We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Double-blind comparative study of the antidepressant, unwanted and cardiac effects of minaprine and amitriptyline.
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 1996 October
1. A double-blind, multicentre study comparing the efficacy and safety of minaprine and amitriptyline in patients with major depression was carried out. Five hundred and thirty-one patients were randomly assigned to treatment with either minaprine 100 mg, 200 mg or 300 mg day-1 or with amitriptyline 150 mg day-1 (75 mg during the first week). The medication was administered for 6 weeks. 2. Efficacy was assessed using the Hamilton rating scale for depression (HDRS), the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale (MADRS) and visual analogue assessments of depression carried out by both the investigators and patients. Unwanted effects were assessed by a questionnaire and spontaneous reporting. In a subgroup of patients cardiovascular effects were investigated by high speed ECG and systolic time intervals. 3. Patients in each treatment group showed a significant clinical improvement (P < 0.01) from baseline. The mean HDRS and MADRS scores adjusted for baseline differences, showed significantly less improvement in the minaprine 100 mg once daily (P < 0.01) and the minaprine 300 mg daily (P < 0.01) groups than in the amitriptyline group at both week 4 and week 6. The MADRS score at week 4 suggested that 200 mg day-1 minaprine was less effective than amitriptyline (P < 0.05), but there was no difference between the two groups at week 6 on either the HDRS or the MADRS. 4. Both drugs were well tolerated and there were no significant differences between treatment groups in any of the safety and tolerance assessments. In the ECG, amitriptyline produced a significant increase in the heart rate and PR interval while minaprine had no effect on electrocardiographic measurements. Neither drug produced changes in the systolic time intervals.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app