MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195763186 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.915

Effectiveness of vortioxetine in real-world clinical practice: Interim results from the relieve study

2021· article· en· W3195763186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregory W. Mattingly, Michael Cronquist Christensen, Kenneth Simonsen, Lene Hammer-Helmich, Hongye Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVortioxetineMedicineAdverse effectPatient Health QuestionnaireQuality of life (healthcare)Observational studyDiscontinuationNauseaMajor depressive disorderPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryMoodDepressive symptomsAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Vortioxetine has demonstrated sustained efficacy and favorable safety profile in multiple clinical trials. Objectives This study aims to describe the effectiveness and safety of vortioxetine in real-world clinical practice. Methods RELIEVE is a prospective, multi-national, observational cohort study of outpatients initiating vortioxetine treatment for MDD at physician’s discretion and followed for 6 months. Data were collected at routine clinical visits. The primary outcome was functioning measured by Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Depressive symptoms measured by Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item (PHQ-9), cognitive symptoms measured by PDQ-5 and DSST were key secondary outcomes. Safety outcomes including adverse events were reported. This interim analysis presents results of 527 patients who completed the study and were followed for 6 months. Mixed models of repeated measures were used to assess improvements between baseline and month 6, adjusted for relevant confounders. Results A total of 527 patients (mean age, 50.2 years, 65% female) were enrolled from US, Canada, France and Italy, and included in the analysis. Mean SDS total score, PHQ-9, PDQ-5 scores decreased by 8.6, 7.4 and 4.7 respectively from baseline to last visit. Mean DSST score improved by 6.5 from baseline to last visit. Patients’ overall functioning and quality of life significantly improved, sick leave days and underproductive days (both absenteeism and presenteeism) decreased over the entire follow up period. The overall incidence of adverse events(AE) was 25%, with the most common AEs being nausea and headache. Conclusions The results confirm the effectiveness and good tolerability of vortioxetine in a broad range of patients in routine clinical practice. Conflict of interest Dr. Mattingly has served as researcher, consultant or speaker for Akili, Alcobra, Alkermes, Allergan, Axsome, Boehringer, Forum, Genentech, Jansen, Lundbeck, Medgenics, Merck, Neos, NLS Pharma, Otsuka, Reckitt Benckiser, Roche, Sage, Shire, Sunovion, Supe

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.362 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207