Guy Edwards is Emeritus Consultant Psychiatrist at the Royal South Hants Hospital (Brintons Terrace, Southampton SO14 0YG, UK. E-mail: jguyedwards{at}gmail.com) and Visiting Professor in the Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Thailand. He was the Founding Editor-in-Chief of the journal Human Psychopharmacology. The author has in the past received research grants and lecture fees from, and been invited to national and international meetings by, the manufacturers of both older and newer antidepressants.
|
|
|---|
Continuation treatment is given to help consolidate recovery from an episode of depression and to prevent relapse, whereas maintenance (prophylactic) treatment is given to help prevent a recurrence of depression. A relapse is a worsening of an ongoing or recently treated episode, while a recurrence is a new episode. When there is a long interval between episodes, the distinction is easier to make, but when the interval is short the distinction is arbitrary and may not reflect underlying pathogenic processes. There is a consensus among researchers that 46 months remission (during which time the individuals affective state returns to its premorbid level) should occur before a further depressive episode is regarded as a recurrence, although this is not based on sound evidence.
Many trials of continuation and maintenance treatment have been carried out. During recent years, larger numbers of people have been included and methodology has improved. In all of the studies the participants met conventional diagnostic criteria, such as those in DSMIV, and had predetermined scores on rating scales for depression. Most participants had responded to open treatment with the drug being investigated or had responded during controlled trials of short-term (acute) treatment with the drug. A relapse or recurrence was defined as a worsening or return of depression with a defined increase in a score on a rating scale. Nevertheless, from the results of these studies it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons between older and newer antidepressants (newer being arbitrarily defined as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and subsequently introduced antidepressants) because of differences between participants and differences of methodology (Box 1
).
Box 1 Problems in interpreting the results of studies of long-term treatment
|
Taking into account these difficulties, in 1997 I reviewed forAPTthe 12 placebo-controlled studies of antidepressants carried out during the decade 19881997 (Edwards, 1997). My analysis suggested that about 59% (range 2276%) of those who respond to an antidepressant and are then switched to placebo remain in remission for up to 2 years and possibly longer. If instead they continue with the treatment to which they have responded, they have overall a 23% better chance of maintaining their improvement. Expressed differently, twice as many relapses occur on placebo than on antidepressants about 41%v. 18%. Some of the studies also revealed advantages of antidepressants over placebo in the time to onset of relapse or recurrence and in the depression scores of those who do not relapse.
Since I carried out that review, the results of other placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants in the long-term treatment of depression have been published. These are included in a systematic review of 3l randomised trials involving 4410 patients (Geddeset al, 2003). The overall results are identical to those of my less sophisticated report a 41% relapse rate on placebov. 18% on active treatment. Continuing treatment reduced the risk of a relapse by 50% and, although most trials included in the review were of 12 months duration, the effect seemed to last for 36 months. Given a constant relative risk reduction, it was extrapolated mathematically that the absolute treatment benefit would be higher in patients at higher risk of relapse.
The studies cited are important in showing the efficacy of continuation and prophylactic treatment but, apart from the finding that the absolute benefit is greater in those at higher risk of relapse, there is a paucity of knowledge on variables that may predict benefit for individual patients.
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
The choice of an antidepressant (or class of antidepressants) for continuation or prophylactic treatment is therefore mostly based on tolerability, adverse effects, toxicity in overdose and cost.
|
|
|---|
| Box 2 Advantages and disadvantages of SSRIs compared with older TCAs and related antidepressants Advantages
Disadvantages
Comments
|
Much is made of the difference due to side-effects, but more important is the overall discontinuation rate, as it is often difficult to be sure why patients stop their treatment. Drug-induced dysphoria (a side-effect) may be misdiagnosed as lack of efficacy, while intolerance of side-effects or discontinuation for other reasons may be determined by depression that has failed to respond to treatment. Overall discontinuation rates in meta-analyses do not show a significant difference between SSRIs and TCAs.
It is possible that overviews of newerv. older drugs obscure differences between individual compounds. For instance, 10% fewer participants failed to complete one comparative trial because of inefficacy and side-effects of paroxetine compared with imipramine (Dunbaret al, 1991), whereas in a small meta-analysis there were 9.6% fewer losses due to adverse effects of dothiepin compared with SSRIs (Donovanet al, 1993).
