Effectiveness and tolerance of the hypericum extract LI 160 in comparison with imipramine: randomized double-blind study with 135 outpatients
Abstract
In a double-blind comparative study, 135 depressed patients were treated in 20 centers. Inclusion diagnoses were typical depressions with single episode (296.2), several episodes (296.3), depressive neurosis (300.4), and adjustment disorder with depressed mood (309.0) in accordance with DSM-III-R. The dosage was 3 x 300 mg hypericum extract LI 160 or 3 x 25 mg imipramine daily. The treatment lasted for 6 weeks. Main assessment criteria were the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), the Depression Scale according to von Zerssen (D-S) and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). In both treatment groups, a parallel reduction of the Hamilton score from 20.2 to 8.8 (LI 160, n = 67) or from 19.4 to 10.7 (imipramine, n = 68), and the transformed D-S point values from 39.6 to 27.2 (LI 160) and 39.0 to 29.2 (imipramine) were found. The analysis of CGI revealed comparable results in both treatment groups. Clinically relevant changes of the safety parameters were not found. In the LI 160 group fewer and milder side effects were found as compared to imipramine.
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: 135 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Quercetin Influences Quorum Sensing in Food Borne Bacteria: In-Vitro and In-Silico Evidence
- Phenolic-protein interactions: insight from in-silico analyses – a review
- In Silico Discovery of Candidate Drugs against Covid-19
- Neuropharmacological Effects of Quercetin: A Literature-Based Review
- In vitro and in silico anti-dengue activity of compounds obtained from Psidium guajava through bioprospecting
- Effect of Quercetin Rich Onion Extracts on Bacterial Quorum Sensing
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.