Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Fluoxetine”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2002

Double-blind study of high-dose fluoxetine versus lithium or desipramine augmentation of fluoxetine in partial responders and nonresponders to fluoxetine.

In a previous study, of 41 depressed patients who had not responded to fluoxetine 20 mg/day, 53% were treated with high-dose fluoxetine (40-60 mg/ day) and responded (i.e., their 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D-17] score was <7) versus 29% and 25% of patients treated with fluoxetine plus lithium (300-600 mg/day) or fluoxetine plus desipramine (25-50 mg/day), respectively. We wanted to assess whether these findings could be replicated in a larger sample of depressed outpatients. We identified 101 outpatients with major depressive disorder (52 men and 49 women; mean age, 41.6 + 10.6 years) who were either partial responders (n = 49) or nonresponders (n = 52) to 8 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg/ day. These patients were randomized to 4 weeks of double-blind treatment with high-dose fluoxetine (40-60 mg/day), fluoxetine plus lithium (300-600 mg/day), or fluoxetine plus desipramine (25-50 mg/day). In the overall group of patients (N = 101), there was no significant difference in response rates across the three treatment groups (high-dose fluoxetine, 42.4%; fluoxetine plus desipramine, 29.4%; fluoxetine plus lithium, 23.5%). Dropout rates were also comparable, ranging from 9.1% (high-dose fluoxetine) to 14.7% (fluoxetine plus desipramine and fluoxetine plus lithium). There were also no significant differences in response rates across the three treatment groups among partial responders (high-dose fluoxetine, 50.0%; fluoxetine plus desipramine, 33.3%; fluoxetine plus lithium, 33.3%) and nonresponders (high-dose fluoxetine, 35.3%; fluoxetine plus desipramine, 26.3%; fluoxetine plus lithium, 12.5%). At the end of the study, the mean lithium level was 0.37 + 0.15 mEq/L (n = 27; range, 0.1-0.8 mEq/L) among lithium-treated patients, and the mean desipramine level was 104.7 + 58.8 ng/mL (n = 22; range, 25-257 ng/mL). There were no significant relationships between lithium or desipramine blood levels and degree of improvement (as measured by the change in HAM-D-17 score). We found no significant differences in efficacy among these three treatment strategies among patients who had failed to respond adequately to 8 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg/day, although the high-fluoxetine group was associated with nonsignificantly higher response rates in both partial responders and nonresponders.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Fluoxetine 40-60 mg versus fluoxetine 20 mg in the treatment of children and adolescents with a less-than-complete response to nine-week treatment with fluoxetine 10-20 mg: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare fluoxetine dosage titration to 40-60 mg/day with fixed fluoxetine 20-mg/day treatment for an additional 10 weeks in pediatric outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had not met protocol-defined response criteria after 9-week acute fluoxetine treatment. METHODS: Patients unresponsive (less than or equal to 30% decrease in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R] score) after 9-week fluoxetine treatment were randomly reassigned to continue at 20 mg/day or to increase to 40 mg/day. After 4 weeks, patients unresponsive to 40 mg/day could receive 60 mg/day. RESULTS: Twenty-nine (29) patients, 9-17 years of age, received fluoxetine 40-60 mg/day (n = 14) or 20 mg/day (n = 15). At the conclusion of this study phase, 10 patients (71%) on 40-60 mg/day met the response criteria, versus 5 patients (36%) on 20 mg/day (p = 0.128). Mean CDRS-R scores improved in both treatment groups (fluoxetine 40-60 mg/day, -9.4; fluoxetine 20 mg/day, -1.5; p = 0.099). Adverse events were similar in both groups. However, this study phase was statistically underpowered for detecting differences between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: More than two thirds of patients whose dosage was increased responded within 10 weeks, suggesting dose escalation may benefit some patients. Approximately one third of patients unresponsive to initial treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg responded to this fixed dosage within another 10 weeks. Fluoxetine 20-60 mg/day was well tolerated.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Postmortem serum and tissue redistribution of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in dogs following oral administration of fluoxetine hydrochloride (Prozac).

