Antidepressant treatment of depression: a metaanalysis

Electrophysiological biomarkers and age characterize phenotypic heterogeneity among individuals with major depressive disorder

Introduction: Despite the high need for effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD), the development of novel medicines is hampered by clinical, genetic and biological heterogeneity, unclear links between symptoms and neural dysfunction, and tenuous biomarkers for clinical trial contexts of use. Methods: In this study, we examined the International Study to Predict Optimized Treatment in Depression (iSPOT-D) clinical trial database for new relationships between auditory event-related potential (ERP) responses, demographic features, and clinical symptoms and behavior, to inform strategies for biomarker-driven patient stratification that could be used to optimize future clinical trial design and drug development strategy in MDD. Results: We replicate findings from previous analyses of the classic auditory oddball task in the iSPOT-D sample showing smaller than typical N1 and P300 response amplitudes and longer P300 latencies for target and standard stimuli in patients with MDD, suggesting altered bottom-up sensory and top-down attentional processes. We further demonstrate that age is an important contributor to clinical group differences, affecting both topographic distribution of the clinically informative ERP responses and the types of the stimuli sensitive to group differences. In addition, the observed brain-behavior associations indicate that levels of anxiety and stress are major contributing factors to atypical sensory and attentional processing among patients with MDD, particularly in the older subgroups. Discussion: Our novel findings support the possibility of accelerated cognitive aging in patients with MDD and identify the frontal P300 latency as an additional candidate biomarker of MDD. These results from a large, well-phenotyped sample support the view that heterogeneity of the clinical population with MDD can be systematically characterized based on age and neural biomarkers of sensory and attentional processing, informing patient stratification strategies in the design of clinical trials.

Changes in mental health, wellbeing and personality following ayahuasca consumption: Results of a naturalistic longitudinal study

Background: Naturalistic and placebo-controlled studies suggest ayahuasca, a potent psychedelic beverage originating from Indigenous Amazonian tradition, may improve mental health, alter personality structure, and reduce alcohol and drug intake. To better understand ayahuasca’s therapeutic potential and to identify factors that influence therapeutic efficacy, we conducted a naturalistic, longitudinal study of facilitated ayahuasca consumption in naïve participants using a comprehensive battery of self-report questionnaires.

Materials and Methods: Ayahuasca naive individuals registering for ayahuasca ceremonies were asked to complete a range of validated questionnaires assessing mental health, alcohol/cannabis use, relationships, personality, and connection to self and spirituality, prior to and 1 month after attending an ayahuasca ceremony. Data for two mental health measures (the DASS-21 and PANAS) and acute subjective effects via the MEQ-30 were also assessed 7 days post-ceremony. Repeated measures ANOVA were used to examine pre-to-post changes, and Pearson correlations explored predictors of improvement in outcomes.

Results: Fifty-three attendees (32 women, 21 men) completed pre and post ayahuasca assessments with 55.6% of the sample reporting a complete mystical experience based on the MEQ-30. One-month post-ayahuasca, significant reductions were identified in depression, anxiety, stress, alcohol and cannabis use, body dissociation, accepting external influence, self-alienation, impulsivity, and negative affect/emotionality. Significant increases were identified in positive mood, self-efficacy, authentic living, extraversion, agreeableness, open-mindedness, spirituality, and satisfaction with relationships. While facets of the mystical experience held little predictive validity on outcome measures, baseline traits, particularly high negative emotionality and body dissociation, and low sense of self-efficacy, robustly predicted improvements in mental health and alcohol/cannabis use, and alterations in personality structure which are linked to better mental health.

Discussion: This study suggests facilitated ayahuasca consumption in naïve participants may precipitate wide-ranging improvements in mental health, relationships, personality structure, and alcohol use. Associations between baseline traits and therapeutic improvements mark an important first step toward personalized, precision-based medicine and warrant randomized controlled trials to confirm and elaborate on these findings.

Contribution Statement: Longitudinal, observational studies and randomized clinical control trials suggest ayahuasca may exert therapeutic effects on mental health and alcohol/cannabis use, and alter personality structure. However, it is unclear if improvements are diagnosis-specific and factors that predict therapeutic gains have yet to be extensively elucidated. This longitudinal, observational study examined the effects of facilitated ayahuasca consumption in naive participants on mental health, alcohol and substance use/abuse, personality traits, relationships, and connection to self and spirituality. We found wide-ranging improvements 1-month post-treatment across these domains, and identified baseline traits which predict pre-to-post changes on primary outcome measures. Improvements were not diagnostic-specific, suggesting ayahuasca may be generally efficacious. Personality traits, body dissociation, and self-efficacy were strong predictors of therapeutic improvements, marking an important first step toward personalized, precision-based medicine. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm and elaborate on these findings.

Impact of ACE2 genetic variant on antidepressant efficacy of SSRIs

Identification of a new axis of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2)/angiotensin (1-7)/Mas receptor, in the renin-angiotensin system (RAS), has opened a new insight regarding the role of RAS and angiotensin in higher brain functions. ACE2 catabolizes angiotensin II and produces angiotensin (1-7), an agonist of Mas receptor. Mice lacking the Mas receptor (angiotensin 1-7 receptor) exhibit anxiety-like behaviours. The present study was conducted to test the hypothesis of the involvement of ACE2 genetic variant (G8790A) on response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). In a randomised control trial, 200 newly diagnosed Iranian patients with major depressive disorder completed 6 weeks of fluoxetine or sertraline treatment. Patients with a reduction of 50% or more in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score were considered responsive to treatment. G8790A polymorphism was determined in extracted DNAs using restriction fragment length polymerase chain reaction method. Our results show that the A allele and AA and GA genotypes were significantly associated with better response to SSRIs (p = 0.008; OR = 3.4; 95% CI = 1.4-8.5 and p = 0.027; OR = 3.3, 95% CI = 1.2-9.2, respectively). Moreover, patients with GA and AA genotypes responded significantly better to sertraline (p = 0.0002; OR = 9.1; 95% CI = 2.4-33.7). The A allele was significantly associated with better response to sertraline (p = 0.0001; OR = 7.6; 95% CI = 2.5-23.3). In conclusion, our results confirm the role of G8790A in response to some SSRIs.

