Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Daniel Sechter

Publications and source records attributed to Daniel Sechter.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

[Chronobiology].

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adult↗

A comparative study of milnacipran and paroxetine in outpatients with major depression.

BACKGROUND: Milnacipran is a dual-action antidepressant which inhibits both serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake with no affinity for any neurotransmitter receptor studied. METHODS: A 6-week double-blind multicentre study compared milnacipran (100 mg/day) with paroxetine (20 mg/day) in 300 outpatients with major depression. Efficacy was evaluated using HAMD17, MADRS and CGI for severity of illness and global improvement. Data were analysed on an intention to treat, last observation carried forward, basis. RESULTS: Milnacipran and paroxetine were both effective and well tolerated with no significant difference in their effects. After treatment discontinuation, milnacipran was associated with significantly less emergent symptoms. Responders, at endpoint, to milnacipran had significantly greater levels of psychomotor retardation at baseline than non-responders. LIMITATIONS: The study did not include a placebo group so that it is impossible to determine absolute levels of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Both milnacipran and paroxetine were effective and well tolerated by outpatients with major depression treated for 6 weeks. After treatment discontinuation milnacipran was associated with less emergent symptoms. Psychomotor retardation at baseline may be a predictive factor of a favourable response to milnacipran.

Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors↗

Validating antidepressant-associated hypomania (bipolar III): a systematic comparison with spontaneous hypomania (bipolar II).

BACKGROUND: According to DSM-IV and ICD-10, hypomania which occurs solely during antidepressant treatment does not belong to the category of bipolar II (BP-II). METHODS: As part of the EPIDEP National Multisite French Study of 493 consecutive DSM-IV major depressive patients evaluated in at least two semi-structured interviews 1 month apart, 144 (29.2%) fulfilled the criteria for bipolar II with spontaneous hypomania (BP-II Sp), and 52 (10.5%) had hypomania associated solely with antidepressants (BP-H AA). RESULTS: BP-II Sp group had earlier age at onset, more hypomanic episodes, and higher ratings on cyclothymic and hyperthymic temperaments, and abused alcohol more often. The two groups were indistinguishable on the hypomania checklist score (12.2+/-4.0 vs. 11.4+/-4.4, respectively, P=0.25) and on rates of familial bipolarity (14.1% vs. 11.8%, respectively, P=0.68). But BP-H AA had significantly more family history of suicide, had higher ratings on depressive temperament, with greater chronicity of depression, were more likely to be admitted to the hospital for suicidal depressions, and were more likely to have psychotic features; finally, clinicians were more likely to treat them with ECT, lithium and mood stabilizing anticonvulsants. LIMITATION: Naturalistic study, where treatment was uncontrolled. CONCLUSION: BP-H AA emerges as a disorder with depressive temperamental instability, manifesting hypomania later in life (and, by definition, during pharmacotherapy only). By the standards of clinicians who have taken care of these patients for long periods of time, BP-H AA appears as no less bipolar than those with prototypical BP-II. We submit that familial bipolarity ('genotypic' bipolarity) strongly favors their inclusion within the realm of bipolar II spectrum, as a prognostically less favorable depression-prone phenotype of this disorder, and which is susceptible to destabilization under antidepressant treatment. These considerations argue for revisions of DSM-IV and ICD-10 conventions. BP-HAA may represent a genetically less penetrant expression of BP-II; phenotypically; it might provisionally be categorized as bipolar III.

Adult↗

Amisulpride vs. risperidone in chronic schizophrenia: results of a 6-month double-blind study.

This multicenter, double-blind, randomized study evaluated the efficacy, safety and functional effects of two atypical antipsychotics, amisulpride and risperidone, in patients with chronic schizophrenia (DSM IV) with a recent worsening of symptoms. It was planned as a non-inferiority trial. 309 patients received amisulpride (400-1,000 mg/day) or risperidone (4-10 mg/day) for six months. Amisulpride was demonstrated to be not inferior to risperidone with respect to the decrease in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score from baseline (90% 2-sided confidence interval (-5.6; 4.0)). Symptomatic improvement measured with the Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale (BPRS), the PANSS positive subscale, and the Bech Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale was similar in both groups. Amisulpride was significantly (p <.05) superior to risperidone in terms of response (>/=50% improvement in PANSS and BPRS total scores or "very much/much improved" on the Clinical Global Impression Scale) and also demonstrated better functional effects and subjective response. Both treatments were well tolerated and had a similar low incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms; however, amisulpride was associated with less weight gain and endocrine/sexual symptoms.

Adolescent↗