The evidence base for psychotropic drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency: a meta-assessment of all European Public Assessment Reports

Vibration of effects resulting from treatment selection in mixed-treatment comparisons: a multiverse analysis on network meta-analyses of antidepressants in major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

It is frequent to find overlapping network meta-analyses (NMAs) on the same topic with differences in terms of both treatments included and effect estimates. We aimed to evaluate the impact on effect estimates of selecting different treatment combinations (ie, network geometries) for inclusion in NMAs.

DESIGN

Multiverse analysis, covering all possible NMAs on different combinations of treatments.

SETTING

Data from a previously published NMA exploring the comparative effectiveness of 22 treatments (21 antidepressants and a placebo) for the treatment of acute major depressive disorder.

PARTICIPANTS

Cipriani et al explored a dataset of 116 477 patients included in 522 randomised controlled trials.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

For each possible treatment selection, we performed an NMA to estimate comparative effectiveness on treatment response and treatment discontinuation for the treatments included (231 between-treatment comparisons). The distribution of effect estimates of between-treatment comparisons across NMAs was computed, and the direction, magnitude and statistical significance of the 1st and 99th percentiles were compared.

RESULTS

4 116 254 different NMAs concerned treatment response. Among possible network geometries, 172/231 (74%) pairwise comparisons exhibited opposite effects between the 1st and 99th percentiles, 57/231 (25%) comparisons exhibited statistically significant results in opposite directions, 118 of 231 (51%) comparisons derived results that were both significant and non-significant at 5% risk and 56/231 (24%) treatment pairs obtained consistent results with only significant differences (or only non-significant differences) at 5% risk. Comparisons based on indirect evidence only were associated with greater variability in effect estimates. Comparisons with small absolute values observed in the complete NMA more frequently obtained statistically significant results in opposite directions. Similar results were observed for treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

In this multiverse analysis, we observed that the selection of treatments to be included in an NMA could have considerable consequences on treatment effect estimations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://osf.io/mb5dy.

Are large prospective trials on antidepressants in mental disorders seeding trials? A descriptive study of trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov

OBJECTIVES

This descriptive study of registered trials aimed to identify large clinical trials on antidepressants for mental disorders: (1) to assess what proportion could be labelled as 'seeding trials' (trials for marketing purposes) and (2) to describe their methodological characteristics and outcomes.

DESIGN

A search was conducted across all trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov by drug name in March 2017.

SETTING

All trials registered in the database of ClinicalTrials.gov were screened. Large registered studies were received and studies focusing prospectively on the effects of antidepressants in mental health disorders. Specific data items were extracted automatically, and subsequently inspected, corrected and completed by hand.

PARTICIPANTS

Prospective studies were selected focusing on the effects of antidepressants in any mental health disorder with 800 participants or more planned for inclusion.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Three members from the study team independently assessed the following 'seeding trial' characteristics in each registered study: a high level of involvement of the product manufacturer in the study design, in the data analysis and reporting of the study, an abnormally low ratio of patient numbers to study site, spin and/or omissions of clinically relevant findings in the abstracts, and conclusions that focused on secondary endpoints and surrogate markers. Secondary outcomes were the exploration of a functional outcome and suicidality.

RESULTS

31 trials were identified from clinical trials database. 18/31 were published (58%). 8 of these 18 (44%) studies were identified as possible seeding trials. 13/31 (42%) large trials planned to explore functioning and 5/31 (16%) suicidality.

CONCLUSIONS

Large trials are rare in the field of antidepressant research. Some could be 'seeding trials'. Few explored suicidality. Identifying seeding trials from incomplete data entries in registries, especially when almost half of the studies were still unpublished, posed considerable challenges. The delay between our research and publication limits the strength of our conclusions.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017065591.

Atypical antipsychotic-induced mania: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The possibility of atypical antipsychotics (AA) to induce manic symptoms has been raised by several articles. The objective of this study was to describe whether exposure to AA may induce mania in mood disorders.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. The systematic search encompassed all relevant studies published until April 4th, 2022. A meta-analysis testing whether treatment emergent mania (TEM) is more frequent with the use of AA compared with placebo was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 52 studies were included in the systematic review. We found 24 case reports or case series describing 40 manic/hypomanic episodes allegedly induced by AA. Twenty-one placebo-controlled trials were included in a meta-analysis including 4823 individuals treated with AA and 3252 individuals receiving placebo. Our meta-analysis showed that the use of AA protects against the development of TEM (OR: 0.68 [95 % CI: 0.52-0.89], p = 0.005).