Probiotics for the treatment of depression and anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND & AIM

Probiotics in the gut have been suggested to have a beneficial effect on anxiety response and depressive disorder. Hence we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the effects of probiotics associated with or without pharmacological or psychological therapies in patients with depressive and/or anxiety symptoms or disorders.

METHODS

We conducted searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ProQuest, LILACS, and Web of Science up to February 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of probiotics associated with or without pharmacological or psychological therapies for patient-important outcomes including relief of depressive, anxiety and stress symptoms, cognitive functions, adverse events and quality of life. We used the GRADE approach to rate the overall certainty of the evidence by outcome. The protocol of the systematic review was registered with PROPSERO and published under the number CRD4202016329.

RESULTS

16 RCTs including 1,125 patients proved eligible. Results suggested a significant improvement in using Beck Depression Index (MD, -3.20 [95% CI, -5.91 to -0.49], p = 0.02; I² = 21%, p = 0.28) for depression symptoms and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) (MD, -6.88 [95% CI, -12.35 to -1.41], p = 0.01; I² = 24%, p = 0.25) for anxiety with overall certainty in evidence rated as moderate and low, respectively. However, Depression Scale (DASS-Depression) (MD, 2.01 [95% CI, -0.80 to 4.82], p = 0.16; I² = 0%, p = 0.62), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRAS) (MD, -2,41 [95% CI, -10,55 to 5,72], p = 0,56; I² = 87%, p = 0,006), Anxiety scale (DASS-Anxiety) (MD, 0.49 [95% CI, -4.05 to 5.02], p = 0.83; I² = 74%, p = 0.05), and Stress Scale (DASS-Stress) (MD, 0.84 [95% CI, -2.64 to 4.33], p = 0.64; I² = 34%, p = 0.22) showed no significant decrease in the relief of depression, anxiety and stress symptoms of probiotics compared to placebo with overall certainty in evidence rated as very low for all outcomes. We also found no differences in the Beck Anxiety Index (BAI) (MD, -3.21 [95% CI, -6.50 to 0.08], p = 0.06; I² = 0%, p = 0.88) with overall certainty in evidence rated as low. Results suggested a non-statistically significantly effect of probiotics in the adverse events outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The current review suggests that probiotics may improve symptoms of depression and anxiety in clinical patients. However, given the limitations in the included studies, RCTs with long-term follow-up and large sample sizes are needed.

Development and preliminary validation of a scale to measure self-efficacy in seeking mental health care (SE-SMHC)

Purpose

Globally, the prevalence of mental illness is on the rise, although few people with psychiatric disorders actually seek mental health care. One under-researched factor that may impact help-seeking behavior from health care professionals is self-efficacy. This research presents the development and validation of the Self-Efficacy to Seek Mental Health Care (SE-SMHC) scale, a nine item-self report measure. It was hypothesized that self-efficacy for seeking mental health care would be positively associated with higher rates of self-reported help-seeking behavior and higher rates of advising others in distress to access mental health treatment.

Methods

A randomized population sample of 977 South Africans completed the SE-SMHC as part of a larger study on barriers to health care for mental illness. SE-SMHC data were subjected to principal component analysis, and data from the larger study were utilized to test the hypotheses.

Results

Two latent factors emerged from the oblique rotation and accounted for 70% of the variance: SE-KNOW (confidence in one’s ability to know how to successfully interface with mental health care systems) and SE-COPE (confidence in one’s ability to cope with the consequences of seeking care). Cronbach alphas for both subscales were 0.87 and for the total scale score was 0.93. Both hypotheses were confirmed suggesting evidence of the scale’s validity.

Conclusions

This data suggests that the SE-SMHC demonstrates good psychometric characteristics and may be a useful research tool and screening instrument for targeted interventions.

General self-efficacy and its relationship to self-reported mental illness and barriers to care: a general population study

Given the prevalence of mental illness worldwide, it is important to better understand the dynamics of mental health help-seeking behavior to improve access to care. The aim of this study was to investigate if general self-efficacy (GSE) was associated with self-reported mental illness and help-seeking behavior and barriers to care in a randomized population. This study utilized a mailed questionnaire completed by 3,981 persons aged 19-64 years who resided in Western Sweden. GSE was measured and logistic regression models calculated, controlling for various sociodemographic variables. Results showed that 25% of men and 43% of women reported a lifetime prevalence of mental illness that they felt could have benefitted from treatment. Of those, 37% of the men and 27% of the women reported barriers to care. Men and women with low GSE were more likely to suffer from mental illness compared with persons high in GSE, but GSE did not enhance help-seeking behavior or perceived barriers to care. The most prevalent barriers to care for both sexes were beliefs that the illness will pass by itself, doubt whether treatment works, lack of knowledge of where to go and feelings of shame. Overall, GSE scores did not differ among those who experienced various barriers to care with the exception of two barriers only among women.

'Third wave' cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based therapy for major depressive disorder. A protocol for a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Most interventions for depression have shown small or no effects. 'Third wave' cognitive therapy and mentalization-based therapy have both gained some ground as treatments of psychological problems. No randomised trial has compared the effects of these two interventions for patients with major depression.

METHODS/DESIGN

We plan a randomised, parallel group, assessor-blinded superiority clinical trial. During two years we will include 84 consecutive adult participants diagnosed with major depressive disorder. The participants will be randomised to either 'third wave' cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based therapy. The primary outcome will be the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression at cessation of treatment at 18 weeks. Secondary outcomes will be the proportion of patients with remission, Symptom Checklist 90 Revised, Beck's Depression Inventory, and The World Health Organisation-Five Well-being Index 1999.

