Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic acid for depression.
J Clin Psychiatry 2015; 76(1):54-61JC

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 omega-3 (n-3) preparations enriched with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) versus docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) as monotherapy for major depressive disorder (MDD) in a 2-site, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

METHOD

196 adults (53% female; mean [SD] age = 44.7 [13.4] years) with DSM-IV MDD and a baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) score ≥ 15 were randomized equally from May 18, 2006, to June 30, 2011, to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with oral EPA-enriched n-3 1000 mg/d, DHA-enriched n-3 1,000 mg/d, or placebo.

RESULTS

154 subjects completed the study. Modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis (n = 177 subjects with ≥ 1 postbaseline visit; 59.3% female, mean [SD] age 45.8 [12.5] years) employed mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM). All 3 groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement in the HDRS-17 (primary outcome measure), 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (QIDS-SR-16), and Clinical Global Improvement-Severity Scale (CGI-S) (P < .05), but neither n-3 preparation separated from placebo (P > .05). Response and remission rates were in the range of 40%-50% and 30%, respectively, for all treatments, with no significant differences between groups. One subject receiving EPA-enriched n-3 discontinued due to worsening depression, and 1 subject receiving placebo discontinued due to an unspecified "negative reaction" to pills.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither EPA-enriched nor DHA-enriched n-3 was superior to placebo for the treatment of MDD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00517036.

Authors+Show Affiliations

1 Bowdoin Sq, 6th Floor, Boston, MA 02114 dmischoulon@partners.org.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Language

eng

PubMed ID

25272149

Citation

Mischoulon, David, et al. "A Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Eicosapentaenoic Acid Versus Docosahexaenoic Acid for Depression." The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, vol. 76, no. 1, 2015, pp. 54-61.
Mischoulon D, Nierenberg AA, Schettler PJ, et al. A double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic acid for depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(1):54-61.
Mischoulon, D., Nierenberg, A. A., Schettler, P. J., Kinkead, B. L., Fehling, K., Martinson, M. A., & Hyman Rapaport, M. (2015). A double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic acid for depression. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 76(1), pp. 54-61. doi:10.4088/JCP.14m08986.
Mischoulon D, et al. A Double-blind, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial Comparing Eicosapentaenoic Acid Versus Docosahexaenoic Acid for Depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(1):54-61. PubMed PMID: 25272149.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial comparing eicosapentaenoic acid versus docosahexaenoic acid for depression. AU - Mischoulon,David, AU - Nierenberg,Andrew A, AU - Schettler,Pamela J, AU - Kinkead,Becky L, AU - Fehling,Kiki, AU - Martinson,Max A, AU - Hyman Rapaport,Mark, PY - 2014/01/07/received PY - 2014/03/11/accepted PY - 2014/10/2/entrez PY - 2014/10/2/pubmed PY - 2015/3/25/medline SP - 54 EP - 61 JF - The Journal of clinical psychiatry JO - J Clin Psychiatry VL - 76 IS - 1 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To compare 2 omega-3 (n-3) preparations enriched with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) versus docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) as monotherapy for major depressive disorder (MDD) in a 2-site, placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind clinical trial. METHOD: 196 adults (53% female; mean [SD] age = 44.7 [13.4] years) with DSM-IV MDD and a baseline 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) score ≥ 15 were randomized equally from May 18, 2006, to June 30, 2011, to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with oral EPA-enriched n-3 1000 mg/d, DHA-enriched n-3 1,000 mg/d, or placebo. RESULTS: 154 subjects completed the study. Modified intent-to-treat (mITT) analysis (n = 177 subjects with ≥ 1 postbaseline visit; 59.3% female, mean [SD] age 45.8 [12.5] years) employed mixed-model repeated measures (MMRM). All 3 groups demonstrated statistically significant improvement in the HDRS-17 (primary outcome measure), 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (QIDS-SR-16), and Clinical Global Improvement-Severity Scale (CGI-S) (P < .05), but neither n-3 preparation separated from placebo (P > .05). Response and remission rates were in the range of 40%-50% and 30%, respectively, for all treatments, with no significant differences between groups. One subject receiving EPA-enriched n-3 discontinued due to worsening depression, and 1 subject receiving placebo discontinued due to an unspecified "negative reaction" to pills. CONCLUSIONS: Neither EPA-enriched nor DHA-enriched n-3 was superior to placebo for the treatment of MDD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00517036. SN - 1555-2101 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/25272149/A_double_blind_randomized_controlled_clinical_trial_comparing_eicosapentaenoic_acid_versus_docosahexaenoic_acid_for_depression_ L2 - http://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/article/pages/2015/v76n01/v76n0109.aspx DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -