Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2015 Jun 1;2015(6):CD011006.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006.pub2.

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

Giovanni Ostuzzi  1 , Faith Matcham, Sarah Dauchy, Corrado Barbui, Matthew Hotopf
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in people with cancer

Giovanni Ostuzzi et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Update in

Abstract

Background: Major depression and other depressive conditions are common in people with cancer. These conditions are not easily detectable in clinical practice, due to the overlap between medical and psychiatric symptoms, as described by diagnostic manuals such as the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Moreover, it is particularly challenging to distinguish between pathological and normal reactions to such a severe illness. Depressive symptoms, even in subthreshold manifestations, have been shown to have a negative impact in terms of quality of life, compliance with anti-cancer treatment, suicide risk and likely even the mortality rate for the cancer itself. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in this population group are few and often report conflicting results.

Objectives: To assess the effects and acceptability of antidepressants for treating depressive symptoms in adults (18 years or older) with cancer (any site and stage).

Search methods: We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to April week 3, 2014), EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2014 week 17) and PsycINFO Ovid (1987 to April week 4, 2014). We additionally handsearched the trial databases of the most relevant national, international and pharmaceutical company trial registers and drug-approving agencies for published, unpublished and ongoing controlled trials.

Selection criteria: We included RCTs allocating adults (18 years or above) with any primary diagnosis of cancer and depression (including major depressive disorder, adjustment disorder, dysthymic disorder or depressive symptoms in the absence of a formal diagnosis) comparing antidepressants versus placebo, or antidepressants versus other antidepressants.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a form specifically designed for the aims of this review. The two authors compared the data extracted and then entered data into RevMan 5 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, outcome measures for each time point of interest, cost analysis and sponsorship by a drug company. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.

Main results: We retrieved a total of nine studies (861 participants), with seven studies contributing to the meta-analysis for the primary outcome. Four of these compared antidepressants and placebo, two compared two antidepressants and one-three armed study compared two antidepressants and a placebo arm. For the acute phase treatment response (6 to 12 weeks), we found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class on symptoms of depression compared with placebo when measured as a continuous outcome (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.01 to 0.11, five RCTs, 266 participants) or as a proportion of people who had depression (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.08, five RCTs, 417 participants). No trials reported data on the follow-up response (more than 12 weeks). In head-to-head comparisons we only retrieved data for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus tricyclic antidepressants, providing very low quality evidence for the difference between these two classes (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.18, three RCTs, 237 participants). No clear evidence of an effect of antidepressants versus either placebo or other antidepressants emerged from the analyses of the secondary efficacy outcomes (dichotomous outcome, response at 6 to 12 weeks, very low quality evidence). We found very low quality evidence for the effect of antidepressants as a class in terms of dropouts due to any cause compared with placebo (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.53, six RCTs, 455 participants), as well as between SSRIs and tricyclic antidepressants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.30, three RCTs, 237 participants). We downgraded the quality of the evidence because the included studies were at an unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting, imprecision arising from small sample sizes and wide confidence intervals, and inconsistency due to statistical or clinical heterogeneity.

Authors' conclusions: Despite the impact of depression on people with cancer, available studies were very few and of low quality. This review found very low quality evidence for the effects of these drugs compared with placebo. On the basis of these results clear implications for practice cannot be made. The use of antidepressants in people with cancer should be considered on an individual basis and, considering the lack of head-to-head data, the choice of which agent should be prescribed may be based on the data on antidepressant efficacy in the general population of individuals with major depression, also taking into account that data on medically ill patients suggest a positive safety profile for the SSRIs. Large, simple, randomised, pragmatic trials comparing commonly used antidepressants versus placebo in people with cancer with depressive symptoms, with or without a formal diagnosis of a depressive disorder, are urgently needed to better inform clinical practice.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Giovanni Ostuzzi ‐ nothing to declare Faith Matcham ‐ nothing to declare Sarah Dauchy ‐ nothing to declare Corrado Barbui ‐ nothing to declare Matthew Hotopf ‐ nothing to declare

