Cited by 572Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsPharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes

Effect of Citalopram on Agitation in Alzheimer Disease: The CitAD Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Porsteinsson, Anton P., Drye, Lea T., Pollock, Bruce G., Devanand, D. P., Frangakis, Constantine, Ismail, Zahinoor, Marano, Christopher, Meinert, Curtis L. +10 more·2014·JAMA

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common, persistent, and associated with adverse consequences for patients with Alzheimer disease. Pharmacological treatment options, including antipsychotics are not satisfactory. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of citalopram for agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease. Key secondary objectives examined effects of citalopram on function, caregiver distress, safety, cognitive safety, and tolerability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease Study (CitAD) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial that enrolled 186 patients with probable Alzheimer disease and clinically significant agitation from 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Participants (n = 186) were randomized to receive a psychosocial intervention plus either citalopram (n = 94) or placebo (n = 92) for 9 weeks. Dosage began at 10 mg per day with planned titration to 30 mg per day over 3 weeks based on response and tolerability. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were based on scores from the 18-point Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) and the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). Other outcomes were based on scores from the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safety (based on scores from the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events. RESULTS: Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement compared with those who received placebo on both primary outcome measures. The NBRS-A estimated treatment difference at week 9 (citalopram minus placebo) was -0.93 (95% CI, -1.80 to -0.06), P = .04. Results from the mADCS-CGIC showed 40% of citalopram participants having moderate or marked improvement from baseline compared with 26% of placebo recipients, with estimated treatment effect (odds ratio [OR] of being at or better than a given CGIC category) of 2.13 (95% CI, 1.23-3.69), P = .01. Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement on the CMAI, total NPI, and caregiver distress scores but not on the NPI agitation subscale, ADLs, or in less use of rescue lorazepam. Worsening of cognition (-1.05 points; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.13; P = .03) and QT interval prolongation (18.1 ms; 95% CI, 6.1-30.1; P = .01) were seen in the citalopram group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00898807.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2014.93

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the CITAD study, people taking citalopram showed significant improvement over placebo on several clinical measures (including clinical global impression of change (odds ratio 2.13, 1.23 to 3.69; P=0.01) and lower care giver distress (−2.70, −4.94 to −-0.47; P=0.02).

    “People taking citalopram showed significant improvement over placebo on several clinical measures (including clinical global impression of change (odds ratio 2.13, 1.23 to 3.69; P=0.01) and lower care giver distress (−2.70, −4.94 to −-0.47; P=0.02).”
  • In CITAD, worsening of cognition and QT prolongation were seen in the citalopram group, although only a small number of patients met the gender specific threshold of QTc (three in the drug group and one in the placebo group).

    “In CITAD, worsening of cognition and QT prolongation were also seen in the citalopram group,136 although only a small number of patients met the gender specific threshold of QTc (three in the drug group and one in the placebo group).140”
  • Recent evidence indicates that citalopram may hold promise for the treatment of agitation in dementia.

    “Recent evidence indicates that citalopram may hold promise for the treatment of agitation in dementia, but more research is needed to determine the optimal dose given concerns about possible QT prolongation at 30 mg.”
  • Dextromethorphan/quinidine and escitalopram may reduce agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

    “Dextromethorphan/quinidine and escitalopram may also reduce agitation.38,39”

    From A 2025 update on treatment strategies for the Alzheimer’s disease spectrum (2025) · cites this paper as [39]

    The Methods (Interventions) and Discussion describe a trial of citalopram, not escitalopram or dextromethorphan/quinidine. Searches for both named treatments found no passage in our copy addressing whether either reduces agitation. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The SSRI citalopram, noted for its anxiolytic effects, has been recently reported to be an effective treatment for agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

    “the SSRI citalopram, noted for its anxiolytic effects, has been recently reported to be an effective treatment for agitation in AD (Porsteinsson et al., 2014)”

    From Neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease: what might be associated brain circuits? (2015) · cites this paper as Porsteinsson et al., 2014

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [16]Schneider LS Vigen CL Mack WJ Effectiveness of Citalopram Compared to Atypical Antipsychotics in Alzheimer's Disease Patients Who Discontinued Their Initially Assigned Treatment: CATIE-AD Phase 2 Results American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 2009 3 Supplement 1 A77

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Porsteinsson, A. P., Drye, L. T., Pollock, B. G., Devanand, D. P., Frangakis, C., Ismail, Z., Marano, C., Meinert, C. L., Mintzer, J. E., Munro, C. A., Pelton, G., Rabins, P. V., Rosenberg, P. B., Schneider, L. S., Shade, D. M., Weintraub, D., Yesavage, J., & Lyketsos, C. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • New York State Psychiatric Institute (US)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
  • Roper St. Francis Healthcare (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Porsteinsson, Anton P.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2014-02-19
Volume
311
Issue
7
Pages
682
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2167862712
Cited by
572
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 40 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 46 · 2019: 51 · 2018: 36 · 2017: 50 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 45 · 2014: 37
FWCI
48.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG031348, P50AG005142, P50AG005146)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R01AI102710)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
Keywords
citalopram, Alzheimer's disease, agitation, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antipsychotic alternatives, caregiver distress, activities of daily living, cognitive safety, adverse events, psychosocial interventions, treatment tolerability, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, Neuropsychiatric Inventory
MeSH terms
Activities of Daily Living, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Alzheimer Disease, Arrhythmias, Cardiac, Cognition, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Agitation, Severity of Illness Index, Stress, Psychological, Citalopram, Treatment Outcome, Caregivers, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review