Consistent superiority of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors over placebo in reducing depressed mood in patients with major depression

被引:141
作者
Hieronymus, F. [1 ]
Emilsson, J. F. [1 ]
Nilsson, S. [2 ]
Eriksson, E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Gothenburg, Sahlgrenska Acad, Dept Pharmacol, POB 432, SE-40530 Gothenburg, Sweden
[2] Chalmers Univ Technol, Inst Math Sci, S-41296 Gothenburg, Sweden
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
RATING-SCALE; INITIAL SEVERITY; ANTIDEPRESSANTS; TRIAL; SUBSCALES; BENEFITS; EFFICACY; INDUSTRY; RATERS; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1038/mp.2015.53
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
The recent questioning of the antidepressant effect of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is partly based on the observation that approximately half of company-sponsored trials have failed to reveal a significant difference between active drug and placebo. Most of these have applied the Hamilton depression rating scale to assess symptom severity, the sum score for its 17 items (HDRS-17-sum) serving as effect parameter. In this study, we examined whether the negative outcomes of many SSRI trials may be partly caused by the use of this frequently questioned measure of response. We undertook patient-level post-hoc analyses of 18 industry-sponsored placebo-controlled trials regarding paroxetine, citalopram, sertraline or fluoxetine, and including in total 6669 adults with major depression, the aim being to assess what the outcome would have been if the single item depressed mood (rated 0-4) had been used as a measure of efficacy. In total, 32 drug-placebo comparisons were reassessed. While 18 out of 32 comparisons (56%) failed to separate active drug from placebo at week 6 with respect to reduction in HDRS-17-sum, only 3 out of 32 comparisons (9%) were negative when depressed mood was used as an effect parameter (P < 0.001). The observation that 29 out of 32 comparisons detected an antidepressant signal from the tested SSRI suggests the effect of these drugs to be more consistent across trials than previously assumed. Further, the frequent use of the HDRS-17-sum as an effect parameter may have distorted the current view on the usefulness of SSRIs and hampered the development of novel antidepressants.
引用
收藏
页码:523 / 530
页数:8
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]   The Hamilton depression rating scale: Has the gold standard become a lead weight? [J].
Bagby, RM ;
Ryder, AG ;
Schuller, DR ;
Marshall, MB .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2004, 161 (12) :2163-2177
[2]   QUANTITATIVE RATING OF DEPRESSIVE STATES [J].
BECH, P ;
GRAM, LF ;
DEIN, E ;
JACOBSEN, O ;
VITGER, J ;
BOLWIG, TG .
ACTA PSYCHIATRICA SCANDINAVICA, 1975, 51 (03) :161-170
[3]   THE HAMILTON DEPRESSION SCALE - EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVITY USING LOGISTIC-MODELS [J].
BECH, P ;
ALLERUP, P ;
GRAM, LF ;
REISBY, N ;
ROSENBERG, R ;
JACOBSEN, O ;
NAGY, A .
ACTA PSYCHIATRICA SCANDINAVICA, 1981, 63 (03) :290-299
[4]  
CICCHETTI DV, 1983, ARCH GEN PSYCHIAT, V40, P987
[5]   Getting what you ask for: On the selectivity of depression rating scales [J].
Demyttenaere, K ;
De Fruyt, J .
PSYCHOTHERAPY AND PSYCHOSOMATICS, 2003, 72 (02) :61-70
[6]   Rating the raters - Assessing the quality of Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression clinical interviews in two industry-sponsored clinical drug trials [J].
Engelhardt, N ;
Feiger, AD ;
Cogger, KO ;
Sikich, D ;
DeBrota, DJ ;
Lipsitz, JD ;
Kobak, KA ;
Evans, KR ;
Potter, WZ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2006, 26 (01) :71-74
[7]   A critical examination of the sensitivity of unidimensional subscales derived from the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale to antidepressant drug effects [J].
Entsuah, R ;
Shaffer, M ;
Zhang, J .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH, 2002, 36 (06) :437-448
[8]   The responsiveness of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [J].
Faries, D ;
Herrera, J ;
Rayamajhi, J ;
DeBrota, D ;
Demitrack, M ;
Potter, WZ .
JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH, 2000, 34 (01) :3-10
[9]  
FERGUSON JM, 1987, INT J OBESITY, V11, P163
[10]  
Ferguson JM, 2001, J CLIN PSYCHIAT, V62, P22