NICEVIVA
DRUG INTERACTION RECORDED 4 Prescription Drug Interaction(s) Reported — Review the pharmacokinetic interaction matrix below before use.
Pharmacokinetic Alert
MONOGRAPH SPEC LATEST 2025

St. John's Wort (Depression)

STRESS MOOD · Evidence Monograph

St. John's Wort (Depression) is an evidence-graded stress mood monograph evaluated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed studies (4 meta-analyses, 4 systematic reviews, and 0 randomized controlled trials, encompassing n = 104,303 cumulative participants). Current clinical evidence is rated GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

Evidence Grade (GRADE) High (4.0 / 4.0)
Indexed PubMed Studies 30 Studies
Meta-Analyses · Reviews 4 Meta · 4 Systematic Reviews
Randomized Trials (RCT) 0 RCTs (0 Double-Blind)
Cumulative Participants n = 104,303
Reported Trial Dosages 1500mg/day · 100mg/day
Trial Duration Range 10 days · 8 weeks
Reading Time ~15 min
RECOMMENDED FOR Clinical Indication

Evidence Supports Supplementation When:

  1. 01 Individuals seeking evidence-backed support for targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support (supported by 30 indexed PubMed studies, GRADE High).
  2. 02 Adults matching clinical trial dosing protocols (1500mg/day · 100mg/day) over a structured 10 days evaluation window.
  3. 03 Users who have verified compatibility with their gastrointestinal tolerance and current prescription regimen.
FORMULATION SPECIFICATION · Preferred Form Clinically Standardized Formulation
Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.
CLINICAL RESPONSE · Body Signal Check
Expected Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.
Dose Adjustment Signal: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.
CHRONOBIOLOGY · Optimal Dosing Window PM 12:30
Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.
Primary Clinical Endpoints & Physiological Biomarkers Studied Based on Indexed PubMed Trials
anxiety (PubMed clinical endpoint)
depression (PubMed clinical endpoint)
01

What Is St. John's Wort (Depression) & Why Does Form Matter?

St. John's Wort (Depression) is classified under STRESS MOOD and has been investigated across 30 peer-reviewed PubMed publications for its role in targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support.

In clinical nutrition, physiological efficacy depends heavily on the specific chemical salt, chelate, or standardized extract used, as well as adherence to trial-validated dosing (1500mg/day, 100mg/day).

02

Who Benefits Most & Common Depletion Factors

Suboptimal status or increased physiological demand for St. John's Wort (Depression) frequently arises from restrictive dietary patterns, age-related declines in gastrointestinal absorption, chronic metabolic stress, or medication-induced nutrient depletion.

Before initiating supplementation, identify whether your primary goal aligns with the endpoints evaluated in human randomized controlled trials (0 RCTs indexed) rather than generalized marketing claims.

03

Physiological Mechanism of Action

Within human physiology, St. John's Wort (Depression) acts on pathways governing targeted physiological homeostasis, clinical biomarker modulation, and evidence-based nutritional support. Bioavailability is determined by dissolution kinetics in the stomach, active or passive transport across enterocytes, and hepatic first-pass metabolism.

Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

04

PubMed Clinical Evidence & GRADE Evaluation

NICEVIVA assigns St. John's Wort (Depression) an overall evidence rating of GRADE High (4.0 / 4.0) based on 30 PubMed studies: 4 meta-analyses, 4 systematic reviews, and 0 randomized controlled trials (0 double-blind, n = 104,303 total participants).

Representative peer-reviewed findings include: • PMID:40014460 (2025) — "Efficacy of Pharmacological Interventions in Milder Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." (CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates that certain supplements, such as eicosapentaenoic acids and Rhodiola rosea, are therapeutic options for mild depression.) • PMID:35311615 (2022) — "Clinician guidelines for the treatment of psychiatric disorders with nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals: The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Taskforce." (RESULTS: Amongst nutraceuticals with Grade A evidence,) • PMID:28700248 (2017) — "Comparative Benefits and Harms of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies for Initial Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis." (Future trials should incorporate patient-oriented outcomes, treatment expectancy, depressive severity, and harms assessments into their designs; antidepressants should be administered over their full dosage ranges; and larger trials using methods to reduce sampling bias are neede)

Quantitative Clinical Effect-Size Distribution (Forest Plot)

Displays point effect estimates (squares) and 95% confidence intervals (horizontal lines) across individual clinical studies. Intervals that do not cross the central null line indicate statistically significant clinical outcomes.

