Amineptine in the treatment of amphetamine withdrawal: a placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind study. A placebo-controlled trial of mirtazapine for the management of methamphetamine withdrawal. Mirtazapine in amphetamine detoxification: a placebo-controlled pilot study. Amisulpride versus amineptine and placebo for the treatment of dysthymia. Comparative effects of amitriptyline and amineptine in patients affected by anxious depression. A comparison of mirtazapine and nortriptyline following two consecutive failed medication treatments for depressed outpatients: a STAR*D report. The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine is effective in the treatment of diabetic neuropathy symptoms. The impact of reboxetine and mirtazapine on driving simulator performance and psychomotor function in depressed patients. Attenuation of olanzapine-induced weight gain with reboxetine in patients with schizophrenia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Temporary inability to function without amphetamine and the experience of withdrawal syndrome enhance the tendency for repetitive use. The investigators proposed to examine the therapeutic effects of amineptine, an antidepressant with dopamine reuptake inhibition effect, for the treatment of amphetamine withdrawal. The 14-day study was carried out on a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled design. The authors assessed the severity of amphetamine withdrawal syndrome by using two measures and performed both end-point and intent-to-treat analyses. The results showed that amineptine helped relieve a depressed mood within one week and improved the general condition within 2 weeks. In conclusion, amineptine is effective in rapid relief of depressed mood and improves the general condition of patients with amphetamine withdrawal. Since the amphetamine withdrawal may last for several weeks, studies with longer duration should be conducted before incorporating amineptine into the clinical practice a of amphetamine withdrawal treatment. As an antidepressant with sedative and anxiolytic properties, mirtazapine may be an appropriate pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine withdrawal. This study sought to examine whether mirtazapine improves retention and alleviates methamphetamine withdrawal symptoms in an out-patient setting.
                An out-patient double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial of mirtazapine for the treatment of methamphetamine withdrawal was conducted (15 mg nocte for 2 days, 30 mg nocte for 12 days). Both groups were offered narrative therapy counselling. Measures recorded on days 0, 3, 7, 14 and 35 included: treatment retention, Amphetamine Cessation Symptoms Assessment, the Athens Insomnia Scale, the Brief Symptom Inventory, the Depression-Anxiety-Stress Scale (DASS), Severity of Dependence scale and the Opiate Treatment Index Drug Use subscale.
                Thirty-one participants were recruited (18 placebo, 13 mirtazapine) and 52% completed the 2-week medication phase. No significant differences between the mirtazapine and placebo groups in retention, or any symptom measure were observed, except greater DASS-anxiety and longer sleep duration were measured at baseline among the mirtazapine group.
                Results suggest that mirtazapine does not facilitate retention or recruitment in out-patient methamphetamine withdrawal treatment, although recruitment may have been insufficient to identify a significant treatment effect. The potential role of narrative therapy for methamphetamine dependent patients deserves further exploration. The present study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of mirtazapine in amphetamine detoxification in a 14-day randomized, placebo-controlled pilot trial in a Thai population. Subjects retained at a Specialized Probation Center, Department of Probation, Ministry of Justice, Thailand (n=20), who met DSM-IV criteria for amphetamine dependence and the inclusion criteria of the study, were randomized for either mirtazapine treatment or placebo. Efficacy was assessed by the Amphetamine Withdrawal Questionnaire (AWQ) for amphetamine withdrawal symptoms and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression rating scale (MADRS) for depression. Mirtazapine safety was assessed by interview during each follow-up period on days 3 and 14 after treatment. Nine subjects were randomized to the mirtazapine group and 11 to the placebo group. Among the initial 20 subjects, 16 (seven in the mirtazapine and nine in the placebo group) completed the study. There were significant improvements in the total AWQ score changes in the mirtazapine group versus placebo both at days 3 (P<0.005) and 14 (P<0.030). Significant improvements in favour of mirtazapine were also seen in the hyperarousal and the anxiety subscale score changes at days 3 (P<0.029) and 14 (P<0.018), respectively. No significant differences were seen (P>0.05) in the MADRS scores changes within or between the groups. Mild adverse events, such as headache, sedation, nausea and vomiting, were reported. In conclusion, despite its small sample size, this randomized, placebo-controlled pilot trial lends support to the hypothesis that mirtazapine may be an option in the meager armamentarium of amphetamine detoxification treatment. Amisulpride, a selective antagonist for D2 and D3 dopamine receptors, acts preferentially on presynaptic receptors increasing dopaminergic transmission at low doses. In a multicentre, 3-month, placebo-controlled study, amisulpride (50 mg/day) was compared to amineptine (200 mg/day) in the treatment of primary dysthymia. A total of 323 patients were enrolled. Amisulpride and amineptine were found to be statistically superior to placebo (p < 0.0001) on the Clinical Global Impression (item 2): 63, 64 and 33% responders, respectively; improvement of Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms scores following amisulpride or amineptine treatment was twice as high as with placebo (p < 0.0001). The adverse event profile of amisulpride was similar to that of placebo except for endocrine symptoms in female patients; amineptine showed mainly events linked to psychic activation (insomnia, nervousness). Results show that amisulpride can improve symptoms of chronic depression in dysthymia. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, the therapeutic efficacy of two antidepressants with different neurochemical mechanisms of action, amitriptyline and amineptine, was investigated in patients affected by anxious depression. Sixty-six patients with the primary diagnosis of major depression or bipolar affective disorder (DSM-III-R) and meeting additional operational clinical criteria such as anxiety, trepidation, restlessness, early and/or late insomnia, impulsivity, hostility, dysphoria, compulsivity, hyperperspiration, palpitation, pollakiuria and phobias were included. They were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 22) and treated either with placebo, amitriptyline (up to 100 mg/day) or amineptine (up to 200 mg/day) for 6 weeks. Patients showed better response to amitriptyline, a preferential inhibitor of serotonin reuptake, than to amineptine, a selective inhibitor of dopamine reuptake. The present results suggest that alterations in serotonergic rather than dopaminergic transmission contribute to the pathophysiology of anxious depression. Few controlled studies have addressed the issue of which antidepressant medications should be recommended for outpatients who have not responded to multiple treatment trials. This study compared the efficacy of switching to mirtazapine to that of switching to a tricyclic antidepressant (nortriptyline) following two prospective, consecutive, unsuccessful medication treatments for nonpsychotic major depressive disorder.
                Following lack of remission or an inability to tolerate an initial trial of citalopram for up to 12 weeks (first step) and a second trial with either monotherapy involving another antidepressant or augmentation of citalopram with bupropion or buspirone (second step), adult outpatients (N=235) with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to 14 weeks of treatment with mirtazapine (up to 60 mg/day) (N=114) or nortriptyline (up to 200 mg/day) (N=121). The primary outcome, symptom remission, was defined a priori as a total exit score of </=7 on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. The 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR(16)), obtained at treatment visits, provided secondary outcomes of remission (score </=5 at exit) and response (>/=50% reduction in score from baseline).
                For mirtazapine, remission rates were 12.3% and 8.0% per the Hamilton and QIDS-SR(16) scores, respectively. For nortriptyline, remission rates were 19.8% and 12.4%, respectively. QIDS-SR(16) response rates were 13.4% for mirtazapine and 16.5% for nortriptyline. Neither response nor remission rates statistically differed by treatment, nor did these two treatments differ in tolerability or adverse events.
                Switching to a third antidepressant monotherapy regimen after two consecutive unsuccessful antidepressant trials resulted in low remission rates (<20%) among patients with major depressive disorder. The effect of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine on diabetic neuropathy symptoms was examined in comparison to imipramine and placebo in a randomised, double-blind, cross-over study. Paroxetine was given as a fixed dose of 40 mg/day, while the dose of imipramine was adjusted to yield optimal plasma levels of imipramine plus desipramine of 400-600 nM. Paroxetine significantly reduced the symptoms of neuropathy as measured by both observer- and self-rating, but was somewhat less effective than imipramine. However, patients showing a weaker response to paroxetine than to imipramine had lower plasma concentrations of paroxetine than patients with similar response to the 2 drugs. On imipramine 5 patients dropped out because of intolerable side effects and 4 of 19 patients completing the study reported withdrawal symptoms after discontinuing imipramine. On paroxetine no patients dropped out due to side effects and no withdrawal symptoms were reported. Self-rating showed no depressive symptoms at baseline, and no changes during the study. Neither paroxetine nor imipramine caused changes in objective measures of peripheral nerve function. In conclusion, 40 mg paroxetine/day significantly reduced the symptoms in peripheral diabetic neuropathy, and it was suggested that by dose adjustment on the basis of drug level monitoring, paroxetine may become as effective as imipramine. Paroxetine was devoid of the often disturbing autonomic side effects limiting the use of imipramine in several patients. The aim of the present study was to examine the influence of reboxetine and mirtazapine on psychomotor functions related to driving skills and on driving simulator performance in depressed inpatients.
