This work may not be copied, distributed, displayed, published, reproduced, transmitted, modified, posted, sold, licensed, or used for commercial purposes. By downloading this file, you are agreeing to the publisher’s Terms & Conditions.


How Do You Choose a Second-Line Treatment Option for Depression?

Richard H. Weisler, MD

Published: October 15, 2010

Article Abstract

A majority of patients with major depression do not remit or adequately respond to initial antidepressant therapy. When response is insufficient, a diagnosis of depression and any comorbidities should be confirmed, treatment adherence should be established, and antidepressant dosages should be optimized as tolerated. If response is still insufficient, then implementing second-line treatment strategies is warranted. Second-line strategies of switching to or combining/augmenting the initial agent with one of a variety of antidepressant medications and/or psychotherapies improves remission rates, although no single approach or agent has demonstrated clear superiority over any other. Second-line treatment selections should be driven by safety considerations, patients’ symptom profiles, and patient preference. Comorbid medical conditions, especially cardiac and cerebrovascular complications, and potential drug-drug interactions should be considered when making treatment decisions.

From the Department of Psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Department of Psychiatry, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina; and private practice, Raleigh, North Carolina.

This article is derived from the planning teleconference series "Looking Past First-Line Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder," which was held in January 2010 and supported by an educational grant from AstraZeneca.

Dr Weisler has been/is a member of the speakers bureaus for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biovail, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Burroughs Wellcome, Cephalon, Ciba Geigy, Eli Lilly, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Organon, Pfizer, Sanofi, Sanofi-Synthelabo, Shire, Solvay, Validus, and Wyeth; has been/is a consultant for Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biovail, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Corcept, Eli Lilly, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Otsuka, Pfizer, Pharmacia, ProPhase, Sanofi, Sanofi-Synthelabo, Shire, Solvay, Takeda, Validus, and Wyeth; has received/is receiving research support from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Biovail, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Burroughs Wellcome, Cenerx, Cephalon, Ciba Geigy, CoMentis, Dainippon Sumitomo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Lundbeck, McNeil, Medicinova, Merck, the National Institute of Mental Health, Neurochem, New River, Novartis, Organon, Pfizer, Pharmacia, Repligen, Saegis, Sandoz, Sanofi, Sanofi-Synthelabo, Schwabe/Ingenix, Sepracor, Shire, Synaptic, Takeda, TAP, UCB, Vela, and Wyeth; and was/is a stock shareholder of Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cortex, Merck, and Pfizer.

Corresponding author: Richard H. Weisler, MD, 700 Spring Forest Rd, Ste 125, Raleigh, NC 27609 (

Related Articles

Volume: 71

Quick Links: