Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Sertraline in symptomatic chronic breathlessness: a double blind, randomised trial

David C. Currow, Magnus Ekström, Sandra Louw, Julie Hill, Belinda Fazekas, Katherine Clark, Patricia M. Davidson, Christine McDonald, Dimitar Sajkov, Nikki McCaffrey, Matthew Doogue, Amy P. Abernethy, Meera Agar
European Respiratory Journal 2019 53: 1801270; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01270-2018
David C. Currow
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
2Discipline of Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Magnus Ekström
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
3Dept of Clinical Sciences, Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergology, Lund University, Lund, Sweden
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sandra Louw
4McCloud Consulting Group, Narabang Way, Belrose, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julie Hill
4McCloud Consulting Group, Narabang Way, Belrose, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Belinda Fazekas
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
2Discipline of Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Katherine Clark
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
5University of Sydney, Northern Clinical School, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonard's, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patricia M. Davidson
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
6School of Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christine McDonald
7Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dimitar Sajkov
8Flinders Medical Centre, Dept of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Medical Centre Drive, Bedford Park, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nikki McCaffrey
9Deakin Health Economics, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew Doogue
10University of Otago, Christchurch and Canterbury District Health Board, Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amy P. Abernethy
2Discipline of Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
11Department of Medicine, Duke University, Carey, NC, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Meera Agar
1IMPACCT, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Does sertraline provide symptomatic relief for chronic breathlessness in people with advanced disease whose underlying cause(s) are optimally treated?

223 participants with chronic breathlessness (modified Medical Research Council breathlessness scale ≥2) who had optimal treatment of underlying cause(s) were randomised 1:1 to sertraline 25–100 mg (titrated upwards over 9 days) or placebo for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the proportion who had an improvement in intensity of current breathlessness >15% from baseline on a 100-mm visual analogue scale.

The proportion of people responding to sertraline was similar to placebo for current breathlessness on days 26–28 (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71–1.40) and for other measures of breathlessness. Quality of life in the sertraline arm had a higher likelihood of improving than in the placebo arm over the 4 weeks (OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.01–0.41; p=0.044). No differences in performance status, anxiety and depression, or survival were observed. Adverse event rates were similar between arms.

Sertraline does not appear to provide any benefit over placebo in the symptomatic relief of chronic breathlessness in this patient population.

Abstract

Chronic breathlessness generates suffering late in life. In this setting, titrated sertraline had similar benefits and harms to placebo in an adequately powered, multi-site, double blind, randomised controlled trial at 4 weeks. http://ow.ly/iWtH30mcMYK

Introduction

Breathlessness is an uncomfortable sensation of breathing which is experienced by nearly 50% of people in their last year of life, regardless of diagnosis [1–3]. It is a source of physical and psychological distress for the patient and their caregivers [4].

The main therapy for chronic breathlessness is treating the underlying cause(s). Despite this, many people remain highly symptomatic [5]. Systemic opioids (oral and parenteral) can reduce breathlessness [6, 7]. To date, no other pharmacological intervention has been shown to be of benefit. A meta-analysis of benzodiazepines found no net benefit despite widespread use [8]. Nebulised furosemide and systemic antidepressants are being explored [9, 10].

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are well tolerated antidepressants. Early-phase studies suggest that they may reduce chronic breathlessness, even in people who are not depressed. A potential mechanism is their anxiolytic effect. Sertraline, an SSRI, shows potential benefit for chronic breathlessness, is well tolerated [11] and used first-line as an antidepressant. Two nonrandomised pilot studies and a case series have reported benefits of sertraline 12.5–100 mg in people with chronic breathlessness due to optimally treated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [12–14]. Another study enrolled people with COPD and depression for up to 19 weeks of treatment with paroxetine (another SSRI) in a small double-blind study. People experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire scores [15]. In another small randomised trial of 12 weeks of paroxetine in people with COPD, there were significant improvements in the emotional function and mastery domains of the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) [16]. These data support the need for an adequately powered study.

