This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: -point 46.2 52.9 76.7 0.73 (0.53^1.02) Non-USA trials v. TCA All studies v. TCA
Intention to treat 39.5 38.3 1.2 1.05 (0.87^1.26) Efficacy 57.5 62.5 75.0 0.82 (0.65^1.02) End-point 45.7 46.3 70.6 0.97 (0.81^ 1.16) *P40.01; TCA, tricyclic antidepressant. statistically significant differences were
observed. In the non-USA trials no statistically significant differences were observed. CGI
Table 3 shows the results for the CGI outcome, both the remission rates (percentage
of `very much improved' and `much improved') and the odds ratio analyses. The
analyses for the fluoxetine v. placebo trials
gave results that were similar to those
obtained for HDRS±17 outcome, that is,
all differences were statistically significant.
Table 3 Meta-analysis of quantitative data
When the results for all seven trials assessing fluoxetine v. placebo are pooled an
effect size of 70.30 in favour of fluoxetine
was obtained, with a 95% CI of 70.39 to
70.21 (see Fig. 1). For the HDRS±6 outcome an effect size of 70.37 was observed
(95% CI: 70.46 to 70.28). Figure 2 shows
the results for the trials v. TCAs. The
pooled effect size for the HDRS±17 outcome in the USA trials was 0.00 with a
95% CI of 70.18 to 0.10. The pooled Meta-analysis of patients classified as `very much' or `much' improved on the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) Meta-analysis of binary data
for treatment effects Trials HDRS ^17
Table 2 shows the results obtained with
HDRS±17, using both the percentage of responders and odds ratio analysis. The efficacy analysis had the highest response
rates in the comparisons. The overall difference for fluoxetine v. placebo was 21.4% in
the efficacy analysis but only 13.6% in the
intention-to-treat analysis. In all the
analyses fluoxetine showed a statistically
significant benefit compared with placebo.
In the USA trials of fluoxetine v. TCA no Percentage of responders on CGI
Difference Log odds ratio analysis Fluoxetine Placebo Odds ratio 95% CI Intention to treat 43.9 29.6 14.3 1.89* (1.57^2.29) Efficacy 65.6 41.3 24.3 2.40* (1.94^2.98)...
View Full Document
- Summer '12