PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Ulla Lepola

Publications and source records attributed to Ulla Lepola.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

A double-blind study of the efficacy of venlafaxine extended-release, paroxetine, and placebo in the treatment of panic disorder.

To date, no large-scale, controlled trial comparing a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with placebo for the treatment of panic disorder has been reported. This double-blind study compares the efficacy of venlafaxine extended-release (ER) and paroxetine with placebo. A total of 664 nondepressed adult outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia) were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of treatment with placebo or fixed-dose venlafaxine ER (75 mg/day or 150 mg/day), or paroxetine 40 mg/day. The primary measure was the percentage of patients free from full-symptom panic attacks, assessed with the Panic and Anticipatory Anxiety Scale (PAAS). Secondary measures included the Panic Disorder Severity Scale, Clinical Global Impressions--Severity (CGI-S) and--Improvement (CGI-I) scales; response (CGI-I rating of very much improved or much improved), remission (CGI-S rating of not at all ill or borderline ill and no PAAS full-symptom panic attacks); and measures of depression, anxiety, phobic fear and avoidance, anticipatory anxiety, functioning, and quality of life. Intent-to-treat, last observation carried forward analysis showed that mean improvement on most measures was greater with venlafaxine ER or paroxetine than with placebo. No significant differences were observed between active treatment groups. Panic-free rates at end point with active treatment ranged from 54% to 61%, compared with 35% for placebo. Approximately 75% of patients given active treatment were responders, and nearly 45% achieved remission. The placebo response rate was slightly above 55%, with remission near 25%. Adverse events were mild or moderate and similar between active treatment groups. Venlafaxine ER and paroxetine were effective and well tolerated in the treatment of panic disorder.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Deramciclane in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-finding study.

Deramciclane, a camphor derivative, is a novel anxiolytic agent with a unique mechanism of action. It acts as a potent and specific antagonist at serotonin 5-HT2A/2C receptors, and exhibits anxiolytic efficacy in animal models. The aim of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a range of doses of deramciclane in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Adult patients with a diagnosis of GAD (DSM-IV) and a Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score >or=18; a score >or=2 for the HAM-A items 'Anxious Mood' and 'Tension'; a score >or=4 on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Scale; and a score <or=20 on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) were enrolled in the study. Following a 1-2 week placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to receive deramciclane (10, 30, or 60 mg/day in two divided doses) or placebo for 8 weeks, followed by a 2-week placebo wash-out period. The primary efficacy measure was change in HAM-A score from baseline to week 8. Adverse events were monitored throughout the study. Withdrawal reactions were assessed at the end of the study (week 8) and during the placebo wash-out period using the Physician's Withdrawal Checklist (34 items). In the intent-to-treat population (n=208), both the deramciclane 30 mg/day and 60 mg/day doses provided clinically relevant improvements in HAM-A total score after 8 weeks of treatment, reaching statistical significance compared with placebo in the 60 mg/day dose group (p=0.024) and a clear trend in the 30 mg/day group (p=0.059). On the HAM-A psychic anxiety factor, significant improvements were seen in patients in the deramciclane 30 mg/day and 60 mg/day treatment groups compared with those in the placebo group (p<0.05). Adverse events were reported at a similar frequency across all four treatment groups; the most commonly reported adverse event was headache. No withdrawal reactions were observed on abrupt discontinuation of deramciclane. In conclusion, deramciclane 60 mg/day showed significant evidence of efficacy for the treatment of GAD in adult patients. The efficacy for the 30 mg/day dose was close to the larger dose although not significant in the primary analysis, and there was no significant evidence of efficacy for the 10 mg/day dose. Deramciclane was safe and well-tolerated up to the 60 mg/day dose over an 8-week period.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Psychiatric drug trials and placebo.

The placebo-controlled trial has been the standard method to demonstrate efficacy and safety of drugs. The trials are regulated by standards and principles that aim to safeguard patient safety and to ensure the faultless availability of reliable information about the object of the survey. The use of a placebo group in clinical drug trials is still as well founded as ever, and is especially important in conditions where the severity of the disorder is associated with variation in time, the possibility of a spontaneous recovery, or in conditions involving a significant proportion of subjective experience. In this systematic review, the present guidelines for developing new compounds for psychiatric disorders are discussed.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2004

Efficacy of Venlafaxine ER in patients with social anxiety disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group comparison with paroxetine.

This study evaluated the anxiolytic efficacy, safety and tolerability of a flexible dose of venlafaxine extended release (ER) compared with placebo and paroxetine in the short-term treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder (SAD). Adult outpatients with generalized SAD (n = 434) were randomized to receive capsules of venlafaxine ER 75 mg to 225 mg/day, paroxetine 20 mg to 50 mg/day, or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the Liebowitz social anxiety scale total score. Secondary efficacy variables included the patient-rated social phobia inventory and the proportion of responders in each group (a responder was defined as having a clinical global impression-improvement score of 1 or 2). Treatment with venlafaxine ER was associated with significantly greater improvement than treatment with placebo for all primary and secondary efficacy variables (p < 0.05). No significant differences in primary or secondary efficacy variables were observed between the venlafaxine ER and paroxetine groups. The week 12 response rates were 69%, 66% and 36% for the venlafaxine ER, paroxetine and placebo groups, respectively. Both active treatments were generally well tolerated and were associated with a similar incidence of adverse events. This study shows that venlafaxine ER is an effective, safe and well-tolerated drug treatment for SAD.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Do equivalent doses of escitalopram and citalopram have similar efficacy? A pooled analysis of two positive placebo-controlled studies in major depressive disorder.

Escitalopram is the S-enantiomer of citalopram. In this study, we compared the efficacy of equivalent dosages of escitalopram and citalopram in the treatment of moderate to severe major depressive disorder (MDD), based on data from two, pooled, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of escitalopram in which citalopram was the active reference. The primary efficacy parameter was the mean change from baseline in the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Significant differences in favour of escitalopram were observed for the MADRS [P<0.05, observed cases (OC)/last observation carried forward (LOCF)] and Clinical Global Improvement-Severity of Illness scores (CGI-S; P<0.05, OC/LOCF). Escitalopram separated from placebo at week 1 on the primary efficacy parameter, whereas citalopram first separated from placebo at week 6. An analysis of time to response showed that escitalopram-treated patients responded significantly faster to treatment than citalopram-treated patients (P<0.01). More patients responded to and achieved remission with escitalopram than to citalopram (P<0.05, OC). The HAMD scale was only used in the fixed-dose study, where escitalopram-treated patients had a significant reduction in HAMD-17 total score at week 8 compared to citalopram-treated patients (P<0.05, OC/LOCF). In the pooled subpopulation of severely ill patients (MADRS> or = 30), escitalopram-treated patients showed greater improvement than citalopram-treated patients (P<0.05, LOCF/OC). Escitalopram showed consistently superior efficacy compared to citalopram in the treatment of moderate to severe MDD on all efficacy parameters, and was similarly well tolerated.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Controlled-release paroxetine in the treatment of patients with social anxiety disorder.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study was conducted to investigate the efficacy and tolerability of the controlled-release (CR) formulation of paroxetine in adults with social anxiety disorder. METHOD: Outpatients with a primary diagnosis of social anxiety disorder according to DSM-IV criteria entered a 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in period. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine CR (flexible dose of 12.5-37.5 mg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks of treatment. The primary efficacy measures were the change from baseline in Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) score and the proportion of responders based on Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Global Improvement scale score. Data were gathered from September 2001 to July 2002. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population consisted of 186 patients randomly assigned to paroxetine CR and 184 patients randomly assigned to placebo. Statistically significant differences in favor of paroxetine CR compared with placebo were observed in the change from baseline to week 12 last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) dataset in LSAS total score (difference = -13.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -18.25 to -8.41, p <.001). In the CGI-Global Improvement responder analysis, 57.0% of patients treated with paroxetine CR achieved response (very much improved or much improved), compared with 30.4% of patients treated with placebo at week 12 LOCF (odds ratio = 3.12, 95% CI = 2.01 to 4.83, p <.001). Dropout rates due to adverse events were low and comparable in both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine CR effectively treated the symptoms associated with social anxiety disorder and was well tolerated, with few patients stopping treatment due to adverse events. This favorable tolerability profile may enable more patients to experience the benefits of effective therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Sertraline versus imipramine treatment of comorbid panic disorder and major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sertraline and imipramine in patients with comorbid panic disorder and major depressive disorder. METHOD: Outpatients meeting a DSM-IV diagnosis of panic disorder and concurrent major depressive disorder were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to 26 weeks of double-blind treatment with either sertraline, in daily doses of 50 to 100 mg, or imipramine, in daily doses of 100 to 200 mg. Primary outcome measures were panic attack frequency (derived from patient diaries) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: 138 patients were treated with sertraline (76% female; mean age = 40 years) and 69 with imipramine (70% female; mean age = 40 years). The symptoms of both major depressive disorder and panic disorder responded significantly and equivalently to both drugs. Endpoint improvement with sertraline versus imipramine, respectively, on the MADRS was 11.1 +/- 10.8 versus 11.2 +/- 10.4, and on the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I) was 2.1 +/- 1.3 versus 2.4 +/- 1.6. Among study completers, CGI-I responder rates were 88% with sertraline and 91% with imipramine. Treatment outcome was concordant for both diagnoses in approximately 70% of patients and discordant in approximately 30%. Overall, sertraline was significantly better tolerated with significantly fewer discontinuations due to adverse events (11% vs. 22%; chi(2) = 4.39, df = 1, p =.04). CONCLUSION: Both sertraline and imipramine were found to be highly effective treatments for both major depressive disorder and panic disorder, with sertraline showing significantly greater tolerability and compliance during long-term treatment than imipramine.

Adult↗