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of sertraline on intensity of chronic breathlessness despite optimal treatment of underlying cause(s). Secondary aims were to determine the effects of sertraline on quality of life and activities of daily living, and its benefits and harms. The null hypothesis was that there is no difference between sertraline and placebo for chronic breathlessness.

Materials and methods

Study design

This double-blind, dose increment, parallel-arm, multisite, randomised, placebo-controlled, adaptive study was conducted in accordance with International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice [17, 18] and registered at www.anzctr.org.au (ACTRN 12610000464066).

The adaptive design was a blinded phase II/III study where the phase II study was not unblinded (having demonstrated acceptability and feasibility), moving directly to the phase III study. Therefore, phase II data were included in the main analysis.

Participants were recruited from 10 inpatient and outpatient services in palliative care, oncology, respiratory medicine and cardiology units across Australia. Their primary family caregiver was also invited to participate.

Study population

Potential participants were eligible if they were aged ≥18 years; diagnosed with chronic breathlessness where the underlying cause(s) had been maximally treated as attested by their specialist treating physician; had a score ≥2 on the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) breathlessness scale [19]; on stable medications for breathlessness for the previous week (with exception of “as-needed” medications); a life expectancy of ≥2 months; and able to read English.

Potential participants were ineligible if they had a previous adverse reaction to sertraline; severe hepatic impairment, gastrointestinal bleeding or respiratory failure; serum sodium <128 mmol·L−1; uncontrolled seizures; respiratory depression; a respiratory or cardiac event in the past week; severe depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) depression subscore >16); treatment with any medicine that increased the risk of serotonin syndrome; or were pregnant or breastfeeding.

Intervention

The active study arm was one capsule daily of oral sertraline (days 1–3 25 mg daily; days 4–6 50 mg daily; then 100 mg daily). Back-titration was allowed to the next lowest dose if the current dose was not tolerated. Participants could continue on their blinded arm for up to 6 months after completing the first 28 days (primary end-point). At study end, the dose was titrated down, halving the dose every 3 days.

Control

Identical-appearing capsules were administered as a placebo.

Both arms were permitted to take up to eight doses of 2.5 mg of immediate-release oral morphine solution “as needed” in any 24-h period.

Randomisation (1:1) was stratified by baseline HADS anxiety subscale (0–10: mild to moderate; 11–21: moderate to severe) and depression (0–10 and 11–16) giving four strata [20], each within blocks of four per site. Pharmacists allocated participants to the next available code according to a supplied table to dispense identical-appearing sertraline or placebo. Ward pharmacists, investigators, treating clinicians, participants and carers remained blinded to treatment allocation at all times.

At study visits (days 0, 9 and 29), laboratory measures and Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) [21] data were collected. Participants completed the CRQ dyspnoea subscale [22], participant and carer quality-of-life questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core quality-of-life questionnaire (QLQ)-C15-Pal [23] and Caregiver Quality of Life Index – Cancer [24]), HADS [20] and descriptors of breathlessness [25]. Participants completed a diary twice daily (days 0, 7, 14, 21, 26, 27 and 28) to record current breathlessness intensity, unpleasantness and worst breathlessness on a 0–100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) and a four-point Likert scale, and the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) (table 1) dyspnoea scale [17]. Optionally, participants could remain on blinded treatment for an additional 5 months (6 months treatment in total).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale

Measurements

The primary outcome measure was the average of the morning and evening current intensity of breathlessness VAS scores over days 26, 27 and 28. Secondary end-points included exposure to treatment; breathlessness (average, worst and relief over the previous 24 h and unpleasantness now on 0–100 mm VAS); response by anxiety and, separately, depression; response in people with and without COPD, response by level of mMRC; use of as-needed immediate-release oral morphine solution; quality of life; CRQ (breathlessness, fatigue, mastery); functional status; anxiety and depression; survival; harms; global impression of change; and choice to enter the extension phase.

