Cited by 38Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Efficacy and Safety of Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d for Prevention of Relapse in Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Rosenthal, Joshua Z., Boyer, Patrice, Vialet, Cécile, Hwang, Eunhee, Tourian, Karen A.·2013·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term (11-month) efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) at the recommended 50-mg/d dose in preventing relapse in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Adult outpatients (age ≥ 18 years) with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) and a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) total score ≥ 20 at screening and baseline were enrolled in a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal trial conducted between June 2009 and March 2011. Patients who responded to 8-week open-label treatment with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d with continuing stable response through week 20 were randomly assigned to receive placebo or desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d in a 6-month, double-blind, randomized withdrawal period. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to relapse following randomization to double-blind treatment, which was compared between groups using the log-rank test. Relapse was defined as HDRS17 total score ≥ 16, discontinuation for unsatisfactory response, hospitalization for depression, suicide attempt, or suicide. Safety and tolerability data were collected throughout the trial. RESULTS: A total of 874 patients were enrolled; 548 patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 276) or desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d (n = 272) in the double-blind withdrawal period. Time to relapse was significantly shorter for placebo versus desvenlafaxine (P < .001). At the end of the 6-month double-blind treatment, the estimated probability of relapse was 30.2% for placebo versus 14.3% for desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d. Safety and tolerability results were generally consistent with those in short-term studies of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d. CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine at the recommended dose of 50 mg/d was effective in relapse prevention of depression during a 6-month period in patients who demonstrated stable response after 20 weeks of open-label desvenlafaxine treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00887224.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.12m07974

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • 20 articles define relapse with psychometric measures (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Goldberg Anxiety and Depression Scale, Clinical Global Impression).

    “20 do so with psychometric measures (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Goldberg Anxiety and Depression Scale, Clinical Global Impression) (4, 7, 9, 13–18, 33, 34, 42–49)”
  • Suicide/suicide attempt is mentioned 19 times as an administrative criterion.

    “Suicide/suicide attempt is mentioned 19 times (1, 15, 16, 18, 19, 26, 27, 33, 37, 38, 41, 43–46, 48–50, 52)”
  • The median time to a new episode with antidepressant treatment continued has averaged approximately 40 months, compared to just over 1 year if treatment was discontinued.

    “The median time to a new episode with antidepressant treatment continued has averaged approximately 40 months, compared to just over 1 year if treatment was discontinued (Baldessarini, 2013; Rosenthal et al., 2013).”
  • The relapse rates observed in the current study were similar to those reported in recently completed studies with desvenlafaxine versus placebo (13.6% vs. 28.3%) and vortioxetine versus placebo (13% vs. 26%).

    “the relapse rates observed in the current study were similar to those reported in recently completed studies with desvenlafaxine versus placebo (13.6% vs. 28.3%; Rosenthal, Boyer, Vialet, Hwang, & Tourian, 2013) and vortioxetine versus placebo (13% vs. 26%; Boulenger, Loft, & Florea, 2012).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rosenthal, J. Z., Boyer, P., Vialet, C., Hwang, E., & Tourian, K. A.
Corresponding author
Rosenthal, Joshua Z.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2013-02-15
Volume
74
Issue
02
Pages
158-166
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1967591091
Cited by
37
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
desvenlafaxine, major depressive disorder, relapse prevention, antidepressant maintenance, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, long-term efficacy, drug safety and tolerability, withdrawal trial, treatment-resistant depression
MeSH terms
Desvenlafaxine Succinate, Antidepressive Agents, Cyclohexanols, Major Depressive Disorder, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Treatment Outcome, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Kaplan-Meier Estimate, Secondary Prevention

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