***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: The antidepressant efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine succinate ( desvenlafaxine ) were evaluated in a phase III , double-blind , placebo-controlled study . Out patients with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder were treated with fixed once-daily doses of desvenlafaxine 200 or 400 mg for 8 weeks . The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression . At the final on-therapy evaluation , adjusted mean change from baseline in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score was greater for desvenlafaxine 200 and 400 mg/day vs. placebo . Both desvenlafaxine doses showed greater efficacy than placebo on the secondary efficacy measures , including the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale scores , Montgomery – Åsberg Depression Rating Scale scores , CGI-Severity , and 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression response rate . Desvenlafaxine 200 mg/day was also significantly better than placebo on remission , Visual Analog Scale – Pain Intensity overall scores , and some Visual Analog Scale – Pain Intensity subscale scores . Desvenlafaxine 400 mg/day was significantly better than placebo on selected Visual Analog Scale – Pain Intensity subscale scores . Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity , and safety assessment s revealed few clinical ly significant changes in vital signs , laboratory tests , and electrocardiogram results . These data provide support for the efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder Background In an effort to establish the lowest effective dose of desvenlafaxine ( administered as desvenlafaxine succinate ) , we assessed the efficacy , safety , and tolerability of 10- and 50-mg/day desvenlafaxine vs placebo for the treatment of major depressive disorder . Methods Adult out patients with DSM-IV – defined major depressive disorder and a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D17 ) total score ≥20 were r and omly assigned to receive placebo or desvenlafaxine ( 10 or 50 mg/day ) after a 6- to 14-day single-blind placebo lead-in period in an 8-week , phase 3 , fixed-dose trial . The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in the HAM-D17 score analyzed using analysis of covariance . Efficacy analyses were conducted with the intent-to-treat population , using the last observation carried forward . Results The intent-to-treat population included 673 patients . Change from baseline to final evaluation in adjusted HAM-D17 total scores was not significantly different comparing desvenlafaxine 10 mg/day ( -9.28 ) and desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day ( -8.92 ) with placebo ( -8.42 ) . There were no differences among treatment groups in the rates of treatment response or remission . Discontinuations due to adverse events occurred in 1.8 % , 0.9 % , and 1.8 % of patients in the placebo and desvenlafaxine 10- and 50-mg/day groups , respectively . Overall rates of treatment-emergent adverse events with both doses were similar to placebo . Conclusions Both doses of desvenlafaxine failed to separate from placebo . However , in a companion study reported separately , desvenlafaxine 50 mg , but not 25 mg , separated from placebo . Taken together , these studies suggest that 50 mg is the minimum effective dose of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of major depressive disorder . Clinical Trials.gov IdentifierNCT00863798 http:// clinical trials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00863798?term=00863798&rank=1 OBJECTIVE To assess the efficacy , safety , and tolerability of 50- and 100-mg/day doses of desvenlafaxine ( administered as desvenlafaxine succinate ) , a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor , for the treatment of major depressive disorder ( MDD ) . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Fourth Edition ( DSM-IV ) MDD and 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D(17 ) ) scores > or = 20 were r and omly assigned to double-blind placebo or desvenlafaxine treatment ( fixed dose of 50 mg/day or 100 mg/day ) for 8 weeks . The primary efficacy measure was the HAM-D(17 ) . Changes from baseline in HAM-D(17 ) scores were analyzed using analysis of covariance . The final on-therapy evaluation was the primary endpoint for efficacy analyses , using last-observation-carried-forward data . MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES AND RESULTS : The intent-to-treat population included 447 patients .  Desvenlafaxine 50 mg was associated with a significantly greater adjusted mean change from baseline on the HAM-D(17 ) ( -11.5 ) compared with placebo ( -9.5 , p=0.018 ) ; the 100-mg dose group ( -11.0 ) did not achieve statistical significance ( p=0.065 ) . The 100-mg dose group experienced significant improvements compared with placebo on several secondary efficacy measures , including the 6-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ( p=0.038 ) and the Visual Analog Scale-Pain Intensity total score ( p=0.041 ) . Both desvenlafaxine doses were generally well-tolerated . The most common adverse events ( incidence > or = 10 % in either desvenlafaxine group and twice the rate of placebo ) were dry mouth , constipation , insomnia , decreased appetite , hyperhidrosis , and dizziness . CONCLUSIONS These results demonstrate efficacy , safety , and tolerability of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day for treating MDD . The significant findings on secondary measures support the efficacy of desvenlafaxine 100 mg , as seen in other trials . Conclusions may be limited by the exclusion of MDD patients with comorbid conditions and the short-term desvenlafaxine treatment duration BACKGROUND Major depressive disorder ( MDD ) is a common , chronic illness associated with substantial disability and economic burden . Although a number of effective antidepressants are available , the need for new medications that are effective and well tolerated remains . OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-dose desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/d with placebo for MDD . A post hoc pooled analysis was conducted to evaluate this study in the context of all similarly design ed , completed studies with the 2 doses . METHODS This was an 8-week , Phase III , r and omized , double-blind , duloxetine-referenced , placebo-controlled , parallel-group trial conducted in 21 centers across the United States .  