                Forty depressed inpatients diagnosed according to DSM-IV-TR criteria were randomly assigned to treatment with either reboxetine (N = 20) or mirtazapine (N = 20). To control for retest effects in psychomotor measures, a group of 10 healthy controls was examined on the same time schedule. Participants were tested once before pharmacologic treatment and twice after initiation of treatment (days 7 and 14) with computerized tests related to car-driving skills. Data were collected with the Act and React Testsystem ART-90 and the Wiener Testsystem, measuring visual perception, reactivity, stress tolerance, concentration, and vigilance. In addition, patients went through various risk simulations on a static driving simulator. Data were analyzed with nonparametric statistics and repeated-measures analysis of variance. The study was conducted from June 2004 through June 2006.
                Before onset of treatment with antidepressants, about 65% of patients did not reach the threshold criterion according to the German guidelines for road and traffic safety. After 14 days of treatment with reboxetine or mirtazapine, patients improved in driving ability skills. Controlling for retest effects in psychomotor measures, data indicate that both patient groups significantly improved in tests measuring selective attention and reactivity (all p < .01). Furthermore, the frequency of accidents in the risk simulations markedly decreased in patients receiving mirtazapine and reboxetine (all p < .05). Statistically significant differences between treatment groups could not be shown.
                Our results indicate that partially remitted depressed inpatients treated with reboxetine or mirtazapine show a better performance on tasks related to driving skills than do untreated depressives.
                Copyright 2008 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc. Since increased norepinephrine availability may account for the weight-reducing effect of appetite suppressants, the authors hypothesized that the addition of the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor reboxetine may prevent or attenuate olanzapine-induced weight gain.
                Twenty-six patients hospitalized for first-episode DSM-IV schizophrenic disorder participated in the study. In addition to 6 weeks of treatment with olanzapine, 10 mg/day, patients were randomly allocated in a double-blind design to receive either reboxetine, 4 mg/day, (N=13) or placebo (N=13).
                Ten patients in each group completed the 6-week trial. Patients given olanzapine and reboxetine demonstrated a significantly lower increase in body weight (mean=2.5 kg, SD=2.7) than those given olanzapine and placebo (mean=5.5 kg, SD=3.1). Significantly fewer patients in the olanzapine/reboxetine group (N=2 of 10) than in the olanzapine/placebo group (N=7 of 10) gained at least 7% of their initial weight, the cutoff for clinically significant weight gain. The addition of reboxetine to olanzapine treatment was safe and well tolerated by the patients. A between-group difference in the reduction of Hamilton depression scale scores was seen that favored the olanzapine/reboxetine group (mean difference=-3.1, SD=1.25).
                The selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor reboxetine may reduce olanzapine-induced weight gain in schizophrenia patients, and activation of the adrenergic system may attenuate weight gain induced by atypical antipsychotic agents.
No medication is effective for treatment of amphetamine withdrawal. Amineptine showed reduction in discontinuation rates and improvement in clinical presentation compared to placebo, but had no effect on reducing withdrawal symptoms or craving. In spite of these limited benefits, amineptine is not available for use due to concerns over abuse liability when using the drug. The benefits of mirtazapine as a withdrawal agent are less clear based on findings from two randomised controlled trials: one report showed improvements in amphetamine withdrawal symptoms over placebo; a second report showed no differences in withdrawal symptoms compared to placebo.  Further potential treatment studies should examine medications that increase central nervous system activity involving dopamine, norepinephrine and/or serotonin neurotransmitters, including mirtazapine.