Statistical analysis

Response rates in previous studies of pharmacological interventions for the symptomatic relief of chronic breathlessness have been high [26]. For a new therapy to be considered clinically significant, there must be a substantial net benefit over placebo. By consensus, the expected response rate was set at 41% for sertraline, while anticipating that 20% of participants in the placebo arm would improve. A sample size of 75 completed participants per group provided >80% power for a two-tailed type 1 error rate of 0.05 between arms. Allowing for expected attrition, recruitment of 240 participants was planned.

Analyses were conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. An interim blinded analysis assessing safety and reviewing the power calculation was conducted by an independent data safety monitoring committee after 50% of participants completed the study [17].

For the primary analysis, missing values were assumed missing at random and imputed using multiple imputation with 100 samples drawn. Intermittent missing data were imputed using the Markov Chain Monte Carlo procedure. Remaining monotone missing data were imputed using stepwise sequential Bayesian regression.

For the primary end-point, the proportion achieving >15% reduction in breathlessness from baseline was compared between groups using the Wald type 3 Chi-squared from a logistic regression model of response with stratum and treatment group as predictor variables. An absolute reduction of >8.9 mm VAS over baseline was analysed [27, 28]. Time and group interactions were assessed using longitudinal mixed models with repeated measures (MMRM), with the end-point from days 1–28 as the dependent variable, the baseline value as a covariate, stratum, day, treatment group and treatment group by day interaction as fixed effects and participant as a random effect. A compound symmetry variance–covariance matrix was used. Clinically relevant response predictors were modelled using multivariable regression.

Differences in secondary end-points were compared using logistic regression for the response rate end-points (using multiple imputation data), MMRM for the continuous end-points measured over time (using the original data), and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) for the continuous end-points. Stratum was included as a factor in all statistical models, where strata were a combination of centre, HADS subscale scores and participation in the blinded pilot study. Low-frequency strata were combined using statistical judgement.

All analyses were performed using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).

The study was approved by relevant human research ethics committees (Cancer Institute NSW 2010C/02/120 and Prince of Wales Hospital 13/327HREC/13/POWH/785). All participants provided written, informed consent. Study reporting complies with CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) guidelines [29, 30].

Results

Study population

249 people were screened, of whom 223 were randomised (figure 1). Treatment groups were balanced in demographics and baseline clinical characteristics including breathlessness scores (table 2). At baseline 23 (10.3%) out of 223 had data missing, for which their screening data were used. Data missing for days 26–28 (93 (41.7%) out of 223) were imputed.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Study flow chart. ITT: intention to treat.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Demographic and baseline characteristics by treatment group

Mean±sd exposure to treatment was 38.5±66.9 days for sertraline and 55.0±96.8 days for placebo. At day 9 (end of titration), 65 participants taking sertraline were on 100 mg, 10 on 50 mg and two on 25 mg. For placebo, corresponding “doses” were taken by 91, five and two participants, respectively.

Primary outcome

Breathlessness intensity lessened in both arms, with no difference between groups in the primary outcome (p=0.636; figure 2). There was no difference in the proportions with a 15% reduction in current intensity of breathlessness from baseline (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.71–1.40; p=0.992; figure 2). For the same sensation, there was no difference in the proportion achieving >8.9 mm reduction (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.72–1.44; p=0.921). In addition, in a model comparing baseline breathlessness to changes over the entire 28 days of the study in people with moderate/severe anxiety accounting rescue medication use, AKPS, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and pulse oximetry, there was no difference in any breathlessness measure. Sensitivity analyses assessing imputation methods were consistent with these results.

FIGURE 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2

Effectiveness data in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of sertraline for chronic breathlessness (n=223) for a) proportion of responders with a 15% reduction in current intensity of breathlessness; b) 0–10 mm breathlessness intensity scores now; c) 0–100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) worst breathlessness in the previous 24 h; d) subgroup analysis; e) quality of life; and f) Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ). HADS: hospital anxiety and depression scale; mMRC: modified Medical Research Council; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; EORTC QLQ: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire.