DISCUSSION

Interventions for depression have until now shown relatively small effects. Our trial results will provide knowledge about the effects of two modern psychotherapeutic interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials: NCT01070134.

Quantification of tricyclic antidepressants using UPLC-MS/MS

Depression is a psychiatric condition that affects about 120 million people worldwide and can interfere with independence and productivity in essentially all aspects of daily life. Depression is also associated with risk of self-harm, and ultimately suicide. Antidepressant medications are widely used to treat symptoms of depression. While there are several classes of antidepressants, therapeutic drug management (TDM) is most common for the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). TDM of TCAs is important due to wide inter-individual variability in pharmacokinetics, production of active metabolites, and a high risk of drug-drug interactions. In addition, TDM of some TCAs can be used to optimize dose, wherein concentration relationships are recognized for both therapeutic response and potentially life-threatening toxicity. In many clinical scenarios, TDM of TCAs is accomplished by currently available point of care or automated immunoassays that provide a "total" TCA concentration. However, these assays may not be adequately specific to meet the needs of all clinical scenarios, and hence, chromatographic separation and quantification of individual TCA parent drugs and active metabolites that may contribute to the "total" TCA concentration is sometimes required. This chapter describes an analytical method designed to detect and/or quantify clinically significant concentrations of nine TCAs (amitriptyline, nortriptyline, imipramine, desipramine, doxepin, nordoxepin, protriptyline, clomipramine, and norclomipramine) in serum or plasma, using ultra pressure liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). The sample preparation employs a rapid protein precipitation with 50:50 MeOH:acetonitrile, high speed centrifugation, and injection of 5 μL of supernatant onto the instrument, with a 5 min run-time.

Lessons learned from placebo groups in antidepressant trials

This comprehensive review provides an overview about placebo and nocebo phenomena in antidepressant trials. Improvements in the placebo groups may partly be explained through methodological issues such as natural course of depression and regression to the mean, but also fundamentally reflect investigators' and participants' expectations. A meta-analysis by our group of 96 randomized placebo-controlled trials showed large placebo responses to antidepressant medication. Moderator analyses revealed substantially larger placebo responses in observer ratings compared with self-report. Effect sizes in observer ratings showed strong increase with publication year while this effect was not found for patients' self-ratings. This reflects the strong influence of investigators' expectations. The analysis of 'nocebo effects', e.g. adverse effects in placebo groups of antidepressant trials also confirms the impact of expectations: nocebo symptoms reflected the typical side-effect patterns expected in the drug group, with higher symptoms rates in the placebo groups of tricyclic antidepressant trials compared with placebo groups of trials testing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. While the placebo response seems to be similar for women and men, gender differences were found for nocebo rates. In the conclusion, we discuss potential implications for clinical trial designs and argue for interventions aimed at optimizing positive expectations of treatment benefit while minimizing the impact of adverse effects.

Meta-analysis of supplemental treatment for depressive and anxiety disorders in patients being treated for alcohol dependence

Approximately half of those receiving treatment for an alcohol use disorder (AUD) also suffer with an anxiety or depressive (internalizing) disorder. Because all internalizing disorders mark a poor alcohol treatment outcome, it seems reasonable to supplement AUD treatment with a psychiatric intervention when these disorders co-occur with AUD. However, this conclusion may be faulty given that the various possible interrelationships between AUD and internalizing disorders do not uniformly imply a high therapeutic yield from this approach. Unfortunately, the studies conducted to date have been too few and too small to resolve this important clinical issue with confidence. Therefore, we used a meta-analytic method to synthesize the effects from published randomized controlled trials examining the impact of supplementing AUD treatment with a psychiatric treatment for co-occurring internalizing disorder (N = 15). We found a pooled effect size (d) of .32 for internalizing outcomes and .22 for a composite of alcohol outcomes; however, the alcohol outcomes effect sizes were greater than this for some specific outcome domains. Subgroups that differed in terms of internalizing outcomes included treatment type (medication vs. cognitive behavioral therapy) and treatment focus (anxiety vs. depression). There was also a trend for the studies with better internalizing disorder outcomes to have better alcohol outcomes. These results indicate that clinical outcomes (both psychiatric and alcohol-related) could be somewhat improved by supplementing AUD treatment with psychiatric treatment for co-occurring internalizing disorder.

A meta-analysis of treatments for perinatal depression

This meta-analysis assessed efficacy of pharmacologic and psychological interventions for treatment of perinatal depression. A systematic review identified 27 studies, including open trials (n=9), quasi-randomized trials (n=2), and randomized controlled trials (n=16) assessing change from pretreatment to posttreatment or comparing these interventions to a control group. Uncontrolled and controlled effect sizes were assessed in separate meta-analyses. There was significant improvement in depressive symptoms from pretreatment to posttreatment, with an uncontrolled overall effect size (Hedges' g) of 1.61 after removal of outliers and correction for publication bias. Symptom levels at posttreatment were below cutoff levels indicative of clinically significant symptoms. At posttreatment, intervention groups demonstrated significantly greater reductions in depressive symptoms compared to control groups, with an overall controlled effect size (Hedges' g) of 0.65 after removal of outliers. Individual psychotherapy was superior to group psychotherapy with regard to changes in symptoms from pretreatment to posttreatment. Interventions including an interpersonal therapy component were found to have greater effect sizes, compared to control conditions, than interventions including a cognitive-behavioral component. Implications of the findings for clinical practice and future research are discussed.

