You will be provided with the titles and abstracts of a collection of medical RCT reports studying a clinical question -- for instance, the efficacy of an intervention on some medical outcome. Please write a few sentences synthesizing the findings of these reports, which could serve as a conclusion section for a systematic review article. Your response should not include any other text. The RCT reports are below.



Title 1:
The pharmacological treatment of delusional depression.
Abstract 1:
The authors investigated the pharmacological treatment of delusional depression by assigning patients on a random double-blind basis to amitriptyline alone, perphenazine alone, or a combination of the two. Fourteen (78%) of the 18 patients assigned to amitriptyline plus perphenazine were responders, compared with seven (41%) of 17 patients treated with amitriptyline alone and three (19%) of the 16 patients treated with perphenazine alone. The combination of amitriptyline and perphenazine was clearly superior (p less than .01).


Title 2:
A double-blind randomized comparison of nortriptyline plus perphenazine versus nortriptyline plus placebo in the treatment of psychotic depression in late life.
Abstract 2:
To conduct the first randomized study comparing the efficacy of an antidepressant alone versus an antidepressant plus a neuroleptic in the treatment of late-life psychotic depression.
                The efficacy of nortriptyline plus placebo versus nortriptyline plus perphenazine was compared in 36 patients aged 50 years or older presenting with a major depressive episode with psychotic features (DSM-III-R criteria). Patients were started openly on nortriptyline treatment titrated to therapeutic levels. They were then randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to addition of perphenazine or placebo. Outcomes were compared in the 2 treatment groups using measures including the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS); side effects were assessed with the Geriatric Movement Disorder Assessment.
                Both treatments were well tolerated. Of the 36 randomly assigned patients, 2 (1 in each group) dropped out due to treatment-related adverse effects. Four additional patients dropped out for administrative reasons. Thirty patients received nortriptyline for at least 4 weeks combined with either perphenazine (N = 14) or placebo (N = 16) for at least 2 weeks (median = 9 weeks). There was no significant difference between the completers in the 2 treatment groups when comparing their scores on the HAM-D, the BPRS, its psychoticism subscale, or any side effects measure. Rates of response (defined as resolution of both depression and psychosis) did not differ significantly in the 2 groups (nortriptyline-plus-perphenazine group, 50% vs. nortriptyline-plus-placebo group, 44%).
                When treating older patients with psychotic depression, the addition of a moderate dose of a traditional neuroleptic to a tricyclic antidepressant was well tolerated but did not improve efficacy. This finding supports existing data suggesting that the pathophysiology (and thus the required treatment) of psychotic depression may be different early and late in life.


Title 3:
Placebo response rates in psychotic and nonpsychotic depression.
Abstract 3:
The authors reanalyzed data from two earlier studies that used double-blind placebo-controlled formats to study the efficacy of amitriptyline. Using a 14-day drug-free 'wash-out' period, they found that the placebo response rates were 0% for psychotic depressives and 13.3% for nonpsychotic depressives. Amitriptyline was significantly superior to placebo for both psychotic (P less than or equal to 0.05) and nonpsychotic (P less than or equal to 0.05) depressed patients.


Title 4:
A double-blind, randomized study of olanzapine and olanzapine/fluoxetine combination for major depression with psychotic features.
Abstract 4:
The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of olanzapine (OLZ) monotherapy and an olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) with placebo (PLA) for unipolar major depression with psychotic features. Under a single protocol, two 8-week, double-blind trials were conducted at 27 sites. Patients (n = 124 trial 1, n = 125 trial 2) were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment groups: OLZ (5 to 20 mg/d), PLA, or OFC (olanzapine 5 to 20 mg/d + fluoxetine 20 to 80 mg/d). The primary outcome measure was the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score. For trial 1, endpoint improvement for the OLZ group (-14.9) was not significantly different from the PLA or OFC groups. The OFC group had significantly greater endpoint improvement (-20.9) than the PLA group (-10.4, P = 0.001); this significant difference was present within 7 days of therapy and maintained at every subsequent visit. The OFC group also had significantly higher response rate (63.6%) than the PLA (28.0%, P = 0.004) or OLZ (34.9%, P = 0.027) groups. For trial 2, there were no significant differences among treatment groups on the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total scores or response rates. The combination exhibited a comparable safety profile with OLZ monotherapy and no significant increases in extrapyramidal symptoms compared with placebo. Patients with major depression with psychotic features treated with OLZ monotherapy did not demonstrate significant depressive symptom improvement compared with placebo in either trial; however, an olanzapine/fluoxetine combination was associated with significant improvement compared with placebo in one trial and was well tolerated.
                Copyright 2004 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins


Title 5:
A double-blind randomized study comparing imipramine with fluvoxamine in depressed inpatients.
Abstract 5:
To compare the efficacy of imipramine and fluvoxamine in inpatients from two centers suffering from a depressive disorder according to DSM IV criteria.
                The study included 141 patients with a depressive disorder according to DSM IV criteria. After a drug-free and placebo run-in period of 1 week, patients were randomized to imipramine or fluvoxamine; doses of both drugs were adjusted to a predefined target blood level. Efficacy was evaluated 4 weeks after attaining predefined adequate plasma level.
                The mean age of the study group (47 males, 94 females) was 51.8 (range 19-65) years. Of these 141 patients, 56 had episode duration longer than 1 year, 48 had mood congruent psychotic features, and 138 patients received medication. Seven patients did not complete the medication trial. The total number of patients using concurrent medication was 12/138 (8.6%). On the primary outcome criteria patients on imipramine improved significantly better on the change of illness severity score of the CGI (chi2 exact trend test=4.089, df=1, P=-0.048). There was no significant difference in 50% or more reduction on the HRSD, the other primary outcome criterion. On the secondary outcome criteria the mean reduction of the HRSD scores was significantly larger in the imipramine group than in the fluvoxamine group (mean difference=3.1, standard error (SE)=1.4, t=2.15, df=136, P=0.033). There was no significant difference in the number of patients with an HRSD < or =7 at the final evaluation.
                In depressed inpatients imipramine is more efficacious than fluvoxamine. Both drugs were well tolerated by all patients.


Title 6:
A double-blind, fixed blood-level study comparing mirtazapine with imipramine in depressed in-patients.
Abstract 6:
Antidepressant effects of mirtazapine and imipramine were compared in a randomized, double blind, fixed blood-levels study with in-patients in a single centre. Patients with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of major depression and a Hamilton (17-item) score of > or = 18 were selected. After a drug-free and a placebo-washout period of 7 days in total, 107 patients still fulfilling the HRSD criterion of > or = 18, started on active treatment. The dose was adjusted to a predefined fixed blood level to avoid suboptimal dosing of imipramine. Concomitant psychotropic medication was administered only in a few cases because of intolerable anxiety or intolerable psychotic symptoms. Eight patients dropped out and two were excluded from analyses because of non-compliance; 97 completed the study. According to the main response criterion (50% or more reduction on the HRSD score) 11/51 (21.6%) patients responded on mirtazapine and 23/46 (50%) on imipramine after 4 weeks' treatment on the predefined blood level. Such a dramatic difference in efficacy between antidepressants has not often been reported before. The selection of (severely ill) in-patients, including those with suicidal or psychotic features, may have significance in this respect. Optimization of treatment with the reference drug imipramine through blood level control, exclusion of non-compliance for both drugs, exclusion of most concomitant medication and a low drop-out rate may also have contributed. It is concluded that imipramine is superior to mirtazapine in the patient population studied.


Title 7:
Venlafaxine versus fluvoxamine in the treatment of delusional depression: a pilot double-blind controlled study.
Abstract 7:
Previous studies have reported the efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors as monotherapy in the treatment of delusional depression. The clinical efficacy of venlafaxine, a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake blocker, has been demonstrated in the treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe depression, but, to date, no evidence is available about its use in depressed patients with psychotic features.
                Under double-blind conditions, 28 hospitalized patients who met DSM-IV criteria for major depression, severe with psychotic features, were randomly assigned to receive fluvoxamine or venlafaxine, 300 mg/day, for 6 weeks. Severity was evaluated using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the Dimensions of Delusional Experience Rating Scale (DDERS) administered at baseline and every week thereafter. Side effects were also recorded. Clinical response was defined as a reduction of the scores in the 21-item HAM-D to 8 or below and in the DDERS to 0.
                At study completion, the response rates were 78.6% (N = 11) and 58.3% (N = 7) for fluvoxamine and venlafaxine, respectively. No significant difference was found between drugs (Fisher exact test, p = .40). Analysis of covariance on HAM-D scores did not reveal a significantly different decrease of depressive symptomatology between the 2 treatment groups (p = .14). Treatment response appeared to be unrelated to the demographic and clinical characteristics recorded. The overall safety profile of both fluvoxamine and venlafaxine was favorable.
                The results of this pilot double-blind trial show that fluvoxamine is useful in the treatment of delusional depression and suggest that venlafaxine may also be an effective compound in the treatment of this disorder. The latter finding, although promising, warrants further replication in a larger sample of patients.


Title 8:
Amoxapine versus amitriptyline combined with perphenazine in the treatment of psychotic depression.
Abstract 8:
In a double-blind study lasting for 4 weeks, the authors compared the effectiveness of amoxapine, an antidepressant with potential antipsychotic properties, with a combination of amitriptyline plus perphenazine in the treatment of 38 patients who had the diagnosis of major depression with psychotic features (psychotic or delusional depression). Patients in each group showed similar improvement in depression and psychosis. There was a tendency for the patients treated with amitriptyline plus perphenazine to have higher global response rates. However, the patients given amoxapine had significantly fewer extrapyramidal side effects.


Title 9:
Double-blind controlled trial of sertraline versus paroxetine in the treatment of delusional depression.
Abstract 9:
In this study the authors evaluated the efficacy and the tolerability of sertraline and paroxetine in the treatment of delusional depression.
                Under double-blind conditions, 46 hospitalized patients who met the DSM-III-R criteria for major depression with psychotic features were treated with sertraline or paroxetine for 6 weeks.
                The response rates were 75% and 46% for sertraline and paroxetine, respectively. The dropout rate was substantial (41%) in the paroxetine group and was attributable to side effects.
                Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors administered alone are useful in the treatment of delusional depression.
Treatment with an antipsychotic alone is not a good option. Starting with an antidepressant alone and adding an antipsychotic if the patient does not respond or starting with the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic both appear appropriate options for patients with psychotic depression. In clinical practice the balance between risks and benefits suggests that initial antidepressive monotherapy and adding an antipsychotic if there is inadequate response should be the preferred treatment strategy for many patients. The general lack of available data limits confidence in the conclusions drawn.