Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: Protocol for a network meta-analysis

Toshi A. Furukawa, Georgia Salanti, Lauren Z. Atkinson, Stefan Leucht, Henricus G. Ruhe, Erick Turner, Anna Chaimani, Yusuke Ogawa, Nozomi Takeshima, Yu Hayasaka, Hissei Imai, Kiyomi Shinohara, Aya Suganuma, Norio Watanabe, Sarah Stockton, John R. Geddes, Andrea Cipriani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

53 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network metaanalyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network metaanalysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. Methods and analysis: We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere010919
JournalBMJ Open
Volume6
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2016

Fingerprint

Antidepressive Agents
Citalopram
S 20098
Trazodone
Fluvoxamine
Therapeutics
Bupropion
Sertraline
Clomipramine
Paroxetine
Amitriptyline
Fluoxetine
Registries
Randomized Controlled Trials
Placebos
Network Meta-Analysis
Databases
Pharmaceutical Preparations
milnacipran

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression : Protocol for a network meta-analysis. / Furukawa, Toshi A.; Salanti, Georgia; Atkinson, Lauren Z.; Leucht, Stefan; Ruhe, Henricus G.; Turner, Erick; Chaimani, Anna; Ogawa, Yusuke; Takeshima, Nozomi; Hayasaka, Yu; Imai, Hissei; Shinohara, Kiyomi; Suganuma, Aya; Watanabe, Norio; Stockton, Sarah; Geddes, John R.; Cipriani, Andrea.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 6, No. 7, e010919, 01.07.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Furukawa, TA, Salanti, G, Atkinson, LZ, Leucht, S, Ruhe, HG, Turner, E, Chaimani, A, Ogawa, Y, Takeshima, N, Hayasaka, Y, Imai, H, Shinohara, K, Suganuma, A, Watanabe, N, Stockton, S, Geddes, JR & Cipriani, A 2016, 'Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: Protocol for a network meta-analysis', BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 7, e010919. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010919
Furukawa, Toshi A. ; Salanti, Georgia ; Atkinson, Lauren Z. ; Leucht, Stefan ; Ruhe, Henricus G. ; Turner, Erick ; Chaimani, Anna ; Ogawa, Yusuke ; Takeshima, Nozomi ; Hayasaka, Yu ; Imai, Hissei ; Shinohara, Kiyomi ; Suganuma, Aya ; Watanabe, Norio ; Stockton, Sarah ; Geddes, John R. ; Cipriani, Andrea. / Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression : Protocol for a network meta-analysis. In: BMJ Open. 2016 ; Vol. 6, No. 7.
@article{847e905ebe7b4741bfe8b435759f0b2c,
title = "Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: Protocol for a network meta-analysis",
abstract = "Introduction: Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network metaanalyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network metaanalysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. Methods and analysis: We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework.",
author = "Furukawa, {Toshi A.} and Georgia Salanti and Atkinson, {Lauren Z.} and Stefan Leucht and Ruhe, {Henricus G.} and Erick Turner and Anna Chaimani and Yusuke Ogawa and Nozomi Takeshima and Yu Hayasaka and Hissei Imai and Kiyomi Shinohara and Aya Suganuma and Norio Watanabe and Sarah Stockton and Geddes, {John R.} and Andrea Cipriani",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010919",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression

T2 - Protocol for a network meta-analysis

AU - Furukawa, Toshi A.

AU - Salanti, Georgia

AU - Atkinson, Lauren Z.

AU - Leucht, Stefan

AU - Ruhe, Henricus G.

AU - Turner, Erick

AU - Chaimani, Anna

AU - Ogawa, Yusuke

AU - Takeshima, Nozomi

AU - Hayasaka, Yu

AU - Imai, Hissei

AU - Shinohara, Kiyomi

AU - Suganuma, Aya

AU - Watanabe, Norio

AU - Stockton, Sarah

AU - Geddes, John R.

AU - Cipriani, Andrea

PY - 2016/7/1

Y1 - 2016/7/1

N2 - Introduction: Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network metaanalyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network metaanalysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. Methods and analysis: We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework.

AB - Introduction: Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network metaanalyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network metaanalysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. Methods and analysis: We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978505054&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978505054&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010919

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010919

M3 - Article

C2 - 27401359

AN - SCOPUS:84978505054

VL - 6

JO - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 7

M1 - e010919

ER -