Antemortem serum and postmortem serum and tissues were evaluated to determine if postmortem redistribution of the antidepressant, fluoxetine (Prozac) and its major active metabolite, norfluoxetine, occurred in dogs following oral administration of fluoxetine hydrochloride. Beagle dogs (four males) received daily oral doses of 10 mg fluoxetine/kg for five days. Antemortem serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine were determined 3 and 24 h following administration of the first four daily doses of fluoxetine and 3 h after the fifth dose in order to monitor for steady-state serum concentrations of parent and metabolite prior to postmortem serum concentration determinations. Antemortem serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine 3 h postdose on Day 5 ranged from 530 to 1210 ng/mL and 1460 to 1980 ng/ mL, respectively. Immediately following the 3 h blood sample on Day 5, each dog was euthanized. Serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine were determined from blood samples collected from the vena cava, heart, and clotted blood within the heart at 2 h after death in two dogs and 12 h after death in the remaining two dogs. Similarly, tissue concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in heart, liver, and lung were determined 2 and 12 h postmortem. Serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine from the vena cava and heart 2 h postmortem were 2.2- to 6.0-fold and 2.3- to 3.6-fold higher, respectively, than antemortem serum concentrations. Similarly, serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine from vena cava and heart 12 h postmortem were 1.3- to 3.5-fold and 1.7- to 3.3-fold higher, respectively, than antemortem serum concentrations. However, 2-h and 12-h postmortem serum concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine from clotted blood within the heart were equal to or less than levels determined in antemortem serum. Results from 2-h and 12-h postmortem average tissue concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in heart, liver, and lung demonstrated that fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations in myocardium were similar 2 h and 12 h postmortem. However, in liver, fluoxetine concentrations decreased 39% and norfluoxetine concentrations decreased 23% from 2 h to 12 h postmortem. Even greater postmortem decreases in fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations were observed in lung. Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations in lung decreased 49% and 39%, respectively, from 2 h to 12 h postmortem. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that fluoxetine and norfluoxetine undergo postmortem redistribution in the dog. Furthermore, postmortem serum concentrations appear to be dependent on the sample site and the degree of coagulation of the blood. Finally, postmortem decreases in concentrations of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in liver and lung may, in part, explain the observed increase in serum concentrations at 2 and 12 h postmortem.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1999

Fluoxetine bioequivalence study: quantification of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine by liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry.

In this study, the authors assessed the bioequivalence of two fluoxetine tablet formulations in 24 healthy volunteers of both sexes who received a single 20 mg dose of each fluoxetine formulation, and a new sensitive method for the quantification of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in human plasma was developed. The study was conducted using an open, randomized, two-period crossover design with a 4-week washout interval. Plasma samples were obtained over a 672-hour period. Plasma fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations were analyzed by combined liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS) with positive ion electrospray ionization using selected ion recording (SIR). Kolmogorov-Smirnov's test, histograms, probit plots, and the correlation between norfluoxetine AUC(0-infinity) and fluoxetine AUC(0-infinity) were used to analyze the population distribution. The limit of quantification was 0.15 ng.ml-1 and 0.50 ng.ml-1 for both fluoxetine and norfluoxetine, respectively. Within- and between-run imprecision was less than 13% and 17%, respectively. The pharmacokinetic parameters obtained for fluoxetine and norfluoxetine after the administration of each formulation included AUC(0-672 h), AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, Cmax/AUC(0-672 h), tmax, t1/2, and Ke. The AUC values for fluoxetine were not consistent with a normal distribution, reflecting the existence of two different populations (poor and extensive metabolizers). The mean pharmacokinetic parameters for extensive fluoxetine metabolizers were 27.0 ng ml-1 for Cmax, 2064.0 ng h ml-1 for AUC(0-infinity), and 85.4 h t1/2. The mean pharmacokinetic parameters for norfluoxetine (in extensive metabolizers only) were 2532.0 ng h ml-1 for AUC(0-infinity) and 8.4 ng ml-1 for Cmax. For fluoxetine bioequivalence, the 90% CI of the individual ratio geometric mean for Psiquial/Prozac (including both extensive and poor metabolizers) was 101.6% to 121.1% for AUC(0-672 h) and 86.1% to 102.6% for Cmax. For norfluoxetine, the 90% CI of the individual ratio geometric mean for Psiquial/Prozac (including both extensive and poor metabolizers) was 90.3% to 108.3% for AUC(0-672 h) and 84.5% to 106.3% for Cmax. The new method developed (LC-MS) presented high sensitivity, specificity, and short chromatographic run for the quantification of both fluoxetine and norfluoxetine in human plasma. Since both 90% CI for AUC and Cmax geometric mean ratios were included in the 80% to 125% interval proposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Psiquial was considered bioequivalent to Prozac according to both the rate and extent of absorption. The finding that there were no significant differences in the bioequivalence assessed by either fluoxetine or norfluoxetine pharmacokinetic parameters indicates that future bioequivalence trials may be performed by quantifying fluoxetine only.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Benefits from mianserin augmentation of fluoxetine in patients with major depression non-responders to fluoxetine alone.

OBJECTIVE: To assess, in depressed patients, the clinical benefit of mianserin augmentation of fluoxetine or the the benefit of switching treatment from fluoxetine to mianserin. METHOD: In a 6-week double-blind study we compared the therapeutic efficiency and tolerance of mianserin 60 mg/day (N = 34), mianserin 60 mg/day plus fluoxetine 20 mg/day (N = 32) and continuing fluoxetine 20 mg/day (N = 38) in patients with major depression who did not respond to previous fluoxetine treatment. RESULTS: Intent-to-treat analysis showed that at week 6 the decrease in the Hamilton Depression rating scale score was significantly (P < or = 0.03) greater in the mianserin plus fluoxetine group when compared to the fluoxetine group (effect size 0.665). Switching from fluoxetine to mianserin gave intermediate results. Mianserin augmentation of fluoxetine was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Mianserin augmentation of fluoxetine in patients non-responders to fluoxetine 20 mg/day increases response to treatment and is well tolerated.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Morning fluoxetine plus evening mianserin versus morning fluoxetine plus evening placebo in the acute treatment of major depression.

In a randomized clinical study the combination of fluoxetine 20 mg daily and mianserin 30 mg daily was compared to fluoxetine 20 mg daily and a mianserin placebo. In total, 34 patients with major depression were randomized, of whom 16 received fluoxetine plus mianserin; 18 patients received fluoxetine plus placebo. Of these patients, 69% completed the planned trial of six weeks in the fluoxetine plus mianserin group while 61% completed in the fluoxetine plus placebo group. In the efficacy analysis (excluding dropouts from the first two weeks of treatment) the combination of fluoxetine and mianserin was superior to fluoxetine and placebo both in observer ratings of depression and in quality of life ratings. However, in the intention-to-treat analysis this difference was not statistically significant. No major side effects were reported. After four weeks of treatment headache was most often seen in the fluoxetine and mianserin combination, while sweating was most often seen in the fluoxetine plus placebo group. No pharmacokinetic interaction in terms of fluoxetine plasma levels was found in the mianserin-treated patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

A comparison of brain and serum pharmacokinetics of R-fluoxetine and racemic fluoxetine: A 19-F MRS study.

Racemic fluoxetine consists of R- and S-fluoxetine, which are metabolized to R- and S-norfluoxetine, respectively. This study was designed to compare brain levels achieved with R-fluoxetine to those achieved with racemic fluoxetine in healthy subjects using fluorine-19 (19-F) magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS). In all, 13 healthy volunteers received study drug for 5 weeks using a dosing schedule designed to achieve steady state for 20 mg/day racemic fluoxetine, 80 mg/day R-fluoxetine, or 120 mg/day R-fluoxetine. The resulting brain drug levels were measured using 19-F MRS. At 5 weeks, the racemate, 80 and 120 mg/day R-fluoxetine groups had mean brain levels of 25.5, 34.9, and 41.4 microM, respectively. In the serum, R-norfluoxetine, which is thought to be an inactive metabolite, accounted for 17, 71, and 63% of the fluoxetine/norfluoxetine concentration, respectively. When the relative proportion of active to total species in serum are taken into account, the data suggest that doses of R-fluoxetine greater than 120 mg/day would be needed to achieve brain levels of active drug comparable to 20 mg/day of racemate. The 120 mg/day R-fluoxetine group experienced a mean increase in QTc interval of 44 ms, with one individual having an increase of 89 ms, which suggests that higher doses may not be tolerable. While these data support the use of MRS to aid in defining the therapeutic dose range for drug development, they also highlight the need for additional studies with concurrent animal models to establish the validity of using serum drug/metabolite ratios to interpret MRS determined brain drug levels.

