Relative Antidepressant Efficacy of Venlafaxine and SSRIs: Sex-Age Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether differences in antidepressant efficacy are moderated by an interaction of age and gender. METHODS: A pooled dataset from eight randomized, controlled trials of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) was reanalyzed to compare remission rates following therapy with venlafaxine (n = 851), one of several selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (n = 748), or placebo (n = 446). Remission was defined as a final Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score < or =7. Pairwise comparisons were conducted using stepwise multiple logistic regression models with main effect and interaction terms for treatment, sex, and age (younger: <50; older: > or =50). Among older women, the impact of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) on remission rates also was examined. RESULTS: Remission rates on venlafaxine therapy were not affected by age, sex, or HRT use. Among women, but not men, there was a significant interaction reflecting poorer SSRI response in the older age group (Wald chi-square = 4.21, df = 1, p = 0.04); HRT appeared to eliminate this difference. Whereas the advantage in remission rates favoring venlafaxine was modest for men and younger women (6%-9%), the difference among older women not taking HRT was 23%. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide further evidence that age, gender, and HRT moderate response to antidepressant medications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".