Management of depression in patients with coronary heart disease: association, mechanisms, and treatment implications for depressed cardiac patients

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Coronary heart disease (CHD) and depression are two leading causes of death and disability in the United States and worldwide. Depression is especially common in cardiac patients, and there is growing evidence that depression is a risk factor for fatal and nonfatal events in CHD patients.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

This paper reviews current literature of depression as a risk factor for CHD along with pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments for depression in cardiac patients.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

Readers will gain knowledge about the importance of depression as a CHD risk factor and learn the results of efforts to treat depressed CHD patients.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Although randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of medication and non-pharmacologic therapies have not demonstrated that treating depression improves survival, there is evidence that treating depressed patients can reduce depressive symptoms and improve quality of life. Additional RCTs are needed, including evaluation of non-pharmacologic therapies such as exercise, to examine the effects of treatment of depression on medical and psychosocial outcomes.

Meta-analysis of the placebo response in antidepressant trials

Improvements in placebo groups of antidepressant trials account for a major part of the expected drug effects. We aimed to determine overall effect sizes of placebo and drug effects in antidepressant trials, and to analyze whether the placebo effect in antidepressant trials also occurs for patient self-perception, general psychopathology, and quality of life.

METHODS

Search terms covered different variants of pharmacotherapy for patients with depressive disorders from January 1980 to December 2005 in the databases Medline/Pubmed, PsychInfo and CENTRAL, a.o. We included RCTs with a placebo group and an antidepressant group in people with depression.

RESULTS

We computed within group effect sizes for several outcome variables and integrated them using random-effect models. A total of 96 studies were included. Mean effect size in the placebo group for primary outcome variables was d=1.69 (95% CI=1.54-1.84) compared to 2.50 in the drug group (95% CI=2.30-2.69). There was a major difference between placebo effect sizes assessed with observer ratings (d=1.85, 95% CI=1.69-2.01) versus patient self-perception (d=0.67; 95% CI=0.49-0.85). The effect sizes in placebo groups in 2005 were more than twice as great as those in 1980, but only for observer ratings, not for patient self-ratings. The result was partly due to increased homogeneity of samples of recently published trials.

CONCLUSIONS

The placebo effect accounted for 68% of the effect in the drug groups. Whereas clinical trials need to control the placebo effect, clinical practice should attempt to use its full power.

Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care

BACKGROUND

Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

All searches were conducted in September 2007.The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care.

Are we drawing the right conclusions from randomised placebo-controlled trials? A post-hoc analysis of data from a randomised controlled trial

Background

Assumptions underlying placebo controlled trials include that the placebo effect impacts on all study arms equally, and that treatment effects are additional to the placebo effect. However, these assumptions have recently been challenged, and different mechanisms may potentially be operating in the placebo and treatment arms. The objective of the current study was to explore the nature of placebo versus pharmacological effects by comparing predictors of the placebo response with predictors of the treatment response in a randomised, placebo-controlled trial of a phytotherapeutic combination for the treatment of menopausal symptoms. A substantial placebo response was observed but no significant difference in efficacy between the two arms.

Methods

A post hoc analysis was conducted on data from 93 participants who completed this previously published study. Variables at baseline were investigated as potential predictors of the response on any of the endpoints of flushing, overall menopausal symptoms and depression. Focused tests were conducted using hierarchical linear regression analyses. Based on these findings, analyses were conducted for both groups separately. These findings are discussed in relation to existing literature on placebo effects.

Results

Distinct differences in predictors were observed between the placebo and active groups. A significant difference was found for study entry anxiety, and Greene Climacteric Scale (GCS) scores, on all three endpoints. Attitude to menopause was found to differ significantly between the two groups for GCS scores. Examination of the individual arms found anxiety at study entry to predict placebo response on all three outcome measures individually. In contrast, low anxiety was significantly associated with improvement in the active treatment group. None of the variables found to predict the placebo response was relevant to the treatment arm.

Conclusion

This study was a post hoc analysis of predictors of the placebo versus treatment response. Whilst this study does not explore neurobiological mechanisms, these observations are consistent with the hypotheses that 'drug' effects and placebo effects are not necessarily additive, and that mutually exclusive mechanisms may be operating in the two arms. The need for more research in the area of mechanisms and mediators of placebo versus active responses is supported.

Trial Registration

International Clinical Trials Registry ISRCTN98972974.

Are there placebo effects in the medication treatment of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder?

Placebos have been shown to produce significant positive changes in several health and mental health problems, referred to as placebo effects. Although it is well established that stimulant medication is an empirically supported treatment for children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), little is known about the role of placebos in the medication treatment of children with ADHD. This article reviews existing studies that evaluate whether placebos produce significant changes in children with ADHD. Published literature and the author's own empirical work were used to evaluate whether placebo effects are present in the medication treatment of children with ADHD. There is little evidence that placebos produce significant changes in the behavior or cognition of elementary school-age children with ADHD. However, there may be significant placebo effects in adults who evaluate children with ADHD. Evidence suggests that parents and teachers tend to evaluate children with ADHD more positively when they believe the child has been administered stimulant medication and they tend to attribute positive changes to medication even when medication has not actually been administered. Several viable mechanisms for these placebo effects are suggested.

Antidepressant efficacy of high-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in double-blind sham-controlled designs: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

For more than a decade high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) has been applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in search of an alternative treatment for depression. The aim of this study was to provide an update on its clinical efficacy by performing a meta-analysis involving double-blind sham-controlled studies.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed and Web of Science in the period between January 1980 and November 2007 with the search terms 'depression' and 'transcranial magnetic stimulation'. Thirty double-blind sham-controlled parallel studies with 1164 patients comparing the percentage change in depression scores from baseline to endpoint of active versus sham treatment were included. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to investigate the clinical efficacy of fast-frequency rTMS over the left DLPFC in depression.

RESULTS

The test for heterogeneity was not significant (QT=30.46, p=0.39). A significant overall weighted mean effect size, d=0.39 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.54], for active treatment was observed (z=6.52, p<0.0001). Medication resistance and intensity of rTMS did not play a role in the effect size.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show that high-frequency rTMS over the left DLPFC is superior to sham in the treatment of depression. The effect size is robust and comparable to at least a subset of commercially available antidepressant drug agents. Current limitations and future prospects are discussed.