SD conducted a multi‐centre trial of participants with cancer and depressive symptoms that compared the efficacy of escitalopram versus placebo. This trial was supported financially by the Institut Gustave‐Roussy and Lundbeck. To prevent bias the author was not involved in assessing the eligibility of the study, or in the extraction of data and quality assessment.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram.
Figure 2
Figure 2
'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figure 3
Figure 3
'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Depression: efficacy at 6‐12 weeks (continuous outcome), outcome: 1.1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Forest plot of comparison: 1 Depression: efficacy at 6‐12 weeks (continuous outcome), outcome: 1.2 Antidepressants versus Antidepressants.
Analysis 1.1
Analysis 1.1
Comparison 1 Depression: efficacy as a continuous outcome at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 1.2
Analysis 1.2
Comparison 1 Depression: efficacy as a continuous outcome at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 2.1
Analysis 2.1
Comparison 2 Depression: efficacy as a continuous outcome at 1 to 4 weeks, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 3.1
Analysis 3.1
Comparison 3 Depression: efficacy as a dichotomous outcome at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 3.2
Analysis 3.2
Comparison 3 Depression: efficacy as a dichotomous outcome at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 4.1
Analysis 4.1
Comparison 4 Social adjustment at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 5.1
Analysis 5.1
Comparison 5 Quality of life at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 5.2
Analysis 5.2
Comparison 5 Quality of life at 6 to 12 weeks, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 6.1
Analysis 6.1
Comparison 6 Acceptability (dropouts due to inefficacy), Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 6.2
Analysis 6.2
Comparison 6 Acceptability (dropouts due to inefficacy), Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 7.1
Analysis 7.1
Comparison 7 Acceptability (dropouts due to side effects), Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 7.2
Analysis 7.2
Comparison 7 Acceptability (dropouts due to side effects), Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 8.1
Analysis 8.1
Comparison 8 Acceptability (dropouts due to any cause), Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 8.2
Analysis 8.2
Comparison 8 Acceptability (dropouts due to any cause), Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 9.1
Analysis 9.1
Comparison 9 Subgroup analysis: psychiatric diagnosis, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 9.2
Analysis 9.2
Comparison 9 Subgroup analysis: psychiatric diagnosis, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 10.1
Analysis 10.1
Comparison 10 Subgroup analysis: cancer site, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 10.2
Analysis 10.2
Comparison 10 Subgroup analysis: cancer site, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 11.1
Analysis 11.1
Comparison 11 Subgroup analysis: cancer stage, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 11.2
Analysis 11.2
Comparison 11 Subgroup analysis: cancer stage, Outcome 2 Antidepressants versus antidepressants.
Analysis 12.1
Analysis 12.1
Comparison 12 Sensitivity analysis: excluding trials that did not employ depressive symptoms as their primary outcome, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
Analysis 13.1
Analysis 13.1
Comparison 13 Sensitivity analysis: excluding trials with imputed data, Outcome 1 Antidepressants versus placebo.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

References to studies included in this review

    1. Costa D, Mogos I, Toma T. Efficacy and safety of mianserin in the treatment of depression of women with cancer. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 1985;72(Suppl 320):85‐92. - PubMed
    1. Dauchy S, Saltel P, Rey A, Consoli SC, Dolbeault S, Razavi D, et al. A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of escitalopram for the treatment of emotional distress during treatment for head and neck cancer [Etude randomisée, en double aveugle, contre placebo, de l’Efficacité de l’ Escitalopram dans le traitement de la détresse émotionnelle des sujets atteints de cancer ORL en cours de traitement]. International Clinical Trials Registry Platform2014. [EUCTR2008‐002159‐25‐FR]
    1. Fisch MJ, Loehrer PJ, Kristeller J, Passik S, Jung S, Shen J, et al. Fluoxetine versus placebo in advanced cancer outpatients: a double‐blinded trial of the Hoosier Oncology Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2003;21(10):1937‐43. [DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.08.025] - DOI - PubMed
    1. Holland JC, Romano SJ, Heiligenstein JH, Tepner RG, Wilson MG. A controlled trial of fluoxetine and desipramine in depressed women with advanced cancer. Psycho‐oncology 1998;7:291–300. - PubMed
    1. Musselman DL, Somerset WI, Guo Y, Manatunga AK, Porter M, Penna S, et al. A double‐blind, multicenter, parallel‐group study of paroxetine, desipramine, or placebo in breast cancer patients (stages I, II, III, and IV) with major depression. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 2006;67(2):288‐96. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

