Estrogen Augmentation of Antidepressants in Perimenopausal Depression: A Pilot Study
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of estrogen augmentation on mood and memory in women with perimenopausal depression who had experienced a partial response to antidepressant medications. METHOD: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 17 subjects taking antidepressant medication were randomly assigned to either 0.625 mg/day of conjugated estrogen (N = 11) or matching placebo (N = 6) for 6 weeks. Women between the ages of 40 and 60 years with DSM-IV major depressive disorder (MDD) in partial remission who had been taking antidepressant medication for a minimum of 8 weeks and were experiencing 1 or more perimenopausal symptoms (hot flashes, night sweats, irregular periods, sleep disturbance, memory impairment) were recruited from the community. The primary outcome measures were the final scores for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the Buschke Selective Reminding Test. Data were gathered from April 2002 to August 2003. RESULTS: Women receiving estrogen had a significantly larger decrease in HAM-D scores than women receiving placebo (t = 2.86, df = 15, p = .012). Group differences in tests of verbal memory were not significant, although improved scores in verbal memory were significantly correlated with a decrease in follicle-stimulating hormone (p = .021). CONCLUSION: Short-term, low-dose estrogen augmentation of antidepressant medication was significantly associated with improved mood, but not memory, in perimenopausal women with MDD in partial remission.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Some included reports described drug effects in words but did not substantiate them with specific data.
“drug effects described in words but not substantiated with specific data.46,48-50”
From Cognitive Effects of Pharmacotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review (2014) · cites this paper as [49]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
Cited by 104
- Authors
- Morgan, M. L., Cook, I. A., Rapkin, A. J., & Leuchter, A. F.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Venue
- The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
- Publisher
- Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc
- Published
- 2005-06-15
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 06
- Pages
- 774-780
- ISSN
- 0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2000348531
- Cited by
- 104
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 4.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01mh040705-13)
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH40705, K02MH001165, K02-MH1165, K08MH001483, K08-MH01483)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Menopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Keywords
- perimenopausal depression, major depressive disorder, partial remission, conjugated estrogens, antidepressant response, perimenopausal symptoms, verbal memory, follicle-stimulating hormone, hot flashes, women
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Antidepressive Agents, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Drug Therapy, Combination, Estrogens, Conjugated (USP), Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Placebos, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Treatment Outcome, Perimenopause
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