4.1 Review

Efficacy and safety of treatments for refractory generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review

Journal

INTERNATIONAL CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages 63-68

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/YIC.0b013e328341bb4a

Keywords

augmentation; generalized anxiety disorder; pharmacotherapy; systematic review; treatment refractory

Funding

  1. Pfizer UK Ltd.

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study systematically collated clinical evidence on refractory generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Refractory GAD patients are those who have failed to respond adequately to at least one earlier treatment for GAD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and conference proceedings were searched to identify trials. Four placebo-controlled trials (pregabalin, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone) and four single-arm studies (aripiprazole, risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone) evaluated the add-ons to initial treatment(s) or switch of treatment(s) because of inadequate efficacy. The most robust trial was the pregabalin study, with a study duration of 8 weeks and a largest sample size that consists of 356 patients. A significant reduction in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) score was found for pregabalin and risperidone augmentation compared with placebo. Olanzapine augmentation resulted in a significantly higher proportion of responders (using HAM-A scores) compared with placebo. Quetiapine augmentation did not result in significantly greater mean reductions in the HAM-A scores compared with placebo. There is a need for effective and safe augmentation treatments for patient's refractory to initial treatments for GAD. This study has located one large robust trial assessing the add-on to pregabalin. All other trials were small and unpowered studies with less than 50 patients. Further high-quality trials of augmentation treatment on refractory GAD are required. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 26:63-68 (C) 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health vertical bar Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available