Secondary outcomes

There was no difference observed between groups in the proportion of participants who had a >15% change from baseline in any measure of breathlessness (figure 2). No subgroup showed any response (those with and without COPD, mMRC score 2 versus 3 or 4 or HADS subscales.

Over the 28-day study period, participants took a similar number of doses of immediate-release oral morphine solution. The mean daily doses taken on days 26–28 was 0.37 lower in the sertraline arm (95% CI −0.78–0.04, p=0.080).

Mean global quality-of-life scores in the sertraline arm had a greater improvement (days 0–28: 0.21, 95% CI 0.01–0.41; p=0.044) [23] and (days 26–28: 0.64, 95% CI 0.21–1.07; p=0.003). There was a lower pain domain score for sertraline in the EORTC-QLQ-15 [23] (−8, 95% CI −14– −2; p=0.015; figure 2). For the CRQ, there was a consistent direction of benefit in the sertraline group for three domains favouring sertraline: breathlessness (0.36, 95% CI −0.07–0.80; p=0.098); fatigue (0.32, 95% CI −0.03–0.66; p=0.070); and mastery (0.38, 95% CI 0.00–0.77; p=0.051) [22].

At the end of the study, 26 (36.1%) out of 72 participants on sertraline and 31 (41.3%) out of 75 on placebo felt appreciable improvement (p=0.6587). A minority felt sufficient benefit for long-term use (sertraline 18.6%, placebo 26.3%) and fewer entered the blinded extension study (sertraline 17.3%, placebo 16.3%; nonsignificant). (Pilot study participants did not have the option of the extension study) [18].

There were no difference in functional status, nor anxiety and depression scores. Using baseline values for carbon dioxide, mMRC, CCI, HADS anxiety, rescue medication use and AKPS as predictors of breathlessness response (≥8.9 mm change), there was only one significant association: a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index was associated with a greater likelihood of response for VAS average breathlessness in the previous 24 h alone (p=0.041) and with the other prognostic factors (0.028).

There were 30 deaths reported in the sertraline group, and 20 reported in the placebo group. Median survival was similar (sertraline 184 days, 95% CI 96–216 days, placebo 167 days, 95% CI 117–not reached).

Adverse events

The majority of participants in each treatment group experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) (sertraline 95.4%, placebo 90.7%; table 3). 24 (22.2%) participants in the sertraline group and 34 (31.8%) in the placebo group experienced serious TEAEs. In the sertraline and placebo arms, the serious events experienced by the most participants were exacerbations of COPD (5.6% and 8.4%, respectively) and breathlessness (2.8% and 5.6%, respectively). No subjects experienced hyponatraemia.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Grade 3, 4 or 5 treatment-emergent adverse events of special interest by treatment group

Discussion

There was no net benefit observed for sertraline on chronic breathlessness in participants who had undergone optimal treatment of the underlying cause(s) in this multisite randomised controlled trial. This contrasts with very limited previous evidence that suggested potential benefit [12–14]. In this study, randomisation was stratified by underlying severity of depression and anxiety, and the majority of participants (nearly 80% in each group) had no or minimal features of anxiety or depression (table 2).

These results are consistent with one study that found no effect of SSRIs in the management of cancer-related breathlessness [14]. The outcomes of the phase 2 BETTER-B study which is evaluating mirtazapine for this indication are awaited with interest (EudraCT 2015-006064-11).

Potential benefits of sertraline were seen for global quality of life, pain, fewer doses of as-needed immediate-release morphine solution and CRQ subscales. Any differences, if real, are small and not clinically significant. These signals should be interpreted with caution given multiple testing of a large number of secondary end-points. Measures of blinded preference or continuing onto the extension study reflected no perceived net benefit of sertraline by participants.

