4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Paroxetine is an effective treatment for hot flashes: Results from a prospective randomized clinical trial

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 28, Pages 6919-6930

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.10.081

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose In an open-label trial we have previously demonstrated that paroxetine reduces hot flashes. We initiated a stratified, randomized, double-blind, cross-over, place bo-controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of paroxetine 10 mg and 20 mg compared to placebo in reducing hot flash frequency and composite score. A secondary objective was to evaluate quality of life (QOL) parameters. Patients and Methods Women who suffered at least two hot flashes a day for 1 month or longer were eligible. Women were randomly assigned to 4 weeks of paroxetine 10 mg or 20 mg followed by placebo for 4 weeks, or placebo for 4 weeks followed by paroxetine 10 mg or 20 mg for 4 weeks. Participants completed baseline daily hot flash diaries for one week prior to the start of the study and throughout the study, and QOL questionnaires at baseline, week 5 and week 9. Results 279 women were screened, and 151 were randomly assigned. Paroxetine 10 mg reduced hot flash frequency and composite score by 40.6% and 45.6%, respectively, compared to 13.7% and 13.7% for placebo (P =.0006 and P =.0008, respectively). Paroxetine 20 mg reduced hot flash frequency and composite score by 51.7% and 56.1%, respectively, compared with 26.6% and 28.8% for placebo (P =.002 and P =.004, respectively). Efficacy was similar between the two doses, but women were less likely to discontinue low-dose paroxetine. Paroxetine 10 mg was associated with a significant improvement in sleep compared with placebo (P =.01). Conclusion Paroxetine is an effective treatment for hot flashes in women with or without a prior breast cancer.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available