Plasma Concentrations and Cardiovascular Effects of Citalopram Enantiomers After Oral Versus Infusion Citalopram Therapy in Dextromethorphan-Mephenytoin-Phenotyped Patients With Major Depression.

BACKGROUND: Authors compared plasma concentrations of citalopram (CIT) enantiomers and their metabolites in patients with depression administered either intravenously (IV) or as oral racemic CIT. Then, plasma concentrations were related to the metabolism of probes used for phenotyping patients with depression for CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 activity and cardiovascular functions. METHODS: Dextromethorphan-mephenytoin-phenotyped patients with depression were administered racemic CIT (days 1 and 2: 20 mg/d; days 3-10: 40 mg/d) either orally or as a slow-drop infusion for 10 days and were then orally administered the drug for another 32 days. Blood probes were collected at the time of minimal and maximal concentrations on day 10, immediately before and 2 hours after drug administration, and on days 21 and 42. Plasma CIT and its metabolites were assayed by stereoselective high-performance liquid chromatography. RESULTS: The following concentrations (ng/mL) were noted in the group receiving active IV infusion (IV-POS group, n = 27) of racemic CIT on day 10, before drug administration: escitalopram (S-CIT): 24 ± 10.2; R-citalopram (R-CIT): 45 ± 14.5; S-desmethyl-CIT: 13 ± 4.4; and R-desmethyl-CIT: 17 ± 8.2. In patients receiving oral administration (POS-POS group, n = 25), the values were 30 ± 12.7, 51 ± 17.4, 13 ± 4.6, and 17 ± 7.9 ng/mL, respectively. In the IV-POS group, 3 patients were poor dextromethorphan (CYP2D6) metabolizers; in the POS-POS group, one was a poor mephenytoin (CYP2C19) metabolizer. On day 10, before CIT treatment, S/R-CIT and S/R-mephenytoin ratios were significantly correlated, determined at baseline. Overall, CIT reduced the heart rate but did not significantly modify QTc. No relationship was found between any cardiovascular parameters and pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenetic data. CONCLUSIONS: Owing to CIT's high bioavailability, the plasma concentrations of its enantiomers remained largely independent on the administration route. CYP2C19 preferentially demethylated S-CIT after CIT therapy.

Residual symptoms and functionality in depressed outpatients: A one-year observational study in Switzerland with escitalopram.

BACKGROUND: Residual depressive symptoms are associated with a poor prognosis for relapse or recurrence and are recognized as impeding factors of functionality. Recovery to the pre-depression level of functioning should be the goal of treatment. AIM: To evaluate outcomes in depressed outpatients treated with escitalopram regarding response, recovery, residual symptoms, functionality and ability to work over 48 weeks. METHOD: 3278 outpatients were evaluated at weeks 8, 24 and 48. A simple questionnaire was used to rate severity of illness, impairment of functionality, treatment response, tolerability, presence and severity of residual symptoms, whether remission with residual symptoms or recovery was achieved, and to what degree the patient was able to work. RESULTS: Data over the full 48-week period were available for 75.8% of patients, for whom treatment response was rated as "very good" or "good" in 81%. However, only 42% of the completing patients achieved recovery without residual symptoms, while 41% were rated as remitters with residual symptoms. Lack of energy/motivation was the most common reported residual symptom and was present in 23.5% of patients at study end. Concentration difficulties were present in 15.8% and impaired sleep in 13.9% of patients. Complete inability to work decreased from 36% at baseline to 9% at week 48, while full-time working capacity increased from 37% to 62%. LIMITATIONS: Non-controlled observational real life study using simple ratings rather than established rating scales. CONCLUSION: <50% of patients completing a one-year antidepressant treatment regimen were rated as being symptomatically fully recovered, and ≈50% still reported functional deficits.

A 24-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of escitalopram for the prevention of generalized social anxiety disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Escitalopram has proven efficacy in the short-term treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (SAD). The present relapse prevention study investigated relapse rates during a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period in patients with generalized SAD who had responded to 12-week open-label treatment with escitalopram. METHOD: A total of 517 patients with a primary diagnosis of generalized SAD (per DSM-IV criteria) and a Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score of > or = 70 received 12 weeks of open-label treatment with flexible doses (10-20 mg/day) of escitalopram. Of these patients, 371 responded (Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale [CGI-I] score of 1 or 2) and were randomly assigned to 24 weeks of double-blind treatment with escitalo-pram (10 or 20 mg/day) (N = 190) or placebo (N = 181), continuing with the dose level administered at the end of the open-label period. Relapse was defined as either an increase in LSAS total score of > or = 10 or withdrawal due to lack of efficacy, as judged by the investigator. The study was conducted from January 2001 to June 2002. RESULTS: Survival analysis of relapse and time to relapse showed a significant advantage for escitalopram compared to placebo (log-rank test: p < .001). The risk of relapse was 2.8 times higher for placebo-treated patients than for escitalopram-treated patients (p < .001), resulting in significantly fewer escitalopram-treated patients relapsing (22% vs. 50%), at both doses. Escitalopram was well tolerated during double-blind treatment of generalized SAD, and only 2.6% of the escitalopram-treated patients withdrew because of adverse events. The overall discontinuation rate, excluding relapses, was 13.2% for patients treated with escitalopram and 8.3% for patients treated with placebo. CONCLUSION: Escitalopram was effective and well tolerated in the long-term treatment of generalized SAD.