Escitalopram and duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of two trials

Pooled analyses have shown that escitalopram has superior effectiveness versus all comparators, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and venlafaxine. Recent studies have compared escitalopram with duloxetine. Data from two randomized, double-blind studies that compared escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) and duloxetine (60 mg/day) were pooled and analysed for all patients and for the subsample of severely depressed patients [baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score > or =30]. Escitalopram (n=280) was superior to duloxetine (n=284) with respect to mean change from baseline in MADRS score at weeks 1, 2, 4 and 8 with a mean treatment difference at week 8 of 2.6 points (P<0.01). Similar results were seen for severely depressed patients, with a mean treatment difference of 3.7 points (P<0.01). Response and remission rates at week 8 were significantly higher for patients treated with escitalopram [response 67.1% for escitalopram compared with 53.2% for duloxetine, P<0.001; remission (MADRS< or =12) 54.3% for escitalopram compared with 44.4% for duloxetine, P<0.05]. The numbers needed to treat based on response and remission rates, in favour of escitalopram, were 8 and 11, respectively, for all patients (6 and 7, respectively, for severely depressed patients). Significantly fewer (P<0.001) patients (all cause and owing to adverse events) withdrew from the escitalopram group. This pooled analysis shows that over an 8-week treatment period, escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) is superior in both effectiveness and tolerability compared with duloxetine (60 mg/day).

Stepped care treatment of postpartum depression: a primary care-based management model

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Postpartum depression (PPD), the most prevalent serious postpartum complication, is a devastating illness that negatively impacts not only the mother, but also her infant, other family members, and work performance. There is an extensive body of research addressing systems-based quality improvement efforts for treatment of depression in primary care populations; however, little of this research has been directed toward postpartum populations. This paper presents a health care systems-based quality improvement model for the treatment of PPD derived from research outcomes in general primary care populations.

METHODS

OVID/MEDLINE and PsychINFO searches were performed using the following terms: depression, postpartum depression, mass screening, collaborative care, stepped care, psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy, interpersonal therapy, and education as keywords.

MAIN FINDINGS

The PPD management model described herein includes screening and diagnosis, initiation of active treatment, and use of collaborative care, which includes primary care visits, case manager follow-up, and more intensive care, through specialty consultation or referral, for complicated or difficult cases.

CONCLUSION

Stepped care, a form of collaborative depression treatment, is proposed as a practical, cost-effective method for improving PPD diagnosis and clinical outcomes.

Effectiveness of paroxetine in the treatment of acute major depression in adults: a systematic re-examination of published and unpublished data from randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Concern has been raised about the efficacy of antidepressant therapy for major depression in adults. We undertook a systematic review of published and unpublished clinical trial data to determine the effectiveness and acceptability of paroxetine.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the GlaxoSmithKline Clinical Trial Register, MEDLINE and EMBASE up to December 2006. Published and unpublished randomized trials comparing paroxetine with placebo in adults with major depression were eligible for inclusion. We selected the proportion of patients who left a study early for any reason as the primary outcome measure because it represents a hard measure of treatment effectiveness and acceptability.

RESULTS

We included in our review 29 published and 11 unpublished clinical trials, with a total of 3704 patients who received paroxetine and 2687 who received with placebo. There was no difference between paroxetine and placebo in terms of the proportion of patients who left the study early for any reason (random effect relative risk [RR] 0.99, 99% confidence interval [CI] 0.88-1.11). Paroxetine was more effective than placebo, with fewer patients who did not experience improvement in symptoms of at least 50% (random effect RR 0.83, 99% CI 0.77-0.90). Significantly more patients in the paroxetine group than in the placebo group left their respective studies because of side effects (random effect RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.44-2.18) or experienced suicidal tendencies (odds ratio 2.55, 95% CI 1.17-5.54).

INTERPRETATION

Among adults with moderate to severe major depression in the clinical trials we reviewed, paroxetine was not superior to placebo in terms of overall treatment effectiveness and acceptability. These results were not biased by selective inclusion of published studies.

An open-label, flexible-dose study of memantine in major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of flexible-dose memantine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

In this 12-week, single-center, open-label study, 8 patients with MDD were titrated for 4 weeks to 20 mg/d memantine. Nonresponsive patients were titrated to 30 mg/d (at week 8) or 40 mg/d (at week 10), provided that no dose-limiting adverse events were observed. Outcome measures were the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness and the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scales, the Patient Global Evaluation, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Major Depressive Episode Checklist. Tolerability and safety assessments were performed throughout the trial.

RESULTS

The safety population comprised 8 outpatients with a mean (SD) baseline MADRS score of 31.9 (4.45), indicative of severe depression. Seven subjects completed the study. All patients attained the target dose of 20 mg/d; 3 patients were titrated to 30 mg/d after week 8, and 2 patients were titrated to 40 mg/d after week 10. The mean dosage across all weeks was 18.1 mg. Patients improved on all efficacy measures within 1 week of treatment initiation. The mean improvement peaked at week 8 and was maintained through week 12 (MADRS, 18.5 [10.3]; last-observation-carried-forward). All memantine doses were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Memantine demonstrated early-onset efficacy in patients with MDD. The treatment was well tolerated. This study suggests that double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of memantine in depression are merited.

