Table 2.
Depression outcome findings.
| Reference | N | Treated depression severity | % depression | Adherence (%) | Discontinuation (%) | Notable findings | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reserpine | Comparator (s) | Reserpine | Comparator (s) | |||||
| A. Reserpine untreated versus treated groups | ||||||||
| Zhu et al. (2019) | 787 | 40 | 41 | 12 | 12 | NA | NR | No between-group difference |
| Hopkinson et al. (1975) | 8 | 11 | 22 | NR | NR | 100 | 0 | Depression reduced (from 30 reserpine/28 placebo)* |
| Bolte et al. (1959) | 270 | 51/6 a | 8/12 | 39 | 32/33 | NR | NA | High > low dose # |
| Bant (1978) | 20 | 42 | 41–56 | 60 | 39–55 | 70 (vs 63–94) | 30 (vs 6–38) | No between-group difference |
| Krajnáková et al. (1981) b | 36 | NR | NR | 39 | 60 | NR | NR | Within-subjects depression increase for crystepin and reserpine # |
| Davies et al. (1955) | 28 | NR | NR | 29 e | 58 e | 88 (vs 93) | 29 | Reserpine < placebo* |
| Prisant et al. (1991) | 111 | 44–46 | 45–47 | 35 | 40 | NR | NR | No between-group difference |
| Lemieux et al. (1956) b | 134 | NR | NR | 18 | 8 | NR | NR | Psychosis n = 2, dose reduce improved depression n = 5 # |
| Winhusen et al. (2007) | 42 | 2.11 | 3.18 | NR | NR | 79 | 30 (vs 37) | Depression reduced (from severity score 4 both groups)** |
| Santucci et al. (1989) | 40 | NR (64% depressed at baseline) | 63 | 50–74 | NR | NR | No between-/within-group difference#,c | |
| Hodgkinson (1956) | 35 | NR | NR | 3 | 0 | NR | 3 | n = 1 extreme depression # |
| Platt et al. (1956) | 54 | NR | NR | 19 | 0 | NR | 19 | Suicide n = 1 reserpine and within-subjects depression increase # |
| Wallace (1955) | 44 | NR | NR | 9 | 14 | NR | 2 | Depression higher only when combined with pentolinium # |
| Achor et al. (1955) b | 58 | NR | NR | 10 | 16 | NR | 9 | Within-subjects depression increase for whole root and reserpine # |
| Segal et al. (1959) | 42 | NR | NR | 31% affective complaints to either arm | NR | 41 | No between-group difference | |
| Dissegna et al. (1985) | 73 | 3 | 3 | NR | NR | NR | NR | No between-group difference |
| Pellerito (1956) | ~100 | NR | NR | 68 c | 50 d | NR | NR | Within-subjects therapeutic effect, reserpine < chlorpromazine # |
| Veselinović et al. (2011) | 18 | 3.3 | 0.2–1.4 | 56 | 6–33 | 100 | 0% (vs 0–39) | Depression rose in all groups, most on reserpine* |
| Bennett et al. (1956) | 91 | NR: 38% depressed at baseline; neither group showed depression change | NR | NR | No between/within-group change # | |||
| Schwarz et al. (1973) | 80 | NR | NR | 10 | 0 | NR | NR | Within-subjects depression decrease, reserpine < others # |
| Reference | N | Untreated severity | % depression treated | Adherence (%) | Discontinuation (%) | Notable findings | ||
| B. Reserpine untreated versus treated time points | ||||||||
| Sainz (1955) | 41 | (all depressed) | 32 | NR | NR | 22/41 remitted under reserpine | ||
| Azima et al. (1959) | 10 | (none depressed) | 40 | 100 | 0 | Mania n = 1, but 90% elation; 40% mixed state | ||
| Lowinger (1957) | 70 | 23% untreated depressed; no change on reserpine | NR | NR | Depression not affected | |||
| Berger et al. (2005) | 15 | HAMD score 7 untreated to 10 treated | 30 (vs 80/90) | 27 (vs 20 vs 14 vs 6) | HAMD NS change; self-rated depression (BDI) improved | |||
| Vakil (1949) | 50 | (none depressed) | 8 | variable | 6 | No serious reactions reported | ||
| Wachspress et al. (1956) | 15 | 33% untreated depressed; 27%worsened on reserpine | NR | 13 | Worsened on reserpine. Suicidal ideation n = 1 | |||
| Fife et al. (1959) | 71 | (none depressed) | 21 | NR | 38 | Reserpine dose reduced due to high depression | ||
| Drake et al. (1955) | 40 | (43% depressed) | 76% unchanged | NR | NR | Suicide attempt n = 1 reserpine | ||
| Kirkegaard et al. (1958) | 1027 | (13% depressed) | [see end column] | NR | 55 | 7/183 depression worsened; 128/183 improved | ||
| Hiob et al. (1955) | 55 | (52% depressed) | 18 | NR | NR | Reserpine improved depressed patients but dysphoria observed in other illnesses | ||
| Kirk et al. (1970) | 24 | (all depressed) | 8% worsened | 100 | 0 | 10 no change; 9 slightly improved; 3 greatly improved | ||
| Carney et al. (1969) | 8 | Severity reduced from 18 to 10 | 38% unchanged | NR | 20 | Mania n = 1 reserpine. Depression reduced slightly (p < 0.05) | ||
| Finn et al. (1955) | 22 | (‘severely disturbed’ inpatients) | 5% worsened | 100 | 0 | 18/22 improved; 9 marked improvement; 3 no improvement; 1 worsened | ||
| Ingrova et al. (1963) | 24 | (92% depressed) | 41 | NR | NR | 0 negative, 20 positive, 2 no change, 1 hypomania | ||
| Jeri (1957) | 159 | 0 | 6 | NR | NR | Worsened on reserpine | ||
A: Where possible, between-subjects associations of depression between reserpine and other conditions (note that in some cases, within-subjects indications are also noted in the final column). B: Where no between-subjects data are available, within-subjects reports between untreated and treated conditions with reserpine. ‘severity’ data is presented as averages and rates (%) are presented for binary outcomes on people/times untreated or treated with reserpine. mg: milligram; NA: not applicable; NR: not reported; NS: non-significant.
n depressive episodes.
Comparator also contained rauwolfia.
However, % of good quality of life increased from 44% to 55% after reserpine
% without ‘therapeutic mood response’
Unchanged or worsened
Within- and between-subjects comparisons both significant (in some cases a within-subjects statistical comparison was not undertaken but significance was inferred by large effects reported).
Within-subjects but not between-subjects statistically significant.
Statistical significance not inferable (usually due to absence of statistical comparisons conducted).