LIMITATIONS

AA-induced mania/hypomania was not the primary outcome in any of the observational or interventional studies. TEM was not homogeneously defined across studies. In most case reports it was not possible to establish causality between the use of AA and the development of manic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is more frequent with placebo than with AA, which suggests that AA exposure does not represent a relevant risk for TEM. Mania/hypomania induced by an AA seems to be rare events, since anecdotal evidence from case reports and case series were not observed in observational prospective and interventional studies.

Back to the Future of Neuropsychopharmacology

Disappointments in translating preclinical findings into clinical efficacy have triggered a number of changes in neuroscience drug discovery ranging from investments diverted to other therapeutic areas to reduced reliance on efficacy claims derived from preclinical models. In this chapter, we argue that there are several existing examples that teach us on what needs to be done to improve the success rate. We advocate the reverse engineering approach that shifts the focus from preclinical efforts to "model" human disease states to pharmacodynamic activity as a common denominator in the journey to translate clinically validated phenomena to preclinical level and then back to humans. Combined with the research rigor, openness, and transparency, this reverse engineering approach is well set to bring new effective and safe medications to patients in need.

Investigation of Psychoactive Medications: Challenges and a Practical and Scalable New Path

In the last two decades the validity of clinical trials in psychiatry has been subject to discussion. The most accepted clinical study method in the medical area, randomized controlled trial (RCT), faces significant problems when applied to the psychiatric world. One of the causes for this scenario is the strict participant inclusion and exclusion criteria that may not represent the real world. The inconsistency of the different endpoint parameters that are used in the field is another cause. We think that psychiatric RCTs' challenges, together with the underlying complexity of psychiatry, lead to a problematic clinical practice. Today, psychoactive drugs are routinely tested not in an official clinical trial setting. Off-label psychoactive drugs are commonly prescribed, and other substances, such as herbal remedies, are also regularly consumed. Learning from those real-life experiments can teach us useful lessons. Real-world data (RWD) includes information about heterogeneous patient populations, and it can be measured with standardized parameters. Collecting RWD can also address the need for systematically documenting and sharing case reports' outcomes. We suggest using digital tools to capture objective and continuous behavioral data from patients passively. New conclusions will be constantly drawn, possibly allowing more personalized treatment outcomes. The relevant next-generation decision support tools are already available.

An open science pathway for drug marketing authorization-Registered drug approval

Florian Naudet and co-authors propose a pathway involving registered criteria for evaluation and approval of new drugs.

EMA and FDA psychiatric drug trial guidelines: assessment of guideline development and trial design recommendations

AIMS

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) produce guidelines for the design of pivotal psychiatric drug trials used in new drug applications. It is unknown who are involved in the guideline development and what specific trial design recommendations they give.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of EMA Clinical Efficacy and Safety Guidelines and FDA Guidance Documents. Study outcomes: (1) guideline committee members and declared conflicts of interest; (2) guideline development and organisation of commenting phases; (3) categorisation of stakeholders who comment on draft and final guidelines according to conflicts of interest ('industry', 'not-industry but with industry-related conflicts', 'independent', 'unclear'); and (4) trial design recommendations (trial duration, psychiatric comorbidity, 'enriched design', efficacy outcomes, comparator choice). Protocol registration https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.22.20018499 (27 January 2020).

RESULTS

We included 13 EMA and five FDA guidelines covering 15 psychiatric indications. Eleven months after submission, the EMA had not processed our request regarding committee member disclosures. FDA offices draft the Guidance Documents, but the Agency is not in possession of employee conflicts of interest declarations because FDA employees generally may not hold financial interests (although some employees may hold interests up to $15,000). The EMA and FDA guideline development phases are similar; drafts and final versions are publicly announced and everybody can submit comments. Seventy stakeholders commented on ten guidelines: 38 (54%) 'industry', 18 (26%) 'not-industry but with industry-related conflicts', six (9%) 'independent' and eight (11%) 'unclear'. They submitted 1014 comments: 640 (68%) 'industry', 243 (26%) 'not-industry but with industry-related conflicts', 44 (5%) 'independent' and 20 (2%) 'unclear' (67 could not be assigned to a specific stakeholder). The recommended designs were generally for trials of short duration; with restricted trial populations; allowing previous exposure to the drug; and often recommending rating scale efficacy outcomes. EMA mainly recommended three arm designs (both placebo and active comparators), whereas FDA mainly recommended placebo-controlled designs. There were also other important differences and FDA's recommendations regarding the exclusion of psychiatric comorbidity seemed less restrictive.

CONCLUSIONS

The EMA and FDA clinical research guidelines for psychiatric pivotal trials recommend designs that tend to have limited generalisability. Independent and non-conflicted stakeholders are underrepresented in the guideline development. It seems warranted with more active involvement of scientists and independent organisations without conflicts of interest in the guideline development process.