Duloxetine was included for assay sensitivity as a positive control ; the study was not design ed or powered to compare desvenlafaxine with duloxetine .  Participants were out patients aged > or = 18 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Fourth Edition-defined MDD and a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression ( HAM-D(17 ) ) score > or = 20 . Patients were r and omly assigned at baseline to fixed-dose desvenlafaxine ( 50 or 100 mg/d ) , fixed-dose duloxetine ( 60 mg/d ) , or placebo . The primary outcome measure was HAM-D(17 ) total score at the final evaluation . Additional measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement ( CGI-I ) score , Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale ( MADRS ) score , Clinical Global Impressions-Severity ( CGI-S ) score , and 6-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression , Bech version ( HAM-D(6 ) ) . Tolerability assessment s included discontinuation rates , adverse events ( AEs ) , vital signs , and laboratory tests . The post hoc pooled analysis was performed using data from the current study and 2 previously published , positive studies that compared the efficacy and tolerability of desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/d with placebo for MDD . The design and method ologies of the 2 studies were similar to the methodology of the current trial , other than not including a reference compound . RESULTS Of the 925 patients who were screened , 287 did not meet entry criteria , and 638 patients enrolled in the study ; the intent-to-treat ( ITT ) population included 615 patients who were evaluated for efficacy ( mean [ SD ] age range , 38.8 - 40.7 [ 12.1 - 13.2 ] years ; mean weight range , 83.3 - 87.0 [ 22.8 - 23.9 ] kg ; female sex , 398 [ 64.7 % ] ; white race , 458 [ 74.5 % ] ) . The primary end point did not reach significance based on the global F test for controlling multiplicity of the desvenlafaxine doses . Based on pairwise comparison , significantly greater improvements on the HAM-D(17 ) were observed in the desven-lafaxine 100 mg/d ( -10.5 ; P = 0.028 , unadjusted for multiple comparisons ) and duloxetine 60 mg/d groups ( -10.3 ; P = 0.047 ) compared with placebo ( -8.7 ) . Desvenlafaxine 100 mg/d and duloxetine 60 mg/d were associated with significantly better scores compared with placebo on the CGI-I , MADRS , CGI-S , and HAM-D(6 ) . No significant differences were observed in any scale between the desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d and placebo groups . Discontinuation rates due to AEs were 5 % , 7 % , 13 % , and 6 % for the desvenlafaxine 50-mg/d , desvenlafaxine 100-mg/d , duloxetine 60-mg/d , and placebo groups , respectively . The ITT population from all 3 studies in the pooled analysis consisted of 1388 patients ( mean [ SD ] age range , 38.8 - 45.7 [ 12.1 - 12.6 ] years ; mean weight range , 73.1 - 87.0 [ 17.6 - 23.9 ] kg ; female sex , 896 [ 64.6 % ] ; white race , 1136 [ 81.8 % ] ) . Significantly greater improvements on the HAM-D(17 ) were observed for desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d ( -11.5 ; P < 0.001 ) and 100 mg/d ( -11.8 ; P < 0.001 ) versus placebo ( -9.6 ) . Both doses were significantly better than placebo on the CGI-I , MADRS , and HAM-D(6 ) . CONCLUSIONS The current study failed to meet its primary efficacy end point based on the a priori analysis plan . Desvenlafaxine was generally well tolerated . A post hoc pooled analysis of this trial and 2 previously published trials with both desvenlafaxine 50 and 100 mg/d found both doses to be effective for MDD compared with placebo . Clinical Trials.gov Identifier : 00384033 ABSTRACT Objective To assess effects of desvenlafaxine ( administered as desvenlafaxine succinate ) on secondary outcomes of mood , climacteric symptoms , and treatment satisfaction in postmenopausal women with moderate to severe menopausal vasomotor symptoms ( VMS ) . Methods A 12-week , multicenter , double-blind , placebo-controlled trial was conducted in postmenopausal women with ≥ 50 moderate to severe hot flushes per week . Participants were r and omly assigned to desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day , desvenlafaxine 150 mg/day , or placebo . Secondary outcome efficacy variables included Profile of Mood States ( POMS ) , Greene Climacteric Scale ( GCS ) , and Menopausal Symptoms Treatment Satisfaction Question naire ( MS-TSQ ) scores . Change from baseline in POMS total mood disturbance ( TMD ) score and subdomain scores were evaluated using analysis of covariance , adjusting for treatment and study site as factors and baseline score . GCS total and subdomain scores were analyzed similarly . Treatment satisfaction was analyzed using the row mean score test . Results A total of 458 women were enrolled . At week 12 , desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day significantly improved POMS TMD scores ( p < 0.001 ) and four of six POMS subdomains compared with placebo ( all p ≤ 0.005 ) . Women taking desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day experienced significantly greater improvement in GCS total scores ( p < 0.001 ) and five of six subdomains ( all p ≤ 0.029 ) compared with placebo . Treatment with desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day result ed in significantly greater treatment satisfaction overall 
    Output:
    
We further provide some evidence that desvenlafaxine might not be as efficacious as other antidepressants