Mastery was a positive outcome in the landmark study by Higginson et al. [31] of an integrated palliative and respiratory care support service for chronic breathlessness. This questions the ideal end-point in symptom studies when wellbeing and a sense of control are positive outcomes, but symptom scores do not change. For example, people may exert themselves to the same level of breathlessness (and thus report no better symptom control), but be able to function more effectively.

Sertraline is registered for the treatment of social anxiety disorder [12]. The largest double-blind, pharmacological randomised controlled trial for chronic breathlessness evaluated buspirone, an anxiolytic [32]. That study of people with chronic breathlessness receiving chemotherapy was strongly negative. The role of anxiety in chronic breathlessness is not well defined, noting that a consecutive case series of 100 people with cancer and breathlessness found that one person had anxiety as the only cause [33]. Future research needs to differentiate anxiety levels between acute and chronic breathlessness.

The majority of participants in the current study did not have high levels of anxiety or depression HADS scores. Given the relatively small proportion of people with higher levels of anxiety, there may be a case for further studies in this subgroup.

To date, the best quality evidence for relief of chronic breathlessness remains with morphine [6, 7], and concerns around the potentially rare but catastrophic side-effect of respiratory depression are slowly abating, primarily due to evidence that regular, low-dose, extended-release morphine, which minimises peak drug concentrations, does not appear to be associated with this effect in steady state [6, 7, 34, 35].

Limitations in the study include that it was a requirement of the human research ethics committee that immediate-release oral morphine solution be made available to all participants, potentially masking benefits from, and attributing harms to the study medication. There was no end-point assessing changes in function, such as accelerometry. The study duration was relatively long for frail people, and so completion rates are lower than in well participants.

The current findings do not support the use of sertraline for the symptomatic treatment of chronic breathlessness, nor does this study identify any subgroup for further study where there is signal of potential benefit using baseline clinicodemographic data.

Footnotes

  • This study is registered at www.anzctr.org.au with identifier number ACTRN 12610000464066. Data are available on request from bona fide researchers.

  • Conflict of interest: D.C. Currow has received an unrestricted research grant from Mundipharma, is an unpaid member of an advisory board for Helsinn Pharmaceuticals and has consulted to Mayne Pharma and received intellectual property payments from them. He is a paid consultant to Specialist Therapeutics.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Ekström has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: S. Louw reports personal fees for statistic consultation from Palliative Care Clinical Studies Collaborative, during the conduct of the study.

  • Conflict of interest: J. Hill has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: B. Fazekas has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: K. Clark has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: P.M. Davidson has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: C. McDonald reports personal fees for speaking from GSK and Novartis, personal fees for advisory board work from Pfizer, and fees for speaking that were paid directly to the hospital from Menarini, outside the submitted work.

  • Conflict of interest: D. Sajkov has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: N. McCaffrey has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Doogue has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: A.P. Abernethy has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Agar has nothing to disclose.

  • Support statement: This study was supported by the Australian Government Commonwealth Department of Health thought the National Palliative Care Program and National Health and Medical Research Council project grant GNT1010065, and sponsored by Flinders University. Funding information for this article has been deposited with the Crossref Funder Registry.

  • Received May 24, 2018.
  • Accepted October 3, 2018.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2019

