4.2 Review

Pharmacological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder

期刊

EXPERT OPINION ON PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 12, 期 16, 页码 2457-2467

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1517/14656566.2011.618496

关键词

antidepressants; anxiety; efficacy; evidence-based treatment; pharmacotherapy; relapse; safety; tolerability; treatment response

资金

  1. US Public Health Research [K08MH080372]
  2. Euthymics Biosience, Inc.
  3. NIMH
  4. Pamlab
  5. Pfizer, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a chronic, relapsing, debilitating disorder, associated with markedly impaired social and occupational functioning. Pharmacological treatment is considered standard care and several drug classes are now FDA approved for the treatment of GAD. While there are clear data for the efficacy of short-term acute treatment, long-term treatment and treatment-resistant GAD remain challenging. Areas covered: This article describes current pharmacological treatment options for GAD, with focus on benzodiazepines, azapirones, antidepressants and anticonvulsant and antipsychotic drugs. Recent findings from placebo-controlled clinical trials are reviewed and evidence-based clinical implications are discussed. A PubMed search was completed using the terms: 'generalized anxiety disorder AND treatment' and 'generalized anxiety disorder AND therapy'. Additional pivotal trials were included for a historical perspective (older landmark trials that established efficacy and safety for older drug classes in the treatment of GAD). Expert opinion: Efficacy for treatment of GAD has been established for several different drug classes. At present, based on clear efficacy and good tolerability, first-line treatment with either a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) is indicated. If an initial, at least moderate, clinical response is achieved under antidepressant therapy, treatment should be at least continued for 12 months.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据