The people included in clinical trials and thus in meta-analyses of trials are highly selected. It is therefore not known whether the apparent advantage of SSRIs suggested by trials and meta-analyses also exists in the real world of general practice, where most people with depression are treated. Nor do we know whether there is a lower discontinuation rate during longer-term treatment, when adaptation to adverse effects may occur. It is also not known whether the advantage would be upheld in populations of patients given better information and reassurance about side-effects, which is known to improve adherence to treatment.
|
|
|---|
Autonomic effects and sedation
There are problems in comparing drugs because of difficulties in defining common effects (which are often identical to the symptoms of depression) and because of differences between studies in the way adverse effects are elicited, recorded, related to treatment and presented. Notwithstanding these problems, the newer antidepressants have been shown to cause fewer autonomic effects and less sedation than the older TCAs. Thus, they produce fewer anticholinergic effects, such as the decreased salivary flow and gastrointestinal mobility that lead to dental caries and constipation, respectively, and a lesser anti-
-adrenoceptor effect, which may result in postural hypotension (causing falls and injuries). Accidents may also be caused by over-sedation. The newer drugs, on the other hand, have other effects such as gastrointestinal symptoms and central nervous system (CNS) excitatory effects in the case of SSRIs (Trindale & Menon, 1997). With both older and newer antidepressants, individuals may adapt to unwanted effects such as sedation and nausea and consequently differences observed during short-term treatment may not continue long-term and thereby affect adherence to the extent often assumed.
Cognitive and psychomotor effects
In laboratory tests the older TCAs (and some other antidepressants, e.g. mianserin and trazodone) have been shown to cause more impairment of cognitive and psychomotor function than newer antidepressants, including lofepramine (for references to this and other studies in this section, see Edwards, 1997). The older tricyclics have also been shown to cause impairment in driving tests, whereas SSRIs, reversible inhibitors of monoamine oxidase A (RIMAs) and nefazodone cause little or no impairment.
Although these findings support the use of the newer drugs for long-term treatment, the predictive validity of psychomotor tests has been questioned. Many skilled tasks can be performed without undue effort and with spare processing capacity left available, and it has been suggested that information-processing tasks are measures of competence (potential) rather than actual performance.
Furthermore, most of the investigations were carried out after short-term administration of drugs (sometimes in single doses), rather than during long-term treatment, when adaptation may occur. Adaptation to the effects of TCAs on driving has, in fact, been demonstrated. Perhaps these considerations explain why TCAs, despite being widely prescribed, were found in the body fluids of only 0.2% of people who died in traffic accidents, compared with alcohol in 35% and other drugs liable to affect the CNS in 7.4%.
Consistent with the observations that older TCAs cause psychomotor impairment is the finding that elderly drivers treated with these drugs have an increased risk of vehicle crashes in which injuries are sustained and that there is a positive relationship between the risk and dose of drug. This suggests that in elderly people the drugs contribute to the accidents, although inability to control for all potentially confounding variables does not allow for definite conclusions to be reached.
Similar considerations apply to proximal femur (hip) fractures. These occur at a similar frequency in elderly patients receiving SSRIs as in those on TCAs (Liuet al, 1998), although the possibility of selective prescribing of SSRIs for people at higher risk of falls cannot be ruled out.
The extent to which different antidepressants cause or contribute to road crashes and other accidents is not known. Nevertheless, the above-mentioned concerns should be taken into account in the choice of drug for long-term treatment. Although the risk may be greater when treatment is first introduced, it should also be considered when the dose is increased or when antidepressants are taken with other substances that affect cognition and psychomotor performance. For elderly people and for individuals thought to be at high risk of accidents, including those who experience persistent sedation when taking TCAs or drug combinations, it is best to err on the side of safety and prescribe non-sedating antidepressants.
Suicidal thoughts and behaviour
Depression as a paradoxical side-effect of TCAs was recognised more than 30 years ago, but controversy as to whether antidepressants can provoke suicidal thoughts was sparked by reports of intense, violent, self-destructive preoccupations arising in individuals treated with fluoxetine (Teicheret al, 1990). The controversy was inflamed by subsequent sensational and emotive television programmes of self-injurious (and also violent or homicidal) acts carried out by people while on treatment with fluoxetine. More recently the finger of suspicion has pointed towards paroxetine as another possible provoker of such thoughts.