Study (PMID · Year)OR Effect Size & 95% CI DistributionEstimate (95% CI)PMID 246961952.39 (1.42–4.02)PMID 243539970.97 (0.77–1.22)PMID 227864970.65 (0.44–0.96)PMID 195883960.55 (0.35–0.85)PMID 275899520.670.2Null (1)5Metric: OR
05

Formulation Selection, Dosing & Chronobiology

Recommended Formulation: Clinically Standardized Formulation. Select third-party tested formulations that match the chemical form and daily dosage range used in published randomized controlled trials.

Clinical Trial Dosing & Timing: Published studies most commonly utilize 1500mg/day · 100mg/day over 10 days · 8 weeks. Optimal timing window: PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch (Taking supplements with a meal minimizes gastrointestinal irritation and supports consistent daily compliance.).

06

Body Response Monitoring & Dose Adjustment

Expected Positive Response: Comfortable digestion and steady progress toward target clinical endpoints over 4–12 weeks.

Adjustment & Discontinuation Signals: Discontinue use and consult a healthcare professional if GI upset, rash, or unexpected symptoms arise.

07

Prescription Drug Interactions & Contraindications

• [MAJOR] Warfarin: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:11950157). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

• [MAJOR] SSRI (fluoxetine ): Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:11950157). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

• [MAJOR] Cyclosporine: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:11950157). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

• [MAJOR] Concomitant Prescription Medication: Pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction reported in clinical literature (PMID:11950157). Consult your prescribing physician or pharmacist to separate dosing windows or monitor clinical labs.

08

4 Essential Safety Rules Before & After Dosing

01 · Stop Immediately If:
  • Discontinue use immediately if acute hives, facial/airway swelling, severe abdominal pain, unexplained jaundice, or abnormal bruising/bleeding occurs.
  • Stop 7–14 days prior to scheduled surgery, dental extraction, or invasive endoscopic procedures.
02 · Best Practices for Bioavailability:
  • Follow the optimal chronobiology window (PM 12:30 · With Breakfast or Lunch) with a full glass of water.
  • Stay within clinically studied daily dosages (1500mg/day · 100mg/day) and re-evaluate efficacy after 10 days.
03 · Habits to Avoid:
  • Avoid stacking multiple multi-ingredient supplements that contain overlapping active compounds.
  • Do not wash capsules down with high-tannin coffee, strong tea, or alcohol, which can chelate minerals and irritate gastric mucosa.
04 · Consult Physician / Pharmacist Before Use If:
  • Consult your physician or pharmacist before use if taking Warfarin, SSRI (fluoxetine ), Cyclosporine, Concomitant Prescription Medication.
  • Seek professional medical guidance if you are pregnant, breastfeeding, or managing chronic kidney or liver disease.
09 · PUBMED CLINICAL STUDIES

Indexed PubMed Clinical Studies & Abstracts (30 Studies) · 12 Quantitative Analyses