Brain↗
PubMed2002

A placebo-controlled study of fluoxetine in continued treatment of bulimia nervosa after successful acute fluoxetine treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of fluoxetine in the acute management of bulimia nervosa is well established; however, few controlled studies have examined whether continuation of pharmacotherapy provides protection from relapse. This study compared the efficacy and safety of treatment with fluoxetine versus placebo in preventing relapse of bulimia nervosa during a 52-week period after successful acute fluoxetine therapy. METHOD: Patients who met DSM-IV criteria for bulimia nervosa, purging type, were assigned to single-blind treatment with 60 mg/day of fluoxetine. After 8 weeks of treatment, patients were considered responders if they experienced a decrease > or =50% from baseline in the frequency of vomiting episodes during 1 of the 2 preceding weeks. Responders were randomly assigned to receive 60 mg/day of fluoxetine or placebo and were monitored for relapse for up to 52 weeks. Patients met relapse criteria if they experienced a return to the baseline vomiting frequency that persisted for 2 consecutive weeks. RESULTS: Of the 232 patients who entered the acute phase, 150 patients (65%) met response criteria and were randomly assigned to receive fluoxetine (N=76) or placebo (N=74). Fluoxetine-treated patients exhibited a longer time to relapse than placebo-treated patients. Quantitative analysis of other efficacy measures, including frequency of vomiting episodes, frequency of binge eating episodes, Clinical Global Impression severity and improvement scores, the patient's global impression score, and Yale-Brown-Cornell Eating Disorder Scale score, indicated that the efficacy of fluoxetine treatment was statistically superior, compared to placebo. There were no clinically relevant differences in safety between groups. Attrition in this study was high, especially in the first 3 months after random assignment to treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Continued treatment with fluoxetine in patients with bulimia nervosa who responded to acute treatment with fluoxetine improved outcome and decreased the likelihood of relapse.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1994

Stability of fluoxetine hydrochloride in fluoxetine solution diluted with common pharmaceutical diluents.

The stability of fluoxetine hydrochloride in fluoxetine solution diluted with five common pharmaceutical diluents was studied. Fluoxetine syrup, containing fluoxetine 4 mg/mL (as the hydrochloride salt), was diluted to 1 and 2 mg/mL in each of the following: deionized water; Simple Syrup, British Pharmacopeia; Simple Syrup, USP; Aromatic Elixir, USP; and grape-cranberry drink. Each solution was divided into eight 120-mL amber glass bottles: four stored at 5 degrees C and four stored at 30 degrees C. Samples were removed from each bottle at time zero and two, four, and eight weeks and assayed in triplicate with high-performance liquid chromatographic methods for determining fluoxetine concentration and concentration of its primary degradation product, alpha-[2-(methylamino)ethyl]benzene methanol. Stability was established if the fluoxetine concentration changed by < 10% and if the concentration of the degradation product was < 1% of the initial fluoxetine concentration. No test mixture dropped below 95% of the initial fluoxetine concentration or exceeded 0.5% degradation product during the study period. Fluoxetine hydrochloride was stable for eight weeks in fluoxetine solution diluted to 1 or 2 mg/mL with common pharmaceutical diluents and stored at 5 or 30 degrees C.

Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid↗
PubMed2002

Serotonin and fluoxetine levels in plasma and platelets after fluoxetine treatment in depressive patients.

Depression is a mood disorder characterized by complex alterations of neurotransmitters such as serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. In particular, there is substantial evidence of abnormalities in serotonin neurotransmission. Peripheral parameters of serotoninergic transmission, such as the 5-hydroxytryptamine content of plasma and platelets, have been used to identify biochemical alterations related to depression. In recent years, these parameters have also been used to examine the mechanism of action of antidepressive drugs such as the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. This study investigated the interaction between the plasma and platelet levels of fluoxetine and serotonin after fluoxetine administration to depressed patients. Twelve patients affected by major depression (according to the DSM-IV criteria) received a single oral dose of fluoxetine in the morning: 5 mg in the first 5 days, 10 mg from day 6 to day 10, and 20 mg from day 11 to day 40. Blood samples were collected at 0, 7, 10, and 24 hours after drug administration on the day 1 of fluoxetine 5 mg and on the 1st and the 30th day of fluoxetine 20 mg (days 11 and 40 of treatment, respectively). Plasma fluoxetine and serotonin levels increased after drug administration, reaching the highest levels on the 30th day of fluoxetine 20 mg. Fluoxetine levels were also detectable in platelets, with a time variation similar to plasma values. Platelet serotonin levels decreased after drug administration, and the lowest values were observed on the 30th day of fluoxetine 20 mg.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Comparison of fluoxetine, olanzapine, and combined fluoxetine plus olanzapine initial therapy of bipolar type I and type II major depression--lack of manic induction.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines for the initial treatment of bipolar type I (BP I) and bipolar type II (BP II) major depressive episode (MDE) recommend avoiding the use of antidepressant drugs due to concerns over drug-induced manic switch episodes. However, recent evidence suggests that the manic switch rate during SSRI therapy of BP MDE may be lower than previously thought. This preliminary, placebo-controlled study examines the relative rates of treatment-emergent manic symptoms during fluoxetine monotherapy, olanzapine monotherapy, and combined fluoxetine plus olanzapine therapy of BP I and BP II MDE. METHODS: 32 BP I and 2 BP II MDE patients were randomized to receive double-blind therapy with fluoxetine monotherapy 10-30 mg daily, olanzapine monotherapy 5-20 mg daily, combined therapy with fluoxetine 10-40 mg plus olanzapine 5-15 mg daily, or placebo for up to 8 weeks. Outcome measures included the 17-item HAM-D, 17-item HAM-D "atypical" symptom profile (HAM-D 17-R), 28 item HAM-D, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the Young Mania Rating (YMR) scale. RESULTS: There were significant reductions over time in mean HAM-D 28 and MADRS ratings for all treatment groups (p<0.006). However, there were no differences among treatment conditions (p=ns). There was no significant increase in YMR scores over time in any treatment group. In contrast, there was a significant reduction in the mean YMR score in the fluoxetine-treated patients over time (p=0.008). No patient met DSM IV criteria for a manic episode. LIMITATIONS: Cohort sizes were limited and the study was not powered to detect statistical differences in efficacy or mania symptoms among treatment conditions. The dose of fluoxetine was modest and the treatment duration was limited to 8 weeks. CONCLUSION: These observations support earlier findings of a low manic switch rate during fluoxetine monotherapy of BP I and BP II MDE, and suggest that fluoxetine may be a safe initial treatment of BP MDE alone or in combination with olanzapine.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Pharmacokinetic interactions between lithium and fluoxetine after single and repeated fluoxetine administration in young healthy volunteers.

Pharmacokinetic interactions following coadministration of fluoxetine and lithium were investigated in 10 young healthy subjects. Both drugs were administered orally in a non-blinded design with 3 consecutive treatment periods: single oral dose of lithium (32.4 mmol lithium as acetate, Quilonum; coadministration of single oral doses of lithium (32.4 mmol) and fluoxetine (Fluctin, 60 mg); and single oral dose of lithium after 7-day pretreatment with fluoxetine (20 mg t.i.d.). Periods 1 and 2 were separated by a 1-week washout phase, while period 3 followed on immediately after period 2. Lithium serum concentrations were practically identical in periods 1 and 3 (administration of lithium alone and after chronic fluoxetine dosing). However, in period 2, when the 2 drugs were coadministered as single oral doses, the lithium concentrations were lower in the first 4 hours after medication compared with treatment periods 1 and 3. Cmax was also significantly lower in period 2. The times to peak, however, were not significantly changed by any fluoxetine comedication. The parameters AUC0 --> infinity, t1/2, total clearance (Cltot) and renal clearance (Clren) determined after administration of lithium alone did not differ statistically from values determined after single or after repeated fluoxetine dosing. Coadministration of lithium and fluoxetine did not produce any clinically relevant changes in hemodynamics, ECGs or laboratory parameters. After single doses of both drugs the most frequently reported symptoms were gastrointestinal complaints, while mild sedative symptoms were predominant when lithium was given after repeated fluoxetine medication.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1995

Relapse in patients on long-term fluoxetine treatment: response to increased fluoxetine dose.

