Impaired sexual function is associated with major depressive disorder in the untreated state and is often more prevalent during antidepressant therapy, which frequently results in poor treatment compliance. In this double-blind, multicenter study, the effects of agomelatine (an MT1 and MT2 agonist and 5HT-2C antagonist) and venlafaxine XR on sexual function were compared using the Sex Effects Scale in depressed patients. A total of 276 male and female patients received either agomelatine (50 mg) or venlafaxine XR (titrated to a target dose of 150 mg/d) for 12 weeks. Those who were sexually active at baseline (n = 193) and those who, in addition, achieved remission (n = 111) were defined a priori for analyses of change in sexual function. Treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction was significantly less prevalent among patients who received agomelatine, and venlafaxine XR was associated with significantly greater deterioration on the Sex Effects Scale domains of desire and orgasm. Both treatments resulted in equivalently high rates of remission (agomelatine, 73%; venlafaxine XR, 66.9%), although fewer patients in the agomelatine group discontinued treatment because of adverse events (agomelatine, 2.2%, vs venlafaxine XR, 8.6%). Agomelatine seems to be an efficacious antidepressant with a superior sexual side effect profile compared with venlafaxine XR, although superiority to placebo was not evaluated in this trial.

O ptimal management of major depressive disorders is enhanced by applying a chronic illnessmanagement model with precise and measurable therapeutic endpoints. 1 In contradistinction to several other chronic medical disorders, biological markers of illness activity in depression do not currently exist. In the interim, therapeutic progress is monitored by evaluating changes in the severity of depressive symptoms and in functional domains. This concatenation of findings is particularly disconcerting in view of the fact that most depressed patients in either primary care or psychiatric settings are not systematically evaluated with objective quantifiable measures -a modifiable deficiency in patient management. [2][3][4][5][6] The most frequently reported symptomatic outcome measure in clinical trials of antidepressants has been response to treatment, arbitrarily defined as a reduction of 50% or more in total symptom severity from a pretreatment assessment of the patient's depression. 7 A categorical response to therapy that fails to achieve a fully asympomatic remitted state furnishes an unsatisfactory outcome, in that it includes patients with ongoing disease activity that is clinically significant. Patients who show improvement in symptom severity but are not asymptomatic are at risk for developing chronic depression, and continue to be vulnerable to poor outcomes and comorbid medical disorders. [8][9][10] Remission is an objective outcome indicated by a quantifiable score with a depressive symptom measurement tool. In antidepressant clinical trials, the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) has been the "gold standard" for use. HAMD-17, however, has not been accepted by clinicians for many reasons, 11,12 notably psychometric deficiencies and the length of time needed to administer it.Although several brief rating scales for depression that attempt to improve upon the limitations of HAMD-17 have recently been validated and reviewed, [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] none that are brief, currently available and use a remission cut-off score that correlates with the most frequently cited definition of remission (a HAMD-17 score ≤ 7) 7 have been validated in both tertiary mental health and primary care settings.Our broad objective in using HAMD-7 was to improve upon the conceptual and pragmatic deficiencies ascribed to HAMD-17. HAMD-7 was originally derived from analyses of a natural practice database at a tertiary care centre composed of patients diagnosed with a major depressive disorder (n = 248). 14 The HAMD-17 items that were endorsed in a previous study 14 by 70% of depressed patients and were most sensi- Background: Symptomatic remission is the optimal outcome in depression. A brief, validated tool for symptom measurement that can indicate when remission has occurred in mental health and primary care settings is unavailable. We evaluated a 7-item abbreviated version (HAMD-7) of the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) in a randomized controlled clinical trial of patients with major de...

According to the Sex FX scale, a significant difference in antidepressant-related sexual dysfunction was detected in men, but not women, during treatment with bupropion SR or paroxetine.

These results reaffirm a higher prevalence of gambling both in BD and in MDD populations, compared with previously published community samples. Our study also identifies risk factors for gambling behaviours within these populations.

W La Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, vol 52, no 1, janvier 2007 22Objectives: We conducted a preliminary study on the validation of the Psychiatric Diagnostic Screening Questionnaire (PDSQ) among patients seeking treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs). Method:We assessed 76 patients with SUDs, using the PDSQ, followed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated.Results: Overall, the psychometric properties identified with the PDSQ in patients with SUDs differed from those found in psychiatric outpatient populations. The ROC curves were calculated for major depressive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and panic disorder. The areas under the curves were 0.86 (95%CI, 0.77 to 0.95; P < 0.001), 0.79 (95%CI, 0.68 to 0.90; P < 0.001), and 0.66 (95%CI, 0.51 to 0.82; P = 0.05), respectively. Conclusion:The use of the PDSQ to screen for other psychiatric disorders in populations with SUDs is promising but requires larger validation studies to provide data on its psychometric properties and inform the choice of cut-off scores for this population. Clinical Implications· The use of a self-assessment instrument to screen for psychiatric diagnosis in patients with substance use disorders is expedient. · Validation data obtained from a different population cannot inform the use of the PDSQ among patients with SUD. · The PDSQ accuracy was moderate, with high negative predictive values for MDD and PTSD in the studied sample. Limitations· The relatively small sample size limits generalizability. · Conclusions could not be drawn on the accuracy of the PDSQ for disorders of low prevalence. · The sample of clients of tertiary care facilities was nonrandomized.