Critical reviews of the evidence for a causal connection between antidepressants and self-injurious thoughts and behaviour suggest that, on balance, the phenomena are more likely related to the personality of the patient and/or the disorder being treated than to the drug. However, the possibility of a rare idiosyncratic reaction cannot be ruled out. Because of the rarity of the events, there is little or no hard evidence that the thoughts and behaviour occur more often in patients on one SSRI than another, or indeed if they occur more often in patients treated with SSRIs than in those treated with older antidepressants. Furthermore, prescription-event monitoring (PEM) reports have noted similar low rates of occurrence of the events in large cohorts of people treated with fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine and sertraline (Edwardset al, 1997; Mackay et al, 1997).
Sexual side-effects
Sexual side-effects are less well understood than many other adverse reactions. There are many reasons for this, some of which are listed in Box 3
. Clinical trials, including those that are double-blind, randomised and controlled, have reported rates of sexual problems experienced during treatment with various antidepressants. However, most of these trials have methodological flaws and the scales used to assess the dysfunction have mostly been inadequate. For all these reasons, it is not surprising that the results of studies are often inconsistent.
Box 3 Reasons for our poor understanding of sexual side-effects of antidepressants
|
Normal sexual function is important in human relationships and it is therefore essential that antidepressant-induced dysfunction be prevented (or reversed) wherever possible. Despite existing uncertainty over the relative risk of sexual side-effects while on various drugs, the best available evidence for choosing an antidepressant for both short- and long-term treatment for individuals who are prone to such problems, or acquire them during treatment, has been provided by Baldwin (2004). His review of the results of studies whose design is sufficiently rigorous to allow for valid recommendations suggests that there are probable advantages of maprotiline and moclobemide over amitriptyline and doxepin, respectively; of bupropion (amfebutamone) and reboxetine over fluvoxamine; and of bupropion and nefazodone over sertraline. The worst offenders appeared to be TCAs and SSRIs, as suspected by many practising clinicians.
Drug interactions
Many drugdrug interactions with all types of antidepressant have been reported (British Medical Association & Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, 2004). The evidence for some of these is weak, as it is based onin vitro studies, animal experiments (from which we may not be able to extrapolate because of species differences), single case reports or small-scale uncontrolled studies.
Some interactions are more of theoretical interest than of clinical relevance. However, others are potentially hazardous and can be life-threatening. The most serious consequences of these are CNS toxicity; profound sedation; convulsive seizures; ventricular arrhythmias; a large increase or fall in blood pressure; and an increased risk of dangerous side-effects, or decreased therapeutic action, of an important co-prescribed substance (Edwards, 2004b) (Table 1
).
|
View this table: [in a new window] | Table 1 Potentially hazardous interactions with newer and older antidepressants |
Knowledge of the mechanisms involved can help predict, and thereby prevent, interactions, but it is also essential that physicians and pharmacists keep up to date with the ever-increasing number of interactions reported and carefully steer a course between effectively treating multiple pathology and avoiding unnecessary risk. This is more important than attempting to generalise as to whether or not newer antidepressants, or particular groups of newer antidepressants, are safer than older compounds.
Lethality in overdose
Antidepressants introduced into clinical practice before 1970 have a higher fatal toxicity index (the number of deaths due to overdose per million prescriptions) than those introduced subsequently (Henry et al, 1995; Henry, 1997). Despite limitations of methodology (especially uncertainty over the cause of death, the quantities of drugs and other substances taken, and the medical condition of the patients), the results show that death due to overdose of antidepressants is more likely to occur if older drugs are taken. This was confirmed by an analysis of deaths from antidepressants between 1993 and 1997 recorded in a new national database (Shah et al, 2001). It is also consistent with the known cardio-toxic effects of older TCAs and the relative freedom from these effects of the newer antidepressants.
On the strength of these observations, it has been recommended that the newer antidepressants should be used routinely as first-line treatment of depression. However, the risk of death from overdose has to be seen in perspective. Only about 4% of all deaths by suicide are due to overdoses of single anti-depressants (Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, 19751992) and it is not known what proportion of these are actually taken during treatment (when the physicians choice is more relevant).