01
META-ANALYSIS Neuropsychopharmacology reports (2025) PMID: 40014460 ↗
Efficacy of Pharmacological Interventions in Milder Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Meta-Analysis published in Neuropsychopharmacology reports involving n = 1,049 participants (RR 1.08). Key conclusion: CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates that certain supplements, such as eicosapentaenoic acids and Rhodiola rosea, are therapeutic options for mild depression.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Mild depression lacks a consistent definition across diagnostic criteria and rating scales, posing challenges to standardizing treatment strategies. International guidelines predominantly recommend psychotherapy as the first-line treatment for mild depression, while the use of antidepressants remains contentious. Supplements such as omega-3 fatty acids, St. John's Wort, and magnesium have garnered attention as alternative therapeutic options for depression. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy of pharmacological interventions, including supplements, in the treatment of mild depression. METHODS: Comprehensive searches were performed in PubMed and Embase through November 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating pharmacotherapy or supplements for mild depression diagnosed using standardized criteria. Eligible studies underwent screening and risk of bias assessment utilizing the ROB2 tool. Data on remission rates, symptom improvement, dropout rates, and adverse events were extracted, with meta-analyses conducted where applicable. RESULTS: Eight RCTs comprising 1049 participants met inclusion criteria. Among the agents studied, St. John's Wort was analyzed in two trials, both comparing it to fluoxetine. A meta-analysis found no significant difference in response rates between the two treatments (risk ratio [RR] = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.78-1.18) or dropout rates (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.62-1.88). For other agents, single studies evaluated their effects. Eicosapentaenoic acid and Rhodiola rosea demonstrated significant improvements in depressive symptoms compared to placebo. In non-blinded trials, magnesium chloride showed efficacy in alleviating depressive symptoms. Other interventions, such as lavender, lemon balm, and transcranial electroacupuncture stimulation, were as effective as antidepressants. Conversely, S-adenosylmethionine did not produce significant improvements relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates that certain supplements, such as eicosapentaenoic acids and Rhodiola rosea, are therapeutic options for mild depression. However, no RCTs compared antidepressants directly to placebo for mild depres

02
CLINICAL STUDY The world journal of biological psychiatry (2022) PMID: 35311615 ↗
Clinician guidelines for the treatment of psychiatric disorders with nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals: The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Taskforce.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2022 Meta-Analysis published in The world journal of biological psychiatry. Key conclusion: RESULTS: Amongst nutraceuticals with Grade A evidence,
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVES: The therapeutic use of nutrient-based 'nutraceuticals' and plant-based 'phytoceuticals' for the treatment of mental disorders is common; however, despite recent research progress, there have not been any updated global clinical guidelines since 2015. To address this, the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Disorders (CANMAT) convened an international taskforce involving 31 leading academics and clinicians from 15 countries, between 2019 and 2021. These guidelines are aimed at providing a definitive evidence-informed approach to assist clinicians in making decisions around the use of such agents for major psychiatric disorders. We also provide detail on safety and tolerability, and clinical advice regarding prescription (e.g. indications, dosage), in addition to consideration for use in specialised populations. METHODS: The methodology was based on the WFSBP guidelines development process. Evidence was assessed based on the WFSBP grading of evidence (and was modified to focus on Grade A level evidence - meta-analysis or two or more RCTs - due to the breadth of data available across all nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals across major psychiatric disorders). The taskforce assessed both the 'level of evidence' (LoE) (i.e. meta-analyses or RCTs) and the assessment of the direction of the evidence, to determine whether the intervention was 'Recommended' (+++), 'Provisionally Recommended' (++), 'Weakly Recommended' (+), 'Not Currently Recommended' (+/-), or 'Not Recommended' (-) for a particular condition. Due to the number of clinical trials now available in the field, we firstly examined the data from our two meta-reviews of meta-analyses (nutraceuticals conducted in 2019, and phytoceuticals in 2020). We then performed a search of additional relevant RCTs and reported on both these data as the primary drivers supporting our clinical recommendations. Lower levels of evidence, including isolated RCTs, open label studies, case studies, preclinical research, and interventions with only traditional or anecdotal use, were not assessed. RESULTS: Amongst nutraceuticals with Grade A evidence,

03
META-ANALYSIS Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) (2017) PMID: 28700248 ↗
Comparative Benefits and Harms of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Therapies for Initial Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2017 Meta-Analysis published in Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.). Key conclusion: Future trials should incorporate patient-oriented outcomes, treatment expectancy, depressive severity, and harms assessments into their designs; antidepressants should be administered over their full dosage ranges; and larger trials using methods to reduce sampling bias are neede
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

