Skip to main content
Full access
INFLUENTIAL PUBLICATIONS
Published Online: 1 October 2010

Comprehensive Analysis of Remission (COMPARE) with Venlafaxine versus SSRIs

Abstract

Background:

To compare venlafaxine and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, and citalopram) in the treatment of depression.

Methods and Materials:

Meta-analysis of 34 randomized, double-blind studies identified by a worldwide search of all research sponsored by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals through January 2007. Patients were treated with venlafaxine (n = 4191; mean dose 151 mg/day) or SSRIs (n = 3621); nine studies also included a placebo control group (n = 932). The primary outcome measure was intent-to-treat (ITT) remission rates (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ≤7) at week 8.

Results:

The overall difference in ITT remission rates was 5.9% favoring venlafaxine (95% confidence interval [CI]: .038–.081; p < .001). Based on this difference, the number needed to treat (NNT) to benefit is 17 (95% CI: 12–26). In the nine placebo controlled studies, the drug-placebo differences were 6% (.02–.09) for the SSRIs and 13% (.09–.16) for venlafaxine. For the specific SSRIs, the difference versus fluoxetine (mean dose = 37 mg/day; 20 studies) was significant (6.6% [95% CI: .030–.095]); smaller differences versus paroxetine (mean dose = 25 mg/day; eight studies; 5%), sertraline (mean dose = 127 mg/day; three studies; 3%), and citalopram (mean dose = 38 mg/day; two studies; 4%) were not significant. Attrition rates due to adverse events were higher with venlafaxine than with SSRI therapy, 11% and 9% respectively (p = .0011).

Conclusions:

These results indicate that venlafaxine therapy is statistically superior to SSRIs as a class, but only to fluoxetine individually. The clinical significance of this modest advantage seems limited for the broad grouping of major depressive disorder. Nonetheless, an NNT of 17 may be of public health relevance given the large number of patients treated for depression and the significant burden of illness associated with this disorder.
(Reprinted with permission from Biological Psychiatry 2008; 63:424–434)

Formats available

You can view the full content in the following formats:

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

History

Published online: 1 October 2010
Published in print: Fall 2010

Authors

Affiliations

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Export Citations

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Format
Citation style
Style
Copy to clipboard

There are no citations for this item

View Options

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub

Full Text

View Full Text

Get Access

Login options

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens login
Purchase Options

Purchase this article to access the full text.

PPV Articles - Focus

PPV Articles - Focus

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share article link

Share