Discontinuation symptoms in depression and anxiety disorders.

The present overview investigates whether different antidepressants have differing discontinuation symptoms upon treatment cessation, if these symptoms vary between depression and anxiety disorders, and with length of treatment. Data came from two comparative studies of escitalopram in major depressive disorder (MDD) (one vs. venlafaxine XR and one vs. paroxetine), two studies in social anxiety disorder (SAD) (one of which used paroxetine as the active reference), and one study in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), using paroxetine as an active reference [total number of patients: escitalopram (n=1051); paroxetine (n=336); venlafaxine XR (n=124); placebo (n=239)]. All studies included a defined discontinuation period and used the Discontinuation Emergent Signs and Symptoms (DESS) checklist to record the number of discontinuation symptoms. All three antidepressants showed more discontinuation symptoms compared with placebo (p<0.001). Patients reported significantly fewer discontinuation symptoms with escitalopram than with paroxetine and venlafaxine XR in MDD (p<0.05). Escitalopram showed significantly fewer discontinuation symptoms than paroxetine in SAD (p<0.05) and GAD (p<0.001). For each antidepressant, no differences in discontinuation symptoms were observed between the three indications and there was no evidence for increased symptom incidence with increased length of treatment. Thus, discontinuation profiles differ between antidepressants of the same class and are broadly similar in different disorders. No evidence was seen for a higher discontinuation burden with longer treatment.

Escitalopram in the treatment of social anxiety disorder: randomised, placebo-controlled, flexible-dosage study.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are effective in the treatment of social anxiety disorder and are currently regarded as the pharmacotherapy of choice. AIMS: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in the treatment of generalised social anxiety disorder. METHOD: Patients with generalised social anxiety disorder were randomised to receive placebo (n=177) or 10-20 mg escitalopram (n=181) in a 12-week, double-blind trial. The primary outcome measure was the mean change from baseline to last assessment in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score. RESULTS: The study showed a statistically superior therapeutic effect for escitalopram compared with placebo on the LSAS total score (P=0.005). There were significantly more responders to treatment for escitalopram than for placebo (54% v. 39%; P<0.01). The clinical relevance of these findings was supported by significant reduction in the work and social components of the Sheehan Disability Scale and by the good tolerability of escitalopram treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Escitalopram was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of generalised social anxiety disorder.

Efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram in 12- and 24-week treatment of social anxiety disorder: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose study.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are the pharmacological treatment of choice for the treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD). The efficacy and tolerability of fixed doses of escitalopram were compared to those of placebo in the long-term treatment of generalised SAD, using paroxetine as an active reference. Patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of SAD between 18-65 years of age were randomised to 24 weeks of double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 166), 5 mg escitalopram (n = 167), 10 mg escitalopram (n = 167), 20 mg escitalopram (n = 170), or 20 mg paroxetine (n = 169). Based on the primary efficacy parameter, Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score at Week 12 (LOCF), a significantly superior therapeutic effect compared to placebo was seen for 5 and 20 mg escitalopram and for all doses for the OC analyses. Further improvement in LSAS scores was seen at Week 24 (OC and LOCF), with significant superiority over placebo for all doses of escitalopram, and 20 mg escitalopram was significantly superior to 20 mg paroxetine. Response to treatment (assessed by a Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score < or = 2) was significantly higher for all active treatments than for placebo at Week 12. Clinical relevance was supported by a significant decrease in all the Sheehan disability scores, and the good tolerability of escitalopram treatment. It is concluded that doses of 5-20 mg escitalopram are effective and well tolerated in the short- and long-term treatment of generalised SAD.

Escitalopram in the treatment of social anxiety disorder: analysis of efficacy for different clinical subgroups and symptom dimensions.

Escitalopram has demonstrated efficacy for the acute treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD) in two placebo-controlled trials and for long-term treatment in a relapse-prevention study. Social anxiety disorder is a heterogeneous disorder. This study questions whether this new selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor is effective across different subgroups of patients. Data from two randomised, placebo-controlled, 12-week escitalopram SAD trials were pooled. General linear models were used to determine the efficacy of escitalopram in different patient subgroups. Furthermore, a factor analysis of the primary efficacy scale, the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS), was undertaken, and a determination made of whether treatment effects were similar for the different symptom dimensions. Escitalopram was effective in both younger and older patients, in male and female patients, and in patients with more and less severe social anxiety symptoms. The LSAS factor analysis showed six factors, which were differentially associated with different areas of disability. Escitalopram was significantly superior to placebo for all six symptom dimensions. The treatment effects of escitalopram were independent of gender, symptom severity and chronicity, and comorbid depressive symptoms. A six-factor model of social anxiety symptoms is supported by the distinctive association between these symptom dimensions and different areas of disability, but did not predict differential response to escitalopram.