    1. Amodeo L, Castelli L, Leombruni P, Cipriani D, Biancofiore A, Torta R. Slow versus standard up‐titration of paroxetine for the treatment of depression in cancer patients: a pilot study. Support Care Cancer 2012;20:375–84. [DOI: 10.1007/s00520-011-1118-8] - DOI - PubMed
    1. Biglia N, Torta R, Roagna R, Maggiorotto F, Cacciari F, Ponzone R, et al. Evaluation of low‐dose venlafaxine hydrochloride for the therapy of hot flushes in breast cancer survivors. Maturitas 2005;52(1):78‐85. [PUBMED: 16143229] - PubMed
    1. Biglia N, Sgandurra P, Peano E, Moggio G, Spatola M, Palmisano D. Duloxetine and escitalopram for treatment of hot flushes in breast cancer survivors. Maturitas 2009;63(Suppl 1):S34.
    1. Boekhout AH, Vincent AD, Dalesio OB, Bosch J, Foekema‐Töns JH, Adriaansz S, et al. Management of hot flashes in patients who have breast cancer with venlafaxine and clonidine: a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2011;29(29):3862‐8. [DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.1298] - DOI - PubMed
    1. Caldera PC, Amodeo L, Borio R, Ramonda E, Torta R. Algorithm‐based treatment for depression in cancer outpatients: efficacy and tolerability evaluation of newer antidepressants. Psycho‐oncology 2009;18(Suppl 2):S317. [DOI: 10.1002/pon.1594] - DOI

References to studies awaiting assessment

    1. Rankin E. Randomised double‐blind placebo controlled trial of venlafaxine in recently diagnosed lung cancer patients: effects on symptom profiles after 12 weeks. controlled‐trials.com2003. [N0405078066]
    1. Miller AA, Shaw EG. Sertraline compared with Hypericum perforatum (St.John's Wort) in treating depression. ClinicalTrials.gov2013. [NCT00066859]
    1. Pirl W. Escitalopram in treating depression in patients with advanced lung or gastrointestinal cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov2012. [NCT00387348]
    1. Nishimura R, Matsushita M. An randomized comparative study of efficacy and safety between mirtazapine and duloxetine hydrochloride in patients with cancer. UMIN Clinical Trials Registry2012. [UMIN000008768]

References to ongoing studies

    1. Yi Ba. Mirtazapine plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in metastasis pancreatic cancer. ClincalTrials.gov2012. [NCT01598584]

Additional references

    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, et al. The EORTC QLQ‐C30: a quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1993;85(5):365‐75. - PubMed
    1. Akechi T, Okuyama T, Onishi J, Morita T, Furukawa TA. Psychotherapy for depression among incurable cancer patients. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005537.pub2] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Altman DG, Bland JM. Detecting skewness from summary information. BMJ 1996;313(7066):1200. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson IM, Nutt DJ, Deakin JF. Evidence‐based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: a revision of the 1993 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines. Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) 2000;14(1):3‐20. - PubMed
    1. Andrade C. Breast cancer and antidepressant use. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 2012;73(9):e1156‐7. [DOI: 10.4088/JCP.12f08054] - DOI - PubMed

References to other published versions of this review

    1. Ostuzzi G, Matcham F, Dauchy S, Barbui C, Hotopf M. Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in patients with cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011006] - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances