ArticleCNS drugs2025
Effectiveness and Tolerability of Vortioxetine Oral Drops Versus Oral Tablets in Major Depressive Disorder: An Analysis of a Real-World Cohort Study in Switzerland.
Article in CNS drugs, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness and Tolerability of Vortioxetine in Major Depressive Disorder: A Real-World Study in Switzerland.Clinical drug investigation · 2026Observational
- Disproportionality evaluation of adverse effects and suicide/self-injury risk factors associated with vortioxetine: a large-scale pharmacovigilance study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine tablets for depression is established, but prospective data for the oral drop formulation were unavailable. This analysis compared the effectiveness, tolerability and dosing patterns of vortioxetine tablet and drop formulations for the treatment of major depressive episodes in Swiss real-world practice.
methodsA post hoc analysis of a prospective, non-interventional study in adults experiencing a major depressive episode (MDE) was conducted. Depression symptoms, functioning, dosing patterns and tolerability were assessed using unanchored Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale items, the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale, a four-point functioning scale, and incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). Statistical tests included two-sample t-tests, Fisher's exact test, Chi-square test and general linear modelling.
resultsOf 225 patients, 60 (26.7%) initiated drops. Drops were more often prescribed for first MDE than tablets (65.0% [n = 39] versus 46.1% [n = 76]; p = 0.012) and shorter MDE duration at baseline (2.9 versus 4.8 months; p = 0.02). Mean CGI-S baseline scores were similar (drops: 5.0; tablets: 4.8). Both formulations improved depressive symptoms and functioning similarly. Drops were used in lower initial doses (4.2 mg/day) versus tablets (7.7 mg/day) (p < 0.001) but in higher doses (> 10 mg/day) earlier during treatment (35% versus 13%, day 15). 'No or little effect' was significantly less frequent with drops (5.0%; n = 3) versus tablets (23.6%; n = 39) (p < 0.001). ADR-related discontinuations were comparable (drops: 3.3%; tablets: 4.2%).
conclusionsThis real-world analysis suggests that vortioxetine drops provide comparable control of depressive symptoms to tablets. The greater capacity for dose individualisation may be beneficial to patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.