BACKGROUND: Although several studies have examined the long-term efficacy of antidepressants, relatively little attention has been paid to the management of relapses or recurrences during continued antidepressant treatment. This study examined whether depressed patients who had recovered and then relapsed on fluoxetine 20 mg/day would benefit from an increase in fluoxetine dose. METHOD: Eighteen patients who relapsed on fluoxetine 20 mg/day during long-term treatment with fluoxetine as part of a placebo-controlled study had their fluoxetine dose raised to 40 mg/day and were followed for at least 1 month (mean time = 4.7 months). RESULTS: Twelve (67%) were full responders, 3 (17%) partial responders, and 3 (17%) dropped out because of side effects (e.g., insomnia and agitation). Of those patients who had either full or partial response (N = 15; 83%), 3 complete responders had a recurrence on 40 mg/day after a mean of 5.8 months and 1 partial responder had a recurrence 11 months later. Overall, 11 (61%) of 18 patients maintained their response during their follow-up while taking the higher dose of fluoxetine. CONCLUSION: An increase in dose of fluoxetine to 40 mg/day appears to be an effective strategy in the treatment of relapse among depressed patients who had initially responded to fluoxetine 20 mg/day.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Outcome assessment and clinical improvement in panic disorder: evidence from a randomized controlled trial of fluoxetine and placebo. The Fluoxetine Panic Disorder Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: Although panic attacks account for only a portion of the morbidity of panic disorder and panic attack frequency assessments are unreliable, studies of drug efficacy in panic disorder have generally used reduction in panic attack frequency as the primary measure of improvement. The authors studied the efficacy of fluoxetine treatment in panic disorder and measured the relative contributions of changes in symptoms to overall improvement. METHOD: Patients with a diagnosis of panic disorder (N = 243) were randomly assigned to treatment with 10 or 20 mg/day of fluoxetine or placebo. Primary outcome measures were change in panic attack frequency and clinician-rated Clinical Global Impression improvement scores. Other assessments included a panic attack inventory, clinician-rated and patient-rated versions of the Panic and Phobic Disorder Change Scale, a phobia rating scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and the Sheehan Disability Scale. Correlations were determined between outcomes in individual symptom domains and overall clinical outcome. RESULTS: Fluoxetine, particularly the 20-mg/day dose, was associated with more improvement than was placebo in patients with panic disorder across multiple symptom measures, including global improvement, total panic attack frequency, phobic symptoms, and functional impairment. Global improvement was most highly correlated with reductions in overall anxiety and phobic symptoms and least correlated with reduction in panic attacks. Fluoxetine treatment for panic disorder was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that observed for fluoxetine in other disorders. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide support for the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine treatment in reducing panic attacks, phobic symptoms, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in patients with panic disorder. Reductions in panic attack frequency in subjects given either fluoxetine or placebo were less closely related to overall clinical improvement than reductions in phobic avoidance, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and functional impairment, suggesting that outcome measures in this disorder should be more broadly based.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

A preliminary, randomized trial of fluoxetine, olanzapine, and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination in women with borderline personality disorder.

BACKGROUND: The intent of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine, olanzapine, or the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC) in the treatment of women meeting criteria for borderline personality disorder (without concurrent major depressive disorder). METHOD: We conducted a randomized double-blind study of these agents in female subjects meeting Revised Diagnostic Interview for Borderlines (DIB-R) and DSM-IV criteria for borderline personality disorder. Treatment duration was 8 weeks. Outcome measures were clinician-rated scales measuring depression (the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) and impulsive aggression (the Modified Overt Aggression Scale). Data were collected from August 2001 through March 2003. RESULTS: Fourteen subjects were randomized to fluoxetine; 16, to olanzapine; and 15, to OFC. Forty-two of these subjects (93.3%) completed all 8 weeks of the trial. Using random-effects regression modeling of panel data of change-from-baseline scores and controlling for time, olanzapine monotherapy and OFC were associated with a significantly greater rate of improvement over time than fluoxetine on both outcome measures. However, it should be noted that fluoxetine treatment led to a substantial reduction in impulsive aggression and severity of depression. Weight gain was relatively modest in all 3 groups but significantly greater in the olanzapine-treated group than in the groups treated with fluoxetine alone or OFC. CONCLUSION: All 3 compounds studied appear to be safe and effective agents in the treatment of women with borderline personality disorder, significantly ameliorating the chronic dysphoria and impulsive aggression common among borderline patients. However, olanzapine monotherapy and OFC seem to be superior to fluoxetine monotherapy in treating both of these dimensions of borderline psychopathology.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Comparison of the efficacy of fluoxetine alone vs. fluoxetine plus local lidocaine ointment in the treatment of premature ejaculation.

