We found no clear evidence that paroxetine was more or less effective compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at acute ( six to 12 weeks ) , early ( one to four weeks ) , or longer term follow-up ( four to six months ) .
Paroxetine was associated with a lower rate of adverse events than amitriptyline , imipramine and older ADs as a class , but was less well tolerated than agomelatine and hypericum .
Some possibly clinical ly meaningful differences between paroxetine and other ADs exist , but no definitive conclusions can be drawn from these findings .
In terms of early response to treatment ( one to four weeks ) there was moderate quality of evidence that mirtazapine was better than paroxetine and that paroxetine was better than reboxetine .
However there was no clear evidence that paroxetine was better or worse compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at any time point .
BACKGROUND Paroxetine is the most potent inhibitor of the reuptake of serotonin of all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) and has been studied in many r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) .
However , these comparative studies provided contrasting findings and systematic review s of RCTs have always considered the SSRIs as a group , and evidence applicable to this group of drugs might not be applicable to paroxetine alone .
The present systematic review assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of paroxetine in comparison with tricyclics ( TCAs ) , SSRIs and newer or non-conventional agents .
OBJECTIVES 1 .
To determine the efficacy of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder.2  .
To review acceptability of treatment with paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.3 .
To investigate the adverse effects of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents .
Mirtazapine compared with paroxetine in major depression.
BACKGROUND The aim was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine with those of paroxetine . METHOD 275 out patients with a diagnosis of major depressive episode ( DSM-IV ) and a score > or = 18 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D-17 ) were r and omly assigned to 6 weeks of treatment with mirtazapine ( 15 - 45 mg/day ) or paroxetine ( 20 - 40 mg/day ) . Efficacy was assessed by the HAM-D-17 , Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety ( HAM-A ) , and Clinical Global Impressions scales ( Severity and Improvement ) , and analyses were performed on the intent-to-treat sample ( 127 mirtazapine-treated patients and 123 paroxetine-treated patients ) . RESULTS Mean daily doses were 32.7 mg of mirtazapine and 22.9 mg of paroxetine . Thirty patients in the mirtazapine group and 33 in the paroxetine group dropped out . Both drugs were equally effective in reducing symptoms of depression . At week 1 , the mean HAM-D-17 total score was significantly lower in mirtazapine- than paroxetine-treated patients ( 16.5 vs. 18.8 , p = .0032 ) . Similarly , significantly more mirtazapine-treated patients were HAM-D-17 responders ( > or = 50 % decrease from baseline ) at weeks 1 ( 23.2 % vs. 8.9 % , p = .002 ) and 4 ( 58.3 % vs. 44.5 % , p = .04 ) . Both treatments were equally effective in reducing anxiety . However , the reduction in mean HAM-A total score was significantly greater with mirtazapine than with paroxetine at week 1 ( -5.1 vs. -3.5 , p = .0435 ) . Tolerability of both treatments was good , with more nausea , vomiting , tremor , and sweating in the paroxetine group and more weight increase and influenza-like symptoms in the mirtazapine group . CONCLUSION Mirtazapine and paroxetine were equally effective after 6 weeks of therapy and were both well tolerated . A potentially faster onset of overall therapeutic efficacy of mirtazapine was suggested by significant differences between treatments after 1 week of therapy that were due to slightly larger improvements of several core symptoms of depression as well as distinct prevention of treatment-emergent worsening of anxiety and physical components of depression
We found no clear evidence that paroxetine was more or less effective compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at acute ( six to 12 weeks ) , early ( one to four weeks ) , or longer term follow-up ( four to six months ) .
Paroxetine was associated with a lower rate of adverse events than amitriptyline , imipramine and older ADs as a class , but was less well tolerated than agomelatine and hypericum .
Some possibly clinical ly meaningful differences between paroxetine and other ADs exist , but no definitive conclusions can be drawn from these findings .
In terms of early response to treatment ( one to four weeks ) there was moderate quality of evidence that mirtazapine was better than paroxetine and that paroxetine was better than reboxetine .
However there was no clear evidence that paroxetine was better or worse compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at any time point .
BACKGROUND Paroxetine is the most potent inhibitor of the reuptake of serotonin of all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors ( SSRIs ) and has been studied in many r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) .
However , these comparative studies provided contrasting findings and systematic review s of RCTs have always considered the SSRIs as a group , and evidence applicable to this group of drugs might not be applicable to paroxetine alone .
The present systematic review assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of paroxetine in comparison with tricyclics ( TCAs ) , SSRIs and newer or non-conventional agents .
OBJECTIVES 1 .
To determine the efficacy of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder.2  .
To review acceptability of treatment with paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.3 .
To investigate the adverse effects of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents .