Efficacy and Safety of Escitalopram, Desvenlafaxine, and Vortioxetine in the Acute Treatment of Anxious Depression: A Randomized Rater-blinded 6-week Clinical Trial
Abstract
Objective Anxious depression is associated with greater chronicity, higher severity of symptoms, more severe functional impairment, and poor response to drug treatment. However, evidence for first-choice antidepressants in patients with anxious depression is limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of escitalopram, desvenlafaxine, and vortioxetine in the acute treatment of anxious depression. Methods Patients (n = 124) with major depressive disorder and high levels of anxiety were randomly assigned to an escitalopram treatment group (n = 42), desvenlafaxine treatment group (n = 40), or vortioxetine treatment group (n = 42) in a 6-week randomized rater-blinded head-to-head comparative trial. Changes in overall depressive and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), respectively. Results Patients demonstrated similar baseline-to-endpoint improvement in scores and similar response and remission rates for HAMD and HAMA. Analysis of the individual HAMD items revealed that desvenlafaxine significantly reduced anxiety somatic scores (p = 0.013) and hypochondriasis scores (p = 0.014) compared to escitalopram. With respect to the individual HAMA items, desvenlafaxine treatment showed significantly lower scores for respiratory symptoms (p = 0.013) than escitalopram treatment and cardiovascular symptoms (p = 0.005) than vortioxetine treatment. The treatments were well…
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 124 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Safety and efficacy of COVID‐19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials
- Accuracy Comparison between Robot-Assisted Dental Implant Placement and Static/Dynamic Computer-Assisted Implant Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of In Vitro Studies
- Determinants of passive antibody efficacy in SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Cleaning efficacy of EDDY versus ultrasonically-activated irrigation in root canals: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Bonding Efficacy of Universal Resin Adhesives to Zirconia Substrates: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- In vitro antimicrobial activity of extracts and essential oils of Cinnamomum, Salvia, and Mentha spp. against foodborne pathogens: A meta-analysis study
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.