OBJECTIVES: To report the comparative benefits and harms of exercise and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments with second-generation antidepressants (SGA) for major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTINGS: Outpatient clinics. SUBJECTS: Adults, aged 18 years and older, with MDD receiving an initial treatment attempt with SGA. INTERVENTIONS: Any CAM or exercise intervention compared with an SGA. OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment response, remission, change in depression rating, adverse events, treatment discontinuation, and treatment discontinuation due to adverse events. RESULTS: We found 22 randomized controlled trials for direct comparisons and 127 trials for network meta-analyses, including trials of acupuncture, omega-3 fatty acids, S-adenosyl methionine, St. John's wort, and exercise. For most treatment comparisons, we found no differences between treatment groups for response and remission. However, the risk of bias of these studies led us to conclude that the strength of evidence for these findings was either low or insufficient. The risk of treatment harms and treatment discontinuation attributed to adverse events was higher for selective serotonin receptor inhibitors than for St. John's wort. CONCLUSIONS: Although we found little difference in the comparative efficacy of most CAM therapies or exercise and SGAs, the overall poor quality of the available evidence base tempers any conclusions that we might draw from those trials. Future trials should incorporate patient-oriented outcomes, treatment expectancy, depressive severity, and harms assessments into their designs; antidepressants should be administered over their full dosage ranges; and larger trials using methods to reduce sampling bias are needed.

04
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2014) PMID: 24696195 ↗
Paroxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2014 Systematic Review published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews involving n = 26,134 participants (OR 2.39). Key conclusion: Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, settings and efficacy, acceptability a
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Paroxetine is the most potent inhibitor of the reuptake of serotonin of all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and has been studied in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, these comparative studies provided contrasting findings and systematic reviews of RCTs have always considered the SSRIs as a group, and evidence applicable to this group of drugs might not be applicable to paroxetine alone. The present systematic review assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of paroxetine in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), SSRIs and newer or non-conventional agents. OBJECTIVES: 1. To determine the efficacy of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder.2. To review acceptability of treatment with paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.3. To investigate the adverse effects of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialized Register (CCDANCTR, to 30 September 2012), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years), EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were handsearched. Pharmaceutical companies marketing paroxetine and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials allocating participants with major depression to paroxetine versus any other antidepressants (ADs), both conventional (such as TCAs, SSRIs) and newer or non-conventional (such as hypericum). For trials which had a cross-over design, only results from the first randomisation period were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. Data were then entered in RevMan 5.2 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, settings and efficacy, acceptability a

05
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2014) PMID: 24402784 ↗
Antidepressants for smoking cessation.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2014 Meta-Analysis published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews involving n = 13,728 participants (RR 2.03). Key conclusion: We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation or to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: There are at least three reasons to believe antidepressants might help in smoking cessation. Firstly, nicotine withdrawal may produce depressive symptoms or precipitate a major depressive episode and antidepressants may relieve these. Secondly, nicotine may have antidepressant effects that maintain smoking, and antidepressants may substitute for this effect. Finally, some antidepressants may have a specific effect on neural pathways (e.g. inhibiting monoamine oxidase) or receptors (e.g. blockade of nicotinic-cholinergic receptors) underlying nicotine addiction. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to assess the effect and safety of antidepressant medications to aid long-term smoking cessation. The medications include bupropion; doxepin; fluoxetine; imipramine; lazabemide; moclobemide; nortriptyline; paroxetine; S-Adenosyl-L-Methionine (SAMe); selegiline; sertraline; St. John's wort; tryptophan; venlafaxine; and zimeledine. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register which includes reports of trials indexed in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, and other reviews and meeting abstracts, in July 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomized trials comparing antidepressant medications to placebo or an alternative pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation. We also included trials comparing different doses, using pharmacotherapy to prevent relapse or re-initiate smoking cessation or to help smokers reduce cigarette consumption. We excluded trials with less than six months follow-up. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data and assessed risk of bias using standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration.The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months follow-up in patients smoking at baseline, expressed as a risk ratio (RR). We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence available in each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a fixed-effect model. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four new trials were identified since the 2009 update, bri

