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 .
Response to treatment in minor and major depression: results of a double-blind comparative study with paroxetine and maprotiline.
Several concepts of minor depression in the sense of acute but less severe symptomatology than major depression have been proposed in the literature , but currently none of them is generally accepted . For the treatment of these conditions , only few recommendations based on empirical data are available . We conducted a r and omized double-blind multicentre study in depressed out patients comparing paroxetine and maprotiline in both patients with minor ( n = 245 ) and major depression ( n = 298 ) . For the diagnosis , Research Diagnostic Criteria were used in a modified version . Two response criteria were applied : a reduction of 50 % or more in total HAMD-17 scores from baseline ( criterion 1 ) , and a reduction of the HAMD-17 total score to 9 points or less ( criterion 2 ) . A completer and an endpoint analysis was performed . For patients with minor depression , remarkably high response rates were found for paroxetine ( criterion 1 : 90.9 % completer , 82.1 % endpoint ; criterion 2 : 89.1 % completer , 82.4 % endpoint ) while the respective rates for maprotiline tended to be lower ( criterion 1 : 80.4 % completer , 71.4 % endpoint ; criterion 2 : 84.9 % completer ; 76.1 % endpoint ) . Response rates in patients with major depression were for paroxetine : criterion 1 : 74.3 % completer , 62.8 % endpoint ; criterion 2 : 76.4 % completer , 65.2 % endpoint ; and for maprotiline : criterion 1:82.4 % completer , 68.5 % endpoint ; criterion 2 : 80.6 % completer ; 66.0 % endpoint , which resembles rates reported from previous antidepressant trials . Both drugs were generally well tolerated . Though no placebo control was carried out , our results suggest that minor depression is a disorder that is very likely to respond to antidepressant pharmacotherapy with paroxetine , but also with maprotiline at a favourable risk/benefit ratio
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 .