Amitriptyline for depression

BACKGROUND

For many years amitriptyline has been considered one of the reference compounds for the pharmacological treatment of depression. However, new tricyclic drugs, heterocyclic compounds and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have been introduced on the market with the claim of a more favourable tolerability/efficacy profile.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present systematic review was to investigate the tolerability and efficacy of amitriptyline in comparison with the other tricyclic/heterocyclic antidepressants and with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR-Studies) was searched on 28-11-2005. Reference lists of all included studies were checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials were included. Study participants were of either sex and any age with a primary diagnosis of depression. Included trials compared amitriptyline with another tricyclic/heterocyclic antidepressant or with one of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using a standardised form. The number of patients undergoing the randomisation procedure, the number of patients who completed the study and the number of improved patients were extracted. In addition, group mean scores at the end of the trial on Hamilton Depression Scale or any other depression scale were extracted. In the tolerability analysis, the number of patients failing to complete the study and the number of patients complaining of side-effects were extracted.

MAIN RESULTS

A total number of 194 studies were included in the review. The estimate of the overall odds ratio (OR) for responders showed that more subjects responded to amitriptyline in comparison with the control antidepressant group (OR 1.12 to 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.23, number needed to treat to benefit (NNTB) = 50). The estimate of the efficacy of amitriptyline and control agents on a continuous outcome revealed an effect size which also significantly favoured amitriptyline (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD) 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.23). Whilst these differences are statistically significant, their clinical significance is less clear. When the efficacy analysis was stratified by drug class, no difference in outcome emerged between amitriptyline and either tricyclic or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor comparators. The dropout rate in patients taking amitriptyline and control agents was similar; however, the estimate of the proportion of patients who experienced side-effects significantly favoured control agents in comparison with amitriptyline (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.74). When the tolerability analysis was stratified by drug class, the dropout rate in patients taking amitriptyline and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors significantly favoured the latter (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95, number needed to treat to harm (NNTH) = 40). When the responder analysis was stratified by study setting amitriptyline was more effective than control antidepressants in inpatients (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.42, NNTB = 24), but not in outpatients (OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.88 to 1.17, NNTB = 200).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This present systematic review indicates that amitriptyline is at least as efficacious as other tricyclics or newer compounds. However, the burden of side-effects in patients receiving it was greater. In comparison with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors amitriptyline was less well tolerated, and although counterbalanced by a higher proportion of responders, the difference was not statistically significant.

Relationship between depression severity entry criteria and antidepressant clinical trial outcomes

BACKGROUND

We assessed whether increasing the minimum prerandomization Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score to enrich the severity of the depressed sample affects antidepressant trial outcome.

METHODS

Using the Food and Drug Administration Summary Basis of Approval reports, we examined outcome data from 51 clinical trials (11,270 depressed patients) evaluating 10 investigational antidepressants.

RESULTS

Using four categories of trials with increasing minimum HAM-D entry trial criteria, we found no statistically significant relationship between prerandomization categories and trial outcome overall. Although there were minor differences in trial outcome among the three categories with the lowest entry criteria (mean 49%, range, 44.4%-50.0%), the antidepressant trials requiring the highest prerandomization HAM-D score (> or = 20 HAM-D 17) had the lowest frequency of positive outcomes (20%), chi(2) = 4.04, df =1, p = .04. Paradoxically, high entry criteria requirements failed to increase reliably actual mean total prerandomization HAM-D scores, although mean total prerandomization HAM-D scores and use of flexible dosing were associated with higher rates of positive outcome. A greater placebo response was seen in trials requiring higher prerandomization depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, requiring higher prerandomization depressive symptoms was not associated with an increased rate of favorable outcomes among these 51 antidepressant trials.

Early onset of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant action: systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are often described as having a delayed onset of effect in the treatment of depression. However, some trials have reported clinical improvement as early as the first week of treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To test the alternative hypotheses of delayed vs early onset of antidepressant action with SSRIs in patients with unipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

Trials identified by searching CENTRAL, The Cochrane Collaboration database of controlled trials (2005), and the reference lists of identified trials and other systematic reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials of SSRIs vs placebo for the treatment of unipolar depression in adults that reported outcomes for at least 2 time points in the first 4 weeks of treatment (50 trials from >500 citations identified). Trials were excluded if limited to participants older than 65 years or specific comorbidities.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted on trial design, participant characteristics, and outcomes by a single reviewer.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Pooled estimates of treatment effect on depressive symptom rating scales were calculated for weeks 1 through 6 of treatment. In the primary analysis, the pattern of response seen was tested against alternative models of onset of response. The primary analysis incorporated data from 28 randomized controlled trials (n=5872). A model of early treatment response best fit the experimental data. Treatment with SSRIs rather than placebo was associated with clinical improvement by the end of the first week of use. A secondary analysis indicated an increased chance of achieving a 50% reduction in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores by 1 week (relative risk, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-2.25) with SSRI treatment compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with SSRIs is associated with symptomatic improvement in depression by the end of the first week of use, and the improvement continues at a decreasing rate for at least 6 weeks.

Literacy education as treatment for depression in patients with limited literacy and depression: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Individuals with limited literacy and those with depression share many characteristics, including low self-esteem, feelings of worthlessness, and shame.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether literacy education, provided along with standard depression treatment to adults with depression and limited literacy, would result in greater improvement in depression than would standard depression treatment alone.

DESIGN

Randomized clinical trial with patients assigned either to an intervention group that received standard depression treatment plus literacy education, or a control group that received only standard depression treatment.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventy adult patients of a community health center who tested positive for depression using the 9-question Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and had limited literacy based on the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM).

MEASUREMENTS

Depression severity was assessed with PHQ-9 scores at baseline and at 3 follow-up evaluations that took place up to 1 year after study enrollment. Changes in PHQ-9 scores between baseline and follow-up evaluations were compared between the intervention and control groups.

RESULTS

The median PHQ-9 scores were similar in both the intervention and control groups at baseline (12.5 and 14, respectively). Nine-question Patient Health Questionnaire scores improved in both groups, but the improvement was significantly larger in the intervention group. The final follow-up PHQ-9 scores declined to 6 in the intervention group but only to 10 in the control group.

