Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .
Efficacy and safety of escitalopram versus citalopram in major depressive disorder: a 6-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose study
Rationale S-citalopram ( escitalopram ) is the very active moiety of citalopram . It has been shown in many studies to be an effective and safe antidepressant for treating major depressive disorder ( MDD ) . Objective The aim of our study was to compare the efficacy and safety of escitalopram vs citalopram in Chinese MDD patients . Methods In the double-blind study , 240 MDD patients were r and omly assigned to treatment for 6 weeks either with escitalopram ( 10–20 mg/d ) or citalopram ( 20–40 mg/d ) . The primary efficacy measurement was the change of 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( HAMD-17 ) total score from baseline to the end of study . The secondary efficacy measurements were response and remission rates . The adverse events ( AEs ) were recorded by the investigator . Results Two hundred and three ( 85 % ) patients completed the trial . The average dose was 13.9 mg/d in the escitalopram group and 27.6 mg/d in the citalopram group . No significant differences were found between the two groups in the change in HAMD-17 total score , response , and remission rate . These results were similar in severe MDD patients . No significant differences were found between the two groups in AEs . No serious AEs were observed in this study . Conclusions The study suggests that escitalopram 10–20 mg/d are as effective and safe as citalopram 20–40 mg/d in the short-term treatment for Chinese MDD patients
Some statistically significant differences between citalopram and other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression were found in terms of efficacy , tolerability and acceptability .
Citalopram was more efficacious than paroxetine and reboxetine and more acceptable than tricyclics , reboxetine and venlafaxine , however , it seemed to be less efficacious than escitalopram .
BACKGROUND Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode .
Systematic review s have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants .
Citalopram , one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRI ) introduced in the market , is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care .
OBJECTIVES To assess the evidence for the efficacy , acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics , heterocyclics , other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression .