Initial Severity and Antidepressant Benefits: A Meta-Analysis of Data Submitted to the Food and Drug Administration
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 26 February 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLoS Medicine
- Vol. 5 (2) , e45
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050045
Abstract
Meta-analyses of antidepressant medications have reported only modest benefits over placebo treatment, and when unpublished trial data are included, the benefit falls below accepted criteria for clinical significance. Yet, the efficacy of the antidepressants may also depend on the severity of initial depression scores. The purpose of this analysis is to establish the relation of baseline severity and antidepressant efficacy using a relevant dataset of published and unpublished clinical trials. We obtained data on all clinical trials submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the licensing of the four new-generation antidepressants for which full datasets were available. We then used meta-analytic techniques to assess linear and quadratic effects of initial severity on improvement scores for drug and placebo groups and on drug–placebo difference scores. Drug–placebo differences increased as a function of initial severity, rising from virtually no difference at moderate levels of initial depression to a relatively small difference for patients with very severe depression, reaching conventional criteria for clinical significance only for patients at the upper end of the very severely depressed category. Meta-regression analyses indicated that the relation of baseline severity and improvement was curvilinear in drug groups and showed a strong, negative linear component in placebo groups. Drug–placebo differences in antidepressant efficacy increase as a function of baseline severity, but are relatively small even for severely depressed patients. The relationship between initial severity and antidepressant efficacy is attributable to decreased responsiveness to placebo among very severely depressed patients, rather than to increased responsiveness to medication.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- Imputing variance estimates do not alter the conclusions of a meta-analysis with continuous outcomes: a case study of changes in renal function after living kidney donationJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2007
- The Power of Statistical Tests for Moderators in Meta-Analysis.Psychological Methods, 2004
- Measuring inconsistency in meta-analysesBMJ, 2003
- Evidence b(i)ased medicine--selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applicationsBMJ, 2003
- Meta-Analysis of Raw Mean Differences.Psychological Methods, 2003
- Clinical Evaluation of VenlafaxineJournal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 1996
- A Double-Blind Comparison of Paroxetine and Placebo in the Treatment of Depressed OutpatientsInternational Clinical Psychopharmacology, 1992
- Psychiatric care of refugees exposed to organized violence.Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 1989
- Paroxetine in the treatment of depression: a comparison with imipramine and placeboActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 1989
- A double‐blind comparison of paroxetine and placebo in the treatment of depressed patients in a psychiatric outpatient clinicActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 1989