BJP-2000-BECH-421-8

The overall difference for fluoxetine v placebo was

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: End-point 52.7 32.9 19.8 2.20* (1.83^2.66) Intention to treat 45.9 38.3 7.6 1.38 (1.10^1.72) Efficacy 67.3 66.4 0.9 1.06 (0.79^1.41) End-point 53.3 49.1 4.2 1.18 (0.95^1.47) USA trials v. placebo USA trials v. TCA *P40.01; TCA, tricyclic antidepressant. 425 B E CH E T AL effect size for the HDRS±6 outcome showed a non-significant trend in favour of fluoxetine, (70.10; 95% CI 70.21 to 0.01). A trend in favour of TCAs was observed for the non-USA trials v. TCAs, with a pooled effect size for the HDRS±17 outcome of 0.17 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.34). There was a stronger trend in favour of TCAs for the HDRS±6 outcome, with a pooled effect size of 0.18 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.34). When the results from all the trials comparing fluoxetine v. TCAs were pooled the effect size for the HDRS±17 outcome showed a non-significant trend in favour of TCAs (0.05; 95% CI 70.04 to 0.14). The pooled effect size for the HDRS±6 outcome also showed a non-significant trend in favour of fluoxetine (70.02; 95% CI 70.11 to 0.07). their treatment because of an adverse event, and significantly fewer patients discontinued for any reason. No significant difference was seen with respect to discontinuations due to lack of efficacy. The results from a similar analysis for the non-USA trials v. TCA did not indicate any significant differences between the two groups, however, the width of the confidence intervals suggest a potential lack of power to detect clinically significant differences. When the USA and nonUSA trials were combined the results showed that significantly fewer patients on fluoxetine discontinued treatment due treatment to adverse events or for any reason. Meta-analysis of early treatment discontinuation data (binary) In our protocol for this meta-analysis it was our intention to compare USA trials with those performed elsewhere (non-USA trials). An a priori condition for such a comparison required that the diagnostic system should be evidence-based and accepted by the health care regulators in both the USA and elsewhere. More non-USA trials than USA trials were excluded because the diagnosis of depression in Europe was made using a classification system oth...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online