Furthermore, different suicide rates among people prescribed different antidepressants may be influenced by their doctors perception of suicide risk. It has been shown, for instance, that amitriptyline is prescribed more often for individuals with severe depression and depression associated with severe insomnia, which in turn could be associated with an increased propensity for suicide (Isacssonet al, 1994). Also, people treated with TCAs may not be at greater overall risk of suicide (by any method) than those treated with less toxic drugs, because those who have their minds firmly set on killing themselves will choose a method of doing so. In keeping with this are two other findings. First, deaths due to self-poisoning in England and Wales decreased between the mid-1970s and early 1990s, during which time safer newer antidepressants were more widely used, whereas those due to more violent methods increased (Office of Population Censuses and Surveys, 197592). Second, the incidence of suicide by any method during treatment with the newer and older antidepressants in general practice has been shown to be similar (Jicket al, 1995).
Citalopram and venlafaxine
Against this background, concern has been expressed during recent years that two of the newer serotonergic antidepressants, citalopram and venlafaxine, may possibly be more lethal in overdose than other newer compounds.
Concern over citalopram arose as a result of a report of six deaths following overdoses of this drug, raising the possibility that it could be intrinsically more toxic than other SSRIs (Ostromet al, 1996). However, no fatalities occurred among 44 people who took overdoses of citalopram alone in quantities ranging from 70 to 3000 mg (Personneet al, 1997). Widened QRS complexes in the electrocardiogram (ECG) were observed, and/or convulsions occurred, in about a third of individuals who had taken 6001800 mg (3090 x 20 mg tablets) and in all of those who had taken more than 1900 mg (95 x 20 mg tablets). Although there is uncertainty as to the cause of death in the citalopram fatalities, overdoses of other SSRIs were not associated with convulsions or ECG abnormalities to the same extent (Denchant & Clissold, 1991; Henry, 1991; Boryset al, 1992; Klein-Schwartz & Anderson, 1996).
The six deaths reported by Ostromet al (1996) and a later one reported by Barbey & Roose (1998) have to be balanced against the extremely small number of fatal overdoses associated with citalopram (Isacsson & Bergman, 1996). In most lethal cases other anxiolytics were taken together with the citalopram, and the quantity of citalopram taken in one of the deaths reported by Ostromet al was similar to that in the only other well-documented death due to an overdose of an SSRI taken alone fluoxetine (Glassman, 1997).
Concern about the toxicity of venlafaxine in overdose arose following reports of cardiac arrhythmias, convulsive seizures and deaths (Sarko, 2000). It was later found that there was a higher death rate per 1000000 prescriptions associated with this drug than with other newer antidepressants (Shahet al, 2001) and that the fatal toxicity index was higher than that of other serotonergic antidepressants and similar to that of some of the less toxic older antidepressants such as phenelzine and clomipramine (Buckley & McManus, 2004). A study of mortality data collected from the National Programme of Substance Abuse Deaths and antidepressant prescribing data supported these findings (Cheetaet al, 2004). However, antipsychotics were taken in combination with venlafaxine more often than in deaths associated with other antidepressants. This suggests that the patients treated with this drug may have been more severely depressed or difficult to treat, and thus possibly at higher risk of suicide to begin with.
It is unfortunate that a shadow has been cast over these two efficacious and otherwise safe anti-depressants. Since 1989 citalopram has been prescribed for more than 30 million people in over 70 countries (Nemeroff, 2003) and its fatal toxicity index is not significantly higher than that of other relatively safe antidepressants (Buckley & McManus, 2002). Deaths associated with the drug are extremely rare and could be chance findings. There are fewer data available on venlafaxine, as it was marketed more recently. The possibility that patient selection influences its high fatal toxicity index clearly needs further exploration. In the case of both drugs, and all new antidepressants, more epidemiological research is needed. Until the results of this are available, it is advisable to avoid, or reduce access to, the older, more toxic antidepressants in patients at high risk of suicide and to use citalopram and venlafaxine with greater caution than other, newer antidepressants.
Effects on the unborn and newborn
Safety during pregnancy
Many women become pregnant while receiving long-term treatment with antidepressants. This raises the complex and emotive subject of teratogenicity. A number of studies provide grounds for cautious optimism (e.g. Wiltonet al, 1998; Goldstein & Sundell, 1999), but the numbers of pregnant women studied have been relatively small and the observational designs of the studies cannot definitely prove that the antidepressants are safe. We are therefore faced with a dilemma. On the one hand, many women need to continue drug treatment during pregnancy but, on the other hand, by prescribing drugs we could be inflicting unforeseen harm on their unborn children.
Teratogenicity is much more complicated than often assumed. In the past, a teratogen was defined as a substance that produced congenital structural abnormalities. During recent years, however, the definition has been extended to include all substances that, through a direct or indirect effectin utero, cause functional as well as structural abnormalities in the foetus or in the child after birth. These include abnormalities that do not manifest themselves until late in development.
