Posted by SLS on July 14, 2006, at 7:29:52
In reply to Study sees no difference between Lex and Celexa, posted by bassman on July 14, 2006, at 6:55:47
I've tried Lexapro, but not Celexa. Right now, Lexapro is my doctor's SSRI of choice. It did nothing for me. The only other SSRI I haven't tried is Luvox. There have been people here who report responding better to Celexa than to Lexapro. Sometimes different is different enough. So much for in vitro experiments and theories.
You know, it occurs to me that there will probably never be another SSRI to be brought to market in our lifetimes. I find this sad. There have to be better ones floating around in test tubes somewhere.
- Scott
> Just another point of view:
>
> Escitalopram: superior to citalopram or a chiral chimera?
>
> Psychother Psychosom 2004 Jan-Feb;73(1):10-6 (ISSN: 0033-3190)
> Svensson S; Mansfield PR
> Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Sahlgren's University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden Healthy Skepticism Inc., Willunga, Australia. staffan.svensson@pharm.gu.se.
>
> BACKGROUND: Escitalopram is the active isomer of the antidepressant citalopram. In theory single-isomer drugs may be superior but few have been found to have clinically significant advantages. The manufacturer claims that escitalopram has more efficacy and a faster onset of effect than citalopram. The purpose of this study was to assess how far these claims are justified.
>
> METHODS: Relevant trial reports were requested from H. Lundbeck A/S and the Swedish drug regulatory authority. The trials consisted of a pooled analysis of 1,321 patients from one unpublished, one partly published and one published eight-week trial, as well as a 24-week trial with 357 patients published as a poster. The studies compared escitalopram with placebo and/or citalopram in outpatients aged or=18 years who met specified criteria for depression. The trials' quality was assessed with Moncrieff et al.'s quality assessment instrument and the results compared with the claims from the advertisements.
>
> RESULTS: The advertising claims are not justified because they are based on secondary outcomes, non-intention-to-treat analyses and arbitrarily defined subgroups. The subgroup results are inconsistent. Methodological flaws in the trials could account for the differences found. Even if the differences claimed were real they appear too small to justify higher prices. CONCLUSIONS: On the evidence available to us the manufacturer's claims of superiority for escitalopram over citalopram are unwarranted. The Swedish and Danish drug regulatory authorities reached similar conclusions. This highlights the need for wider dissemination of national authorities' statements to other countries affected by the European Union's mutual recognition procedure. [Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel].
poster:SLS
thread:666681
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060709/msgs/666981.html