CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 204Cardiac Health and Mental HealthAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchTreatment of Major Depression

Effect of Escitalopram vs Placebo Treatment for Depression on Long-term Cardiac Outcomes in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Kim, Jae-Min, Stewart, Robert, Lee, Yong-Seong, Lee, Hee-Joon, Kim, Min Chul, Kim, Ju-Wan, Kang, Hee-Ju, Bae, Kyung-Yeol +7 more·2018·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.2018.9422PMC PMC6583706
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Importance: Depression has been associated with poorer medical outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but there are few data on the effects of antidepressant treatment on long-term prognosis. Objective: To investigate the effect on long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE) of escitalopram treatment of depression in patients with recent ACS. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted among 300 patients with recent ACS and depression enrolled from May 2007 to March 2013, with follow-up completed in June 2017, at Chonnam National University Hospital, Gwangju, South Korea. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either escitalopram in flexible dosages of 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg/d (n = 149) or matched placebo (n = 151) for 24 weeks. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was MACE, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Four secondary outcomes were the individual MACE components of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, MI, and PCI. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare the escitalopram and placebo groups by time to first MACE. Results: Among 300 randomized patients (mean age, 60 years; 119 women [39.3%]), 100% completed a median of 8.1 (interquartile range, 7.5-9.0) years of follow-up. MACE occurred in 61 patients (40.9%) receiving escitalopram and in 81 (53.6%) receiving placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = .03). Comparing individual MACE outcomes between the escitalopram and placebo groups, respectively, incidences for all-cause mortality were 20.8% vs 24.5% (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.51-1.33; P = .43), for cardiac death, 10.7% vs 13.2% (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.52; P = .48); for MI, 8.7% vs 15.2% (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.27-0.96; P = .04), and for PCI, 12.8% vs 19.9% (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.33-1.04; P = .07). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with depression following recent acute coronary syndrome, 24-week treatment with escitalopram compared with placebo resulted in a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events after a median of 8.1 years. Further research is needed to assess the generalizability of these findings. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00419471.

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.2018.9422

Cites

43 of 43 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 follow-up from the ESDEPACS trial, depressed patients after acute coronary syndrome assigned to escitalopram had lower rates of major adverse cardiac events at 8 years compared with placebo (40.9% versus 53.6%; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96).

    “Follow-up from a cohort from the 12-month ESDEPACS trial (Escitalopram for Depression in Acute Coronary Syndrome) in 300 depressed patients after ACS found that those assigned to the escitalopram group had lower rates of major adverse cardiac events at 8 years compared with those receiving placebo (40.9% versus 53.6%; HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.49-0.96]). 178”

    From Psychological Health, Well-Being, and the Mind-Heart-Body Connection: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2021) · cites this paper as [178]

    The Primary Outcome section reports median follow-up of 8.1 years and the stated MACE rates and hazard ratio for 300 randomized patients. However, the Study Design and Participants section describes EsDEPACS as a 24-week trial, not the 12-month trial specified in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Among depressed patients with recent acute coronary syndrome, 24-week treatment with escitalopram compared with placebo resulted in a lower risk for a composite measure consisting of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous coronary intervention after a median of 8.1 years.

    “An exception is a recent study, which showed that among depressed patients with recent acute coronary syndrome, 24-week treatment with escitalopram compared with placebo resulted in a lower risk for a composite measure consisting of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and percutaneous coronary intervention after a median of 8.1 years150.”

    From Mechanisms and treatment of late-life depression (2019) · cites this paper as [150]

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

1 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kim, J.-M., Stewart, R., Lee, Y.-S., Lee, H.-J., Kim, M. C., Kim, J.-W., Kang, H.-J., Bae, K.-Y., Kim, S.-W., Shin, I.-S., Hong, Y. J., Kim, J. H., Ahn, Y., Jeong, M. H., & Yoon, J.-S.
Affiliations
  • Chonnam National University (KR)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • Department of Psychiatry, Chonnam National University Medical School, Republic of Korea
  • Department of Cardiology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Republic of Korea
Corresponding author
Kim, Jae-Min
ORCID
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2018-07-24
Volume
320
Issue
4
Pages
350
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.2018.9422
PMC
PMC6583706
OpenAlex
W2884872821
Cited by
204
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 1
FWCI
16.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • King's College London
  • Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
  • National Research Foundation of Korea
  • Medical Research Council (MC_PC_17214)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
escitalopram, depression, acute coronary syndrome, major adverse cardiac events, antidepressant treatment, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, cardiovascular mortality, long-term prognosis, depression and cardiovascular risk, flexible dosing, depression screening in pregnancy, depression screening
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Depression, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Risk, Citalopram, Incidence, Proportional Hazards Models, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation, Acute Coronary Syndrome, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

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