In view of the potential dangers, here too it is best to err on the side of caution. Until it can be shown beyond all reasonable doubt that an antidepressant does not have harmful effects on the unborn, it should be prescribed during pregnancy and especially during the first trimester only if it is absolutely essential for the well-being of the mother. It has been suggested that we will not learn about the teratogenic effects of drugs until a large number of women have been exposed to them during pregnancy. However, to prescribe the drugs in non-essential cases means exposing the most vulnerable of all young humans to unethical uncontrolled experimentation.
If it is absolutely necessary to administer an anti-depressant during pregnancy, older compounds should mostly be chosen because more is known about their teratogenic potential. If there are unequivocal indications for prescribing a newer antidepressant instead of an older compound, the drug on which most safety data are available is fluoxetine.
Safety during breast feeding
Antidepressants are excreted in breast milk and there have been isolated case reports of suspected untoward effects in the breast-fed babies of mothers who have been treated with older and newer antidepressants (e.g. sedation and colic have been associated with doxepin and fluoxetine, respectively). There is little evidence of adverse consequences in the relatively small number of mothers and infants that have been studied in detail (e.g. Yoshidaet al, 1999; Hendricket al, 2001), but antidepressants should nevertheless be prescribed for lactating mothers only when they are essential for the well-being of the mother. Here too more is likely to be known about the effects of older antidepressants. Of the newer drugs, most data are available on SSRIs. Of these, fluoxetine has the potential disadvantages of being excreted in breast milk in higher concentrations than paroxetine and sertraline, and of a more prolonged effect because of its long half-life.
Where there is concern over possible adverse effects in the newborn, the clinician should discuss with the mother the possibility of mixed breast and artificial feeding. Slow-release antidepressants should be avoided and, depending on their half-life, consideration should be given to administering the drug immediately after a feed and/or just before the babys longest period of sleep. The mother should be reassured that risks are low and she should be involved in decision-making.
|
|
|---|
In most healthcare systems, money spent on expensive new products means that there is less money available for other aspects of care. It was shown, for example, that if there were a total shift to prescribing SSRIs for all patients on antidepressants, in England alone the annual cost to the National Health Service at 1995 prices and consumption volumes would be almost £350 million more than treating the same patients with amitriptyline (Edwards, 1997). This amount would pay for 4.1 million out-patient attendances per year for people with mental health problems, about 22 million hours of community psychiatric nurse time or, outside psychiatry, tens of thousands of kidney transplants or hundreds of thousands of cataract removals (calculated at 1994/95 costs; Edwards, 1995).
The choice of newer or older drug should not, of course, be based solely on economic considerations but costs have to be taken into account, especially in countries and services where there are harsh budgetary restrictions. In these services older antidepressants may be chosen as first-line treatment, with newer compounds reserved for specific sub-categories of patients in whom older drugs may pose a risk (for example, patients with severe cardiovascular disease and those at high risk of deliberate self-poisoning). A compromise on the polarised views that are often held on cost-effectiveness would be to administer less expensive generic SSRIs where appropriate.
|
|
|---|
Box 4 Key points
|
Opinions on the overall advantages and disadvantages of newer and older antidepressants are polarised, but there is little place for dogmatism. If we are to consider the large differences in patients needs and in the different healthcare systems and countries in which they are treated, compromise is essential. But whatever is decided, choice should be determined by objective scientific evidence rather than frustration with the relative lack of effectiveness of currently marketed antidepressants, the novelty of wanting to gain personal experience with more recently introduced products or the hype with which they are promoted.
|
|
|---|
billion or more than prescribing an older TCA
|
View this table: [in a new window] | MCQ answers |
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
A. Kent and T. Burns Assertive community treatment in UK practice: REVISITING... SETTING UP AN ASSERTIVE COMMUNITY TREATMENT TEAM Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., November 1, 2005; 11(6): 388 - 397. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Seivewright, C. McMahon, and P. Egleston Stimulant use still going strong: REVISITING... MISUSE OF AMPHETAMINES AND RELATED DRUGS Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., July 1, 2005; 11(4): 262 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. M. Mortimer Another triumph of hope over experience?: REVISITING... TREATMENT OF THE PATIENT WITH LONG-TERM SCHIZOPHRENIA Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., July 1, 2005; 11(4): 277 - 285. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||