Levomilnacipran 80mg modified-release capsules

A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of antidepressants to treat adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) in the maintenance phase. This study searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases and included only double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with an enrichment design: patients were stabilized on the antidepressant of interest during the open-label study and then randomized to receive the same antidepressant or placebo. The outcomes were the 6-month relapse rate (primary outcome, efficacy), all-cause discontinuation (acceptability), discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), and the incidence of individual adverse events. The risk ratio with a 95% credible interval was calculated. The meta-analysis comprised 34 studies (n = 9384, mean age = 43.80 years, and %females = 68.10%) on 20 antidepressants (agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, vilazodone, and vortioxetine) and a placebo. In terms of the 6-month relapse rate, amitriptyline, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine outperformed placebo. Compared to placebo, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had lower all-cause discontinuation; however, sertraline had a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Compared to placebo, venlafaxine was associated with a lower incidence of dizziness, while desvenlafaxine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were associated with a higher incidence of nausea/vomiting. In conclusion, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had reasonable efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability in the treatment of adults with stable MDD.

Abstract licence: CC BY

BackgroundAntidepressants induce physiological alterations; however, the degree to which these occur in treatment with various antidepressants is unclear. We aimed to compare and rank antidepressants based on physiological side-effects by synthesising data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website from database inception to April 21, 2025. We included single-blinded and double-blinded RCTs comparing antidepressants and placebo in acute monotherapy of any psychiatric disorder. We did frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses to investigate treatment-induced changes in weight; total cholesterol; glucose; heart rate; systolic and diastolic blood pressure; corrected QT interval (QTc); sodium; potassium; aspartate transferase (AST); alanine transaminase (ALT); alkaline phosphatase (ALP); bilirubin; urea; and creatinine. We did meta-regressions to examine study-level associations between physiological change and age, sex, and baseline weight. We estimated the correlation between depressive symptom severity change and metabolic parameter change.FindingsOf 26 252 citations, 151 studies and 17 FDA reports met inclusion criteria. The overall sample included 58 534 participants, comparing 30 antidepressants with placebo. Median treatment duration was 8 weeks (IQR 6·0-8·5). We observed clinically significant differences between antidepressants in terms of metabolic and haemodynamic effects, including an approximate 4 kg difference in weight-change between agomelatine and maprotiline, over 21 beats-per-minute difference in heart rate change between fluvoxamine and nortriptyline, and over 11 mmHg difference in systolic blood pressure between nortriptyline and doxepin. Paroxetine, duloxetine, desvenlafaxine, and venlafaxine were associated with increases in total cholesterol and, for duloxetine, glucose concentrations, despite all drugs reducing bodyweight. There was strong evidence of duloxetine, desvenlafaxine, and levomilnacipran increasing AST, ALT, and ALP concentrations, although the magnitudes of these alterations were not considered clinically significant. We did not find strong evidence of any antidepressant affecting QTc, or concentrations of sodium, potassium, urea, and creatinine to a clinically significant extent. Higher baseline bodyweight was associated with larger antidepressant-induced increases in systolic blood pressure, ALT, and AST, and higher baseline age was associated with larger antidepressant-induced increases in glucose. We did not observe an association between changes in depressive symptoms and metabolic disturbance.InterpretationWe found strong evidence that antidepressants differ markedly in their physiological effects, particularly for cardiometabolic parameters. Treatment guidelines should be updated to reflect differences in physiological risk, but choice of antidepressant should be made on an individual basis, considering clinical presentation and preferences of patients, carers, and clinicians.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, Maudsley Charity, Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Objective The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of levomilnacipran extended-release (ER) in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods Randomized controlled trials were searched by electronic databases. Unpublished data were also searched by the relevant websites. Weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and pooled using fixed-effects model or random-effects model. Results Five randomized placebo-controlled trials including 2,637 patients were analyzed. Compared with placebo, levomilnacipran ER had a greater reduction in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total score (MADRS: WMD −3.49 [95% CI −4.28, −2.70; P<0.00001]; SDS: WMD −2.41 [95% CI −3.05, −1.77; P<0.00001]). Significantly more patients in levomilnacipran ER achieved MADRS response rate (RR 1.35 [95% CI 1.23, 1.47; P<0.00001]) and MADRS remission rate (RR 1.30 [95% CI 1.06, 1.59; P=0.01]). In terms of safety, more patients discontinued due to adverse events (AEs) in levomilnacipran ER compared with placebo (RR 3.15 [95% CI 2.26, 4.39; P<0.00001]), but it was generally well tolerated in each eligible trial. The most common AEs were nausea, delay in ejaculation, erectile dysfunction, tachycardia, headache and increase in heart rate. Conclusion Levomilnacipran ER is a safe and effective short-term treatment for MDD (≤10 weeks). Long-term and head-to-head trials comparing levomilnacipran ER with other antidepressants are needed to confirm the conclusion.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC 3.0