CONCLUSIONS

There may be benefit to assessing the literacy skills of patients who are depressed, and recommending that patients with both depression and limited literacy consider enrolling in adult education classes as an adjuvant treatment for depression.

Imputing missing standard deviations in meta-analyses can provide accurate results

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Many reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) fail to provide standard deviations (SDs) of their continuous outcome measures. Some meta-analysts substitute them by those reported in other studies, either from another meta-analysis or from other studies in the same meta-analysis. But the validity of such practices has never been empirically examined.

METHODS

We compared the actual standardized mean difference (SMD) of individual RCTs and the meta-analytically pooled SMD of all RCTs against those based on the above-mentioned two imputation methods in two meta-analyses of antidepressants.

RESULTS

Two meta-analyses included 39 RCTs of fluoxetine (n = 3,681) and 25 RCTs of amitriptyline (n = 1,832), which had actually reported means and SDs of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. According to either of the two proposed imputation methods, the agreement between actual SMDs and imputed SMDs for individual RCTs was very good with ANOVA intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.61 and 0.97. The agreement between the actual pooled SMD and the imputed one was even better, with minimal differences in both their point estimates and 95% confidence intervals.

CONCLUSION

For a systematic review where some of the identified trials do not report SDs, it appears safe to borrow SDs from other studies.

Bias resulting from the use of ‘assay sensitivity’ as an inclusion criterion for meta-analysis

Assay sensitivity has been proposed as a criterion for including psychiatric clinical outcome studies in meta-analyses. The authors assess the performance of assay sensitivity as a method for determining study appropriateness for meta-analysis by calculating expected standard drug vs placebo effect sizes for various combinations of high quality and flawed studies. In the absence of flawed studies, expected effect sizes are close to unbiased only when sample sizes are very large. In the presence of flawed studies, expected effect sizes tend to be substantially biased except under simultaneous conditions of high power, a large proportion of flawed studies, and a population standard vs placebo effect size of flawed studies considerably lower than that of high quality studies. The authors conclude that this method is not robust and can lead to serious bias. Unless it can be shown that specific conditions hold, assay sensitivity should not be used to make quality judgments of studies.

Efficacy and tolerability of tricyclic antidepressants and SSRIs compared with placebo for treatment of depression in primary care: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Depression is common in primary care. There are no systematic reviews of depression treatment comparing antidepressants with placebo; hence, we do not know whether these medications are effective in primary care.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group register of controlled trials, MEDLINE, International Pharmaceutical abstracts, PsycINFO, and EMBASE. Abstracts of potential studies were reviewed independently by 2 authors. Studies needed to include randomized controlled trials of either a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), or both, and placebo in a primary care setting. The data and quality of the studies were extracted and assessed by 2 authors blind to the other's choice. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. The main outcome measures were the standardized mean difference and weighted mean difference of the final mean depression scores, the relative risk of improvement, and the number withdrawing because of side effects. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 4.2.2.

RESULTS

There were 10 studies in which TCAs were compared with placebo, 3 in which SSRIs were compared with placebo, and 2 with both compared with placebo. One half of the studies were of low methodological quality, and nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6 to 8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed a relative risk of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.12-1.42) for improvement with TCAs compared with placebo; For SSRIs, relative risk was 1.37 (95% CI, 1.21-1.55). Most patients, 56% to 60%, responded well to active treatment compared with 42% to 47% for placebo. The number needed to treat for TCAs was about 4, and for SSRIs it was 6. The numbers needed to harm (for withdrawal caused by side effects) ranged from 5 to 11 for TCAs and 21 to 94 for SSRIs. Low-dose (100 mg or 75 mg) as well as high-dose TCAs were effective.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review is the first comparing antidepressants with placebo for treatment of depression in primary care. Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective. This review is also the first to show that low-dose TCAs are effective in primary care. Prescribing antidepressants in primary care is a more effective clinical activity than prescribing placebo.

Animal models of depression: navigating through the clinical fog

Animal models of human disease have proven of considerable value in elucidating basic pathophysiological mechanisms and in developing novel treatments. However, modelling human mental disorders in experimental animals is fraught with difficulties. Depression models generally lack both clinical and scientific credibility and have, thus far, failed to inform treatment strategies previously acquired through serendipity. The complexity and heterogeneity of the clinical states labelled 'depression' dictate that we continue to work with a crude and uninformative taxonomy within which 'core' clinical and pathophysiological features of depression are not clearly identified. Consequently, much of the neuroscience of animal modelling is framed around physiological and neurobiological phenomena that may be of relevance to only a minority of patients. Additionally, inferring pathophysiology from apparent treatment responses overestimates the efficacy of existing treatments and tends to ignore reliable demonstrations of the 'antidepressant effects' of non-pharmacological interventions. Whilst animal modelling remains a potentially important approach towards understanding neurobiological mechanisms in depression, we need to address the poverty of reliable clinical science that should inform model development.

Reducing exposure of clinical research subjects to placebo treatments

The ethics of pill placebo and placebo psychotherapy conditions in clinical research are controversial. Even when not life threatening, mental disorders dramatically diminish the quality of life. Pill-placebo conditions in drug treatment research have been justified on the grounds that a placebo versus standard drug comparison is necessary to test the quality of the study, viz., the assay sensitivity method. The assay sensitivity method of judging study quality, however, results in misclassification of the quality of some studies, leading to bias in effect size estimation in the context of meta-analyses. This bias is of particular concern in relation to studies comparing psychotherapies to psychotropic drugs, which are conducted outside of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) context. In cases in which control conditions may be justified on grounds other than as essential elements of an assay sensitivity test, statistical methods to reduce the number of study participants exposed to placebo should be strongly considered. Of the methods available, group sequential methods are the most widely used. Group sequential methods involve successive looks at accumulating data, with rules for terminating a trial (or an arm of a trial) early if results are strong enough.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and venlafaxine use in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder: a systematic review of published randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

This review critiques published randomized placebo-controlled trials pertaining to the efficacy and safety of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and venlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents.

