Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xm8r8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-19T19:54:34.550Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predicting Therapeutic Results with Levoprotiline and Maprotiline in Major Depression: The Role of the Outcome Criteria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 August 2018

V. Filip ,
C. Höschl ,
P. Karen ,
D. Seifertová ,
L. Bornová ,
H. Praŝková  and
J. Praŝko
V. Filip*
Affiliation:
Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
C. Höschl
Affiliation:
3rd School of Medicine, Charles University, and Director, Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
P. Karen
Affiliation:
Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
D. Seifertová
Affiliation:
Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
L. Bornová
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Faculty Hospital, Pilsen, Czech Republic
H. Praŝková
Affiliation:
Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
J. Praŝko
Affiliation:
Prague Psychiatric Centre, Prague, Czech Republic
*
∗Prague Psychiatric Centre, Ústavní 91, 181 03 Prague 8, Czech Republic
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We describe a double-blind study involving 58 in-patients with major depression (DSM-III). After one week on placebo, the patients were randomly assigned to either levoprotiline or maprotiline treatment for three weeks. In the next three weeks, responders were maintained on the same medication and non-responders were shifted to treatment with the complementary drug. After the initial three weeks' treatment, 31% of levoprotiline patients and 58% of maprotiline patients had responded. Both in the initial three-week treatment period and after shifting non-responders to the complementary drug, there were significant differences in favour of maprotiline. The comparison of properties of different outcome criteria in prediction analyses shows that the final score gives the best agreement with global evaluation; using the delta score (final minus baseline) or ratio score (final/baseline) as the outcome criterion may yield paradoxical results.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 163 , Issue S21: Prediction in Psychopharmacology , September 1993 , pp. 35 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 The Royal College of Psychiatrists 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (1980) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edn) (DSM-III). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Guy, W. (1976) ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology, pp. 217–222. Rockville: US Department of Health, Education and Welfare.Google Scholar
Montgomery, S. A. & Asberg, M. (1979) A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. British Journal of Psychiatry, 134, 382–389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Náhunek, K., Ŝvestka, J., Ĉeková, E., et al (1990) Position von Levoprotilin in der Klassifikation antidepressiv wirksamer Präparate nach Náhunek. Münchener medizinischer Wochenschrift, 132 (suppl. 1), 50–54.Google Scholar
Pelzer, E., Unverzagt, C., Koppetz, R., et al (1990) Depression und Schlaf. Differentielle Effekte dreier Antidepressiva. Münchener medizinischer Wochenschrift, 132 (suppl. 1), 55–57.Google Scholar
Prien, R. F., Carpenter, L. L. & Kupfer, D. J. (1991) The definition and operational criteria for treatment outcome of major depressive disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 796–800.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wendt, G. & Binz, U. (1990) Levoprotilin: Therapeutische Wirksamkeit und Verträglichkeit am Beispiel einer Doppelblindstudie vs. Amitriptilin. Münchener medizinischer Wochenschrift, 132 (suppl. 1), 44–49.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.