OBJECTIVE: The present study compares the efficacy and side effects of fluoxetine alone vs. fluoxetine plus local lidocaine ointment in the treatment of premature ejaculation. METHODS: Forty-three patients suffering from premature ejaculation were studied. The exclusion criteria were erectile dysfunction, loss of libido, alcohol and substance abuse, mental retardation, diabetes mellitus, thyroid disease, hypotension, previous use of these drugs and urogenital infections. The patients' ages ranged from 19 to 48 years (mean age 28 +/- 1.6). They had regular sexual lives. They had normal psychiatric consultation and the Glombock Rast Sexual Satisfactory Test (GRISS) psychiatric test were in accordance with premature ejaculation. RESULTS: The patients were assigned to two groups. Twenty-six patients, aged 21 to 36 years (mean age 27), received only fluoxetine 20 mg/day (1 capsule) for a week which was later increased to 40 mg/day (2 capsules). Seventeen patients, aged 19 to 48 years (mean age 31), were given fluoxetine 20 mg/day plus local application of lidocaine ointment. The patients and partners were re-evaluated 8 weeks after the treatment. The results were classified as unsuccessful, improvement and cure. The chi-square test was used for statistical analysis. In the fluoxetine group, 8 (30.8%) patients cured, 11 (42.2%) showed improvement and there were 7 failures (26.9%). In the combination treatment group, 9 (52.9%) patients cured, improvement was observed in 5 (29.4%) and failure in 3 (17.6%). Side effects in group I were observed in 6 patients (23%) and in 5 (29.4%) in group II. There were no statistical differences between the two groups according to the side effects (p > 0.01). No patients were excluded from the study due to side effects. CONCLUSION: The combination of fluoxetine plus local application of lidocaine ointment was found to be more effective than fluoxetine alone in the treatment of premature ejaculation. However, the results should be confirmed in further studies with a placebo group to rule out the placebo effect.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed1998

Mirtazapine: efficacy and tolerability in comparison with fluoxetine in patients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder. Mirtazapine-Fluoxetine Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of mirtazapine and fluoxetine in depressed inpatients and outpatients. METHOD: Patients with a major depressive episode (DSM-III-R), a baseline score of > or=21 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), and > or=2 on HAM-D Item 1 (depressed mood) were randomly assigned to a 6-week treatment with either mirtazapine (N=66, 15-60 mg/day) or fluoxetine (N=67, 20-40 mg/day). The upper limit of the mirtazapine dose range was above the dose range approved in the United States (15-45 mg/day). Efficacy was evaluated by the HAM-D, Clinical Global Impressions, the Visual Analogue Mood Rating Scale (VAMRS), and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (QLESQ). The efficacy analyses were performed on the intent-to-treat group using the last-observation-carried-forward method. RESULTS: Mean total 17-item HAM-D scores at baseline were 26.0 for the mirtazapine- and 26.1 for the fluoxetine-treated group. The decrease from baseline on the HAM-D was larger in the mirtazapine than in the fluoxetine group throughout the treatment period, reaching statistical significance at days 21 and 28. At assessments from day 21 and onward, the absolute difference between the 2 study groups favoring mirtazapine ranged from 3.7 to 4.2 points, the magnitude of difference usually seen between an efficacious antidepressant drug and placebo. Mean dosages at weeks 1-4 were 36.5 mg/day for mirtazapine and 19.6 mg/day for fluoxetine; the respective dosages at weeks 5-6 were 56.3 mg and 35.8 mg. Similar numbers of patients dropped out due to adverse events; tolerability profiles were comparable except for changes in body weight from baseline which were statistically significantly more pronounced in the mirtazapine group compared to the fluoxetine group. CONCLUSION: We found that mirtazapine was as well tolerated as fluoxetine and significantly more effective after 3 and 4 weeks of therapy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1995

Long-term fluoxetine treatment of bulimia nervosa. Fluoxetine Bulimia Nervosa Research Group.

BACKGROUND: A large collaborative 8-week study has shown fluoxetine to be effective and safe in treating patients with bulimia nervosa. The present study evaluated fluoxetine over 16 weeks. METHOD: Fifteen US out-patient psychiatry clinics conducted a double-blind parallel study in men and women with DSM-III-R bulimia nervosa (483 patients entered, 398 randomised [3:1 ratio, fluoxetine 60 mg/day or placebo], 225 completed). Outcome measures included change in vomiting and binge-eating episodes per week. Eating Disorder Inventory, Clinical Global Impressions and Patient's Global Impression. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, fluoxetine treatment resulted in significantly greater reductions in vomiting (F[1,360] = 14.73, P < 0.0001) and binge-eating (F[1,360] = 14.39, P = 0.0002) episodes per week at endpoint and improvement in other outcome measures. Adverse event, vital sign and laboratory analyses indicated that fluoxetine was safe. CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine appeared to be safe and effective in patients with bulimia nervosa for up to 16 weeks.

Adolescent↗