↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacokinetic Optimisation of Therapy with Newer Antidepressants

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacokinetics, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
12 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Pharmacokinetic Optimisation of Therapy with Newer Antidepressants
Published in
Clinical Pharmacokinetics, November 2012
DOI 10.2165/00003088-199427040-00005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul J. Goodnick

Abstract

Since the early 1950s, when imipramine was first introduced, a whole series of antidepressants with differences in structures, neurochemical effects and pharmacokinetics have been developed. Structurally or functionally, they have been classified as tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), tetracyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), or selective serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). In addition, there is a series of antidepressants with unique structures. Many of the newer TCAs appear to have shorter half-lives than the standard TCAs (e.g. imipramine), allowing for the possibility of a more rapid response, but requiring the drugs to be given in multiple daily doses, which may reduce patient compliance. The short time to peak plasma concentration (tmax) can also lead to rapid onset of adverse effects. The tetracyclic antidepressants have longer elimination half-lives (t1/2) than the TCAs, but there is only very minimal evidence for a relationship between drug concentrations in the blood and clinical response. The triazolopyridines, like the newer TCAs, show pharmacokinetic evidence for rapid onset of adverse effects and the need for multiple daily doses due to short tmax and t1/2. The newer MAOIs are a significant addition to therapy, as the rapid binding action of these medications increases their safety margin with regard to tyramine interactions. Further information in this area is required. In addition, moclobemide has pharmacokinetic features that are clinically beneficial (e.g. aging and renal dysfunction have little effect on the elimination of the drug), but also features that are not beneficial (e.g. nonlinear pharmacokinetics). Among the SSRIs, there are a range of t1/2 values for the parent drugs, from relatively short t1/2 values of less than 24 hours (paroxetine, fluvoxamine) to among the longest found (e.g. 2 days for fluoxetine). Only 2 of the agents (sertraline and citalopram) have linear pharmacokinetics, and 1 drug has nonlinear pharmacokinetics within the usual therapeutic range (fluvoxamine). Once a therapeutic blood concentration is established, linearity is helpful in avoiding the small dose changes and repeated rechecking of concentrations of medications that would be required for those agents with nonlinear pharmacokinetics. Sertraline stands out as having the best effects on behaviour among all antidepressants. However, fluoxetine and fluvoxamine are least likely to penetrate into breast milk. All 3 of the structurally unique newer antidepressants [amfebutamone (bupropion), viloxazine venlafaxine] have relatively short tmax values (1 to 2 hours), which may relate to the early onset of adverse effects. Amfebutamone has the benefits of linear pharmacokinetics with potential for defined therapeutic blood concentrations, lack of effect of liver enzymes on metabolism of the drug, and lack of significant effects of either aging or hepatic dysfunction on elimination of the drug. Thus, the antidepressants best suited for pharmacokinetic optimisation of therapy are the following: desipramine, sertraline, fluvoxamine, citalopram and amfebutamone.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 30%
Student > Bachelor 3 15%
Professor 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 25%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 20%
Psychology 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 August 2017.
All research outputs
#5,447,195
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#360
of 1,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,486
of 201,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacokinetics
#140
of 625 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 201,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 625 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.