References

  1. ↵
    1. Reuben DB,
    2. Mor V
    . Dyspnea in terminally ill cancer patients. Chest 1986; 89: 234–236.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Ripamonti C
    . Management of dyspnea in advanced cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 1999; 7: 233–243.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. ↵
    1. Bruera E,
    2. Schmitz B,
    3. Pither J, et al.
    The frequency and correlates of dyspnea in patients with advanced cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage 2000; 19: 357–362.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  3. ↵
    1. O'Driscoll M,
    2. Corner J,
    3. Bailey C
    . The experience of breathlessness in lung cancer. Eur J Cancer Care 1999; 8: 37–43.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Johnson MJ,
    2. Yorke J,
    3. Hansen-Flaschen J, et al.
    Towards an expert consensus to delineate a clinical syndrome of chronic breathlessness. Eur Respir J 2017; 49: 160277.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Ekström M,
    2. Bajwah S,
    3. Bland JM, et al.
    One evidence base; three stories: do opioids relieve chronic breathlessness? Thorax 2018; 73: 88–90.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Ekström M,
    2. Nilsson F,
    3. Abernethy AA, et al.
    Effects of opioids on breathlessness and exercise capacity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A systematic review. Ann Am Thorac Soc 2015; 12: 1079–1092.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Simon ST,
    2. Higginson IJ,
    3. Booth S, et al.
    Benzodiazepines for the relief of breathlessness in advanced malignant and non-malignant diseases in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 10: CD007354.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Newton PJ,
    2. Davidson PM,
    3. Macdonald P, et al.
    Nebulized furosemide for the management of dyspnea: does the evidence support its use? J Pain Symptom Manage 2008; 36: 424–441.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    Better Treatments for Refractory Breathlessness. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN32236160. Date last accessed: April 29, 2018. Date last updated January 30, 2017.
  10. ↵
    1. Rayner L,
    2. Price A,
    3. Evans A, et al.
    Antidepressants for the treatment of depression in palliative care: systematic review and meta-analysis. Palliat Med 2011; 25: 36–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Papp LA,
    2. Weiss JR,
    3. Greenberg HE, et al.
    Sertraline for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and comorbid anxiety and mood disorders. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152: 1531.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Smoller JW,
    2. Pollack MH,
    3. Systrom D, et al.
    Sertraline effects on dyspnea in patients with obstructive airways disease. Psychosomatics 1998; 39: 24–29.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. Perna G,
    2. Cogo R,
    3. Bellodi L
    . Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors beyond psychiatry: are they useful in the treatment of severe, chronic, obstructive pulmonary disease? Depress Anxiety 2004; 20: 203–204.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Eiser N,
    2. Harte R,
    3. Spiros K, et al.
    Effect of treating depression on quality-of-life and exercise tolerance in severe COPD. COPD 2005; 2: 233–241.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. ↵
    1. Lacasse Y,
    2. Beaudoin L,
    3. Rousseau L, et al.
    Randomized trial of paroxetine in end-stage COPD. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis 2004; 61: 140–147.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. ↵
    International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. Guideline for Good Clinical Practice ICH Harmonised Tripartite 1996. Available from: www.ich.org/fileadmin/Public_Web_Site/ICH_Products/Guidelines/Efficacy/E6/E6_R1_Guideline.pdf
  16. ↵
    1. Watts GJ,
    2. Clark K,
    3. Agar M, et al.
    Study protocol: a phase III randomised, double-blind, parallel arm, stratified, block randomised, placebo-controlled trial investigating the clinical effect and cost-effectiveness of sertraline for the palliative relief of breathlessness in people with chronic breathlessness. BMJ Open 2016; 6: e013177.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Bestall JC,
    2. Paul EA,
    3. Garrod R, et al.
    Usefulness of the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea scale as a measure of disability in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax 1999; 54: 581–586.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    1. Zigmond AS,
    2. Snaith RP
    . The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 67: 361–370.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Abernethy AP,
    2. Shelby-James T,
    3. Fazekas B, et al.
    The Australian-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) scale: a revised scale for contemporary palliative care clinical practice. BMC Palliat Care 2005; 4: 7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    American Thoracic Society. Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire – CRQ. http://qol.thoracic.org/sections/instruments/ae/pages/crq.html Date last accessed: December 15, 2017. Date last updated: April 2002.