METHOD

Medline was searched for articles meeting defined inclusion criteria. The following key terms were used: depressive disorders, antidepressive agents, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, citalopram, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine, child, and adolescent.

RESULTS

Six articles met inclusion criteria. Only 2 studies claim efficacy by significant results in primary outcomes; both have since been contested in further analysis. Not one study adequately examines safety, particularly with respect to whether a link exists between antidepressant use and induction of suicidal ideation or attempts.

CONCLUSION

Published studies on SSRI or venlafaxine use in children and adolescents are inconclusive with respect to safety and efficacy, owing to inappropriate claims of efficacy, lack of improvement in global functioning scores, nonstandardized data collection regarding adverse effects, exclusion of suicidal subjects in the recruitment process, grouping of children and adolescents together, small sample sizes, conflict of interest posed by pharmaceutical company sponsorship, and publishing bias. Future investigators should consider these factors when developing study designs.

Psychogenic movement disorders: diagnosis and management

Psychogenic movement disorders (PMDs) are best defined as hyper- or hypo-kinetic movement disorders, often associated with gait disorders, that cannot be directly attributed to a lesion or dysfunction of the nervous system and which are derived in most cases from psychological or psychiatric causes. There are a variety of PMDs including tremor, dystonia, parkinsonism, gait disorders and, even, unusual forms including paroxysmal dyskinesias. As has been recognised in the recent literature, PMDs cannot be strictly classified into clearly defined psychiatric disorders such as somatoform, dissociative or conversion disorders. In this review, we discuss the diagnosis of various PMDs (including hyper- and hypo-kinetic disorders; and current evidence for underlying comorbid disorders) and the current therapeutic approach to them. The therapy of PMDs is not well established, is very challenging to the clinician, and a better outcome can be achieved in the setting of a team approach involving movement disorders specialists, psychiatrists and therapists who specialise in cognitive-behavioural techniques. Current pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to treatment focus on therapy of underlying comorbid psychiatric and psychological issues, although compliance is a major concern.

Diagnosing and treating depression in general hospitals

Depressive conditions are common in general hospital patients but if recognized can be treated by both pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic means. Although hospital doctors cannot be expected to be masters of the intricacies of treating depression, they can make the diagnosis and prescribe first-line antidepressants to the benefit of most cases.

Pharmacological treatment of social anxiety disorder: a meta-analysis

Placebo-controlled trials have evaluated the efficacy of several medications in the treatment of social anxiety disorder but information regarding their relative efficacy is lacking. We compared the efficacy of medications systematically studied for the treatment of social anxiety disorder using meta-analytic techniques. The methodology included a database search of articles published between January 1980 and June 2001 and manual searches of bibliographies in published manuscripts. Trials were included if they reported outcome data on the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) or a categorical measure of responder status. Data were extracted independently by two authors. The Q statistic was used to assess homogeneity across trials. All analyses were conducted using intent-to-treat data. There was substantial heterogeneity across trials. The medications with largest effect sizes were phenelzine [effect size, 1.02; 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 0.52-1.52], clonazepam (effect size, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.49-1.45), gabapentin (effect size, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.29-1.27), brofaromine (effect size, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.38-0.94), and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; effect size, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.81). There were no statistically significant differences between medications or medication groups. However, formal methods of interim monitoring adapted for meta-analyses suggested strongest evidence of efficacy for SSRIs and brofaromine. Several medications are efficacious for the treatment of social anxiety disorder. The stability of the SSRI effect size estimate in conjunction with other evidence for safety and tolerability and their ability to treat comorbid conditions supports the use of SSRIs as the first-line treatment. Direct comparisons of SSRIs vs. other promising medications deserve consideration.

Reducing the burden of affective disorders: is evidence-based health care affordable?

BACKGROUND

Affective disorders remain the leading cause of disability burden despite the availability of efficacious treatment. A wider dissemination of evidence-based health care is likely to impact this burden, however the affordability of such a strategy at the population level is unknown. This study calculated the cost-effectiveness of evidence-based health care for depression, dysthymia and bipolar disorder in the Australian population, and determined whether it was affordable, based on current mental health-related expenditure and outcomes for these disorders.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness was expressed in costs per years lived with disability (YLDs) averted, a population health summary measure of disability burden. Data from the Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing, in conjunction with published randomized trials and direct cost estimates, were used to estimate the 1-year costs and YLDs averted by current health care services, and costs and outcomes for an optimal strategy of evidence-based health care.

RESULTS

Current direct mental health-related health care costs for affective disorders in Australia were 615 million dollars (1997-98 Australian dollars). This treatment averted just under 30,000 YLDs giving a cost-effectiveness ratio of 20,633 dollars per YLD. Outcome could be increased by nearly 50% at similar cost with implementation of an evidence-based package of optimal treatment, halving the cost-effectiveness ratio to 10,737 dollars per YLD.

LIMITATIONS

The method to estimate YLDs averted from the literature requires replication. The costs of implementing evidence-based health care have not been estimated.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based health care for affective disorders should be encouraged on both efficacy and efficiency grounds.

Meta-analysis: A 12-step program

Meta-analysis is a technique for combining the results of many studies in a rigorous and systematic manner, to allow us to better assess prevalence rates for different types of gambling and determine which interventions have the best evidence regarding their effectiveness and efficacy. Meta-analysis consists of (a) a comprehensive search for all available evidence; (b) the use of applying explicit criteria for determining which articles to include; (c) determination of an effect size for each study; and (d) the pooling of effect sizes across studies to end up with a global estimate of the prevalence or the effectiveness of a treatment. This paper begins with a discussion of why meta-analyses are useful, followed by a 12-step program for conducting a meta-analysis. This program can be used both by people planning to do such an analysis, as well as by readers of a meta-analysis, to evaluate how well it was carried out.