Desvenlafaxine succinate is a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), according to non-clinical trials. Desvenlafaxine succinate’s effectiveness is thought to be influenced by the central nervous system’s ability to potentiate the neurotransmitters serotonin and norepinephrine.

Desvenlafaxine does not exhibit strong affinity for a variety of receptors in vitro, such as muscarinic cholinergic, H1-histaminergic, or 1-adrenergic receptors. Desvenlafaxine exhibits little affinity for a number of ion channels, including calcium, chloride, potassium, and sodium channels, as well as monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitory action, according to the same binding profile assay.

Studies on major depressive disorder: Patients who satisfied the DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder were studied to determine the effectiveness of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of MDD. Four short-term (8-week), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and two relapse prevention trials including adult outpatients with major depressive disorder all demonstrated efficacy at dosages of 50–400 mg/day. Improvement on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) total score and the Clinical Global Impression of Improvement Scale (Clinical Global Impressions Scale – Improvement, CGI-I) showed that desvenlafaxine was superior than placebo. A combined analysis of these studies revealed a mean difference from placebo in the change in HAM-D17 scale score from baseline of 1.5 (0.9, 2.1), 2.2 (1.4, 2.9), and 2.4 (1.2, 3.6), respectively. for the daily doses of 50 mg, 100 mg, and 200 mg, respectively.

For desvenlafaxine (dosage 50 to 200 mg/day), the proportion of patients with CGI-I scores of 1 (very much improved) or 2 (very much improved) varied from 55 to 61% vs 45% in the placebo group.

5% of the 7,785 patients analyzed in desvenlafaxine premarketing clinical investigations were 65 years of age or older. These patients’ overall efficacy did not differ from that of younger patients’.