  21. ↵
    1. Kaasa S,
    2. Bjordal K,
    3. Aaronson N, et al.
    The EORTC core quality of life questionnaire (QLQ-C30): validity and reliability when analysed with patients treated with palliative radiotherapy. Eur J Cancer 1995; 31A: 2260–2263.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. ↵
    1. Weitzner MA,
    2. Jacobsen PB,
    3. Wagner HJ, et al.
    The Caregiver Quality of Life Index-Cancer (CQOLC) scale: development and validation of an instrument to measure quality of life of the family caregiver of patients with cancer. Qual Life Res 1999; 8: 55–63.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. ↵
    1. Wilcock A,
    2. Crosby V,
    3. Hughes A, et al.
    Descriptors of breathlessness in patients with cancer and other cardiorespiratory diseases. J Pain Symptom Manage 2002; 23: 182–189.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  24. ↵
    1. Currow DC,
    2. Ekström M,
    3. Fazekas B, et al.
    A phase III, multi-site, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled parallel arm study of daily extended release (ER) morphine for chronic breathlessness. Eur Respir J 2016; 48: OA4808.
    OpenUrl
  25. ↵
    1. Johnson MJ,
    2. Bland JM,
    3. Oxberry S, et al.
    Measuring improvement in dyspnoea: should absolute or relative values be used? Eur Resp J 2014; 44: 1700–1703.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. Johnson MJ,
    2. Bland JM,
    3. Oxberry SG, et al.
    Clinically important differences in the intensity of chronic refractory breathlessness. J Pain Symptom Manage 2013; 46: 957–963.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  27. ↵
    1. Schulz KF,
    2. Altman DG,
    3. Moher D
    . CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340: c332.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  28. ↵
    1. Moher D,
    2. Hopewell S,
    3. Schulz KF, et al.
    CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 340: c869.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. Higginson IJ,
    2. Bausewein C,
    3. Reilly CC, et al.
    An integrated palliative and respiratory care service for patients with advanced disease and refractory breathlessness: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med 2014; 2: 979–987.
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Peoples AR,
    2. Bushunow PW,
    3. Garland SN, et al.
    Buspirone for management of dyspnea in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a randomized placebo-controlled URCC CCOP study. Support Care Cancer 2016; 24: 1339–1347.
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. Dudgeon DJ,
    2. Lertzman M
    . Dyspnea in the advanced cancer patient. J Pain Symptom Manage 1998; 16: 212–219.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  32. ↵
    1. Abernethy AP,
    2. Currow DC,
    3. Frith P, et al.
    Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled crossover trial of sustained release morphine for the management of refractory dyspnoea. BMJ 2003; 327: 523–528.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    1. Verberkt CA,
    2. van den Beuken-van Everdingen MHJ,
    3. Schols JMGA, et al.
    Respiratory adverse effects of opioids for breathlessness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J 2017; 50: 1701153.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 53 Issue 1 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 53 (1)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Sertraline in symptomatic chronic breathlessness: a double blind, randomised trial
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Sertraline in symptomatic chronic breathlessness: a double blind, randomised trial
David C. Currow, Magnus Ekström, Sandra Louw, Julie Hill, Belinda Fazekas, Katherine Clark, Patricia M. Davidson, Christine McDonald, Dimitar Sajkov, Nikki McCaffrey, Matthew Doogue, Amy P. Abernethy, Meera Agar
European Respiratory Journal Jan 2019, 53 (1) 1801270; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01270-2018

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Sertraline in symptomatic chronic breathlessness: a double blind, randomised trial
David C. Currow, Magnus Ekström, Sandra Louw, Julie Hill, Belinda Fazekas, Katherine Clark, Patricia M. Davidson, Christine McDonald, Dimitar Sajkov, Nikki McCaffrey, Matthew Doogue, Amy P. Abernethy, Meera Agar
European Respiratory Journal Jan 2019, 53 (1) 1801270; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01270-2018
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Original Articles

  • Ambulatory management of secondary spontaneous pneumothorax
  • Systematic assessment of respiratory health in illness susceptible athletes
  • Identifying early PAH biomarkers in systemic sclerosis
Show more Original Articles

Breathlessness

  • Expectation and dyspnoea: neurobiology and respiratory nocebo effects
  • Dyspnoea, mortality and resource use in hospitalised patients
  • Effectiveness of a breathlessness service in Germany
Show more Breathlessness

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society