MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293714479 · doi:10.2147/ndt.s374635

Effectiveness of Vortioxetine in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder in Real-World Clinical Practice: French Cohort Results from the Global RELIEVE Study

2022· article· en· W4293714479 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mircea Polosan, Marc Rabbani, Michael Cronquist Christensen, Kenneth Simonsen, Hongye Ren

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH. Lundbeck A/S
KeywordsVortioxetineMedicinePatient Health QuestionnaireMajor depressive disorderDepression (economics)Digit symbol substitution testCohortAnxietyConfoundingCohort studyPsychiatryInternal medicineAntidepressantMoodDepressive symptomsAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: Functional recovery is an important treatment goal in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The Real-Life Effectiveness of Vortioxetine in Depression (RELIEVE) study assessed the effectiveness of vortioxetine in patients with MDD receiving treatment in routine clinical care settings in France, Italy, Canada, and the United States. This paper presents the study data for the cohort enrolled in France. Methods: RELIEVE was a 6-month, international, observational, prospective cohort study in outpatients initiating vortioxetine treatment for MDD at their physician’s discretion (NCT03555136). Patients were assessed at routine clinic visits at study entry (baseline) and after 12 and 24 weeks of vortioxetine treatment. The primary study outcome was patient functioning, assessed by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Secondary outcomes included depression severity (assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9]), cognitive symptoms (assessed by the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-Depression [PDQ-D-5]), and cognitive performance (Digit Symbol Substitution Test [DSST]). Changes from baseline to week 24 were assessed using mixed models for repeated measures, adjusted for relevant confounders. Adverse events spontaneously reported by the patient or observed by the investigator were recorded. Results: Data are available for 184 patients in France (mean age, 50.2 years; 65.2% female). Overall, 67.9% of patients had at least one comorbidity and 46.2% reported current anxiety symptoms at baseline. Adjusted least-squares mean (standard error) change in SDS score from baseline to week 24 was − 10.9 (0.6) points ( P < 0.001). Respective changes for PHQ-9, PDQ-D-5 and DSST scores were − 9.3 (0.5), − 6.1 (0.4), and +6.9 (1.0) points (all P < 0.0001). Adverse events were reported by 29 patients (15.8%), most commonly nausea (11 patients, 6.0%). Conclusion: Clinically relevant and sustained improvements in overall functioning, depressive symptoms, cognitive symptoms, and cognitive performance were observed in patients with MDD treated with vortioxetine for 6 months in routine clinical practice settings in France. Keywords: major depressive disorder, vortioxetine, effectiveness, patient functioning, real-world evidence

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric Disease and TreatmentSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207