06
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2013) PMID: 24353997 ↗
Fluoxetine versus other types of pharmacotherapy for depression.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2013 Systematic Review published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews involving n = 24,868 participants (OR 0.97). Key conclusion: BACKGROUND: Depression is common in primary care and is associated with marked personal, social and economic morbidity, thus creating significant demands on service providers.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Depression is common in primary care and is associated with marked personal, social and economic morbidity, thus creating significant demands on service providers. The antidepressant fluoxetine has been studied in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in comparison with other conventional and unconventional antidepressants. However, these studies have produced conflicting findings.Other systematic reviews have considered selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRIs) as a group which limits the applicability of the indings for fluoxetine alone. Therefore, this review intends to provide specific and clinically useful information regarding the effects of fluoxetine for depression compared with tricyclics (TCAs), SSRIs, serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), monoamineoxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and newer agents, and other conventional and unconventional agents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of fluoxetine in comparison with all other antidepressive agents for depression in adult individuals with unipolar major depressive disorder. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR)to 11May 2012. This register includes relevant RCTs from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (all years),MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were handsearched. The pharmaceutical company marketing fluoxetine and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data. SELECTION CRITERIA: All RCTs comparing fluoxetine with any other AD (including non-conventional agents such as hypericum) for patients with unipolar major depressive disorder (regardless of the diagnostic criteria used) were included. For trials that had a cross-over design only results from the first randomisation period were considered. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were independently extracted by two review authors using a standard form. Responders to treatment were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis: dropouts were always incl

07
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2012) PMID: 22786497 ↗
Citalopram versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2012 Systematic Review published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (OR 0.65). Key conclusion: Citalopram was shown to be significantly less effective than escitalopram in achieving acute response (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 2.02), but more effective than paroxetine (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.96) and reboxetine (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91)
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Recent US and UK clinical practice guidelines recommend that second-generation antidepressants should be considered amongst the best first-line options when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Systematic reviews have already highlighted some differences in efficacy between second-generation antidepressants. Citalopram, one of the first selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) introduced in the market, is one of these antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of citalopram in comparison with tricyclics, heterocyclics, other SSRIs and other conventional and non-conventional antidepressants in the acute-phase treatment of major depression. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to February 2012. No language restriction was applied. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field for supplemental data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to citalopram versus any other antidepressants. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), patient acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects). MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-seven trials compared citalopram with other antidepressants (such as tricyclics, heterocyclics, SSRIs and other antidepressants, either conventional ones, such as mirtazapine, venlafaxine and reboxetine, or non-conventional, like hypericum). Citalopram was shown to be significantly less effective than escitalopram in achieving acute response (odds ratio (OR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 2.02), but more effective than paroxetine (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.96) and reboxetine (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.91). Significantly fewer patie

08
CLINICAL STUDY The Cochrane database of systematic reviews (2009) PMID: 19588396 ↗
Milnacipran versus other antidepressive agents for depression.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2009 Meta-Analysis published in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews involving n = 2,277 participants (OR 0.55). Key conclusion: MAIN RESULTS: A total of 16 randomised controlled trials (n=2277) were included in the meta-analysis.Despite the size of this sample, the pooled 95% confidence intervals were rather wide and there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy, acceptability and tolera
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

BACKGROUND: Although pharmacological and psychological interventions are both effective for major depression, antidepressant drugs are frequently used as first-line treatment in primary and secondary care settings. Milnacipran, a dual serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), is one of the antidepressant drugs that clinicians use for routine depression care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of milnacipran in comparison with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), heterocyclics, SSRIs and other newer antidepressive agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety & Neurosis review group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References) were electronically searched in August 2008. References of relevant trials and other reviews were also checked. Trial databases of the drug-approving agencies and ongoing clinical trial registers for all published and unpublished trials were hand-searched in 2007. All relevant authors were contacted for supplemental data. No language restriction was applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing milnacipran with any other active antidepressive agents (including non-conventional agents such as herbal products like hypericum) as monotherapy in the acute phase of major depression were selected. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently checked eligibility, assessed methodological quality and extracted data from the eligible trials using a standardised data extraction form. The number of participants who responded to treatment or those who achieved remission were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted, combining data from the included trials. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 16 randomised controlled trials (n=2277) were included in the meta-analysis.Despite the size of this sample, the pooled 95% confidence intervals were rather wide and there were no statistically significant differences in efficacy, acceptability and tolerability when comparing milnacipran with other antidepressive agents. However, compared with T

