John Geddes

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Conventional meta-analyses have shown inconsistent results for efficacy of second-generation antidepressants. We therefore did a multiple-treatments meta-analