Agomelatine Prevents Relapse in Generalized Anxiety Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of agomelatine in the prevention of relapse in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHOD: Patients with GAD (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [HARS] ≥ 22, with items 1 and 2 ≥ 2, item 1 + 2 ≥ 5; Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] ≤ 16; and < 20% decrease in HARS total score between screening and baseline) who responded to a 16-week course of agomelatine 25-50 mg/d treatment were randomly assigned to receive continuation treatment with agomelatine (n = 113) or placebo (n = 114) for 26 weeks. The main outcome measure was time to relapse during this maintenance period. The estimated risk of relapse was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and groups were compared using a log-rank test stratified for country. The study was undertaken in 31 clinical centers in Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, and Sweden from November 2007 to September 2009. RESULTS: During the 6-month maintenance period, the proportion of patients that relapsed during the double-blind period in the agomelatine group (22 patients, 19.5%) was lower than in the placebo group (35 patients, 30.7%). The risk of relapse over time was significantly lower for patients who continued treatment than for those switched to placebo (P = .046, log-rank test stratified for country). Agomelatine was also superior to placebo in preventing relapse in the subset of more severe patients with baseline HARS total score ≥ 25 and CGI-S score ≥ 5. The tolerability of agomelatine was good throughout the study, and there were no differences in discontinuation symptoms after withdrawal of agomelatine in comparison to maintenance on agomelatine. CONCLUSIONS: The present study extends the positive findings of an earlier short-term study of agomelatine in GAD, demonstrating that agomelatine is effective and well-tolerated in the longer-term treatment of this chronic disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.isrctn.org identifier: ISRCTN38094599.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".