Efficacy of moclobemide in different patient groups: a meta-analysis of studies

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Whilst tricyclic antidepressants are efficacious in all depressive syndromes, classical MAO-inhibitors differ substantially from them in their action. They are considered less effective in general and not very effective in endogenous depression, but recommended for the treatment of ‘atypical’ depression. A new class of RIMA (Reversible Inhibitors of MAO-A) represented by moclobemide requires a change in clinical thinking on antidepressants. Moclobemide shows the same efficacy in depression as tricyclics: its effects are similar in unipolar and bipolar affective disorders, and in patients with major depressive episode superimposed on dysthymia (double depression). As with classical antidepressants, the response rate tends to be lower, but is still present in psychotic depression. Agitated depressives do not respond less well than non-agitated patients to moclobemide. Patients meeting DSM-III-R criteria for major depression with melancholia tend to respond better than non-melancholics, but this may be associated with the significantly higher baseline severity observed in melancholics. A slightly higher response rate in patients without concomitant benzodiazepine treatment, compared to those with benzodiazepine comedication, may also be related to baseline differences in the severity of depression. Elderly depressives respond less well than younger patients to classical antidepressants, but with moclobemide, elderly patients do as well as younger ones.