09
CLINICAL STUDY Ugeskrift for laeger (2022) PMID: 36510811 ↗
[Christmas article: Can gin with herbs induce the vision of Christmas elves?].
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2022 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) published in Ugeskrift for laeger involving n = 21 participants; statistical significance reported at p = 0.01. Key conclusion: RRESULTS: The vision of elves was induced in 10 out of 21 participants (48.6%) and was associated with male sex (p = 0.01), young age (p = 0.03) and increase in cerebral oxygenation (p = 0.04) but not with sweet woodruff (p = 0.83) or alcohol intoxication (p = 0.26).
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

INTRODUCTION: The Italian Medieval doctor Thaddeus Florentinus (AD 1210-1295) claimed that herbs could cure or relieve various symptoms such as obstipation, melancholia and nervousness. Additionally, certain herbs were proposed to be able to predict the weather and induce the vision of elves. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate whether herbs could have medical properties as claimed. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial with three arms was conducted: 1) Gin with St. John's wort, 2) Gin with angelica and 3) Gin with sweet woodruff. Participants were 21 anesthesia registrars. The primary outcome was visual induction of elves (yes/no) whereas secondary outcomes included melancholia (VAS 0-100), nervousness (VAS 0-100), weather prediction capabilities (yes/no) obstipation (Bristol Stool Chart 1-7) and others. Baseline recordings were obtained and hourly registrations of outcomes were undertaken. Confounding factors such as alcohol intoxication and vivid imagination was controlled by the means of alcohol breathalyzers and assessment of cerebral oxygenation by near infrared spectroscopy. RRESULTS: The vision of elves was induced in 10 out of 21 participants (48.6%) and was associated with male sex (p = 0.01), young age (p = 0.03) and increase in cerebral oxygenation (p = 0.04) but not with sweet woodruff (p = 0.83) or alcohol intoxication (p = 0.26). Participants were not capable of predicting the weather forecast (p = 0.55). Melancholia and nervousness were not relieved by St. John's wort, and obstipation could not be relieved by the intake of angelica. CONCLUSION: Sweet woodruff, St. John's wort and angelica were unable to relieve relevant Christmas symptoms as proposed by a medieval doctor. Alcohol ingestion might have influenced results, and data should be interpreted in the light of these precautions. FUNDING: none. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not applicable.

10
CLINICAL STUDY Pharmacology research & perspectives (2025) PMID: 40325522 ↗
St. John's Wort Extract Increases Pgp Expression in the Brain but Not in the Small Intestine or the Liver of Wistar Rats.
Clinical Trial Synthesis 2025 Clinical Study published in Pharmacology research & perspectives. Key conclusion: As such, we conclude that the inducing effect is governed by a so far unknown regulatory mechanism that most likely does not affect transcription of the transporter.
View Original PubMed Abstract ↓

St John's Wort (SJW), commonly used to treat mild depression, is known to pose a risk of drug-herb interactions through hyperforin-mediated activation of the pregnane X receptor (PXR). This induces transcription and expression of PXR target genes, including the efflux transporter P-glycoprotein (Pgp). While the activation of human PXR by the SJW constituent hyperforin is well established, there are contradictory findings on rodent PXR target genes. This study aimed to further investigate SJW effects on Pgp expression in rats. Male Wistar rats were treated for 10 days with the two commercial SJW formulations, Hyperiplant and Rebalance, which differ in their hyperforin content. Quantitative real-time PCR, western blot analysis, and immunohistochemical staining were applied to test for Pgp mRNA expression and protein abundance in the small intestine (jejunum), liver, and brain (cerebrum). Treatment with the hyperforin-rich Hyperiplant increased protein levels in the brain. However, it did not affect mRNA levels. Besides, there was no impact on Pgp protein abundance in the small intestine or the liver. The hyperforin-poor formulation Rebalance did not affect Pgp expression in any of the investigated tissues. Taken together, our results show that there is a modulation of brain Pgp protein abundance in Hyperiplant-treated animals. As such, we conclude that the inducing effect is governed by a so far unknown regulatory mechanism that most likely does not affect transcription of the transporter. © 2025 The Author(s). Pharmacology Research & Perspectives published by British Pharmacological Society and American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

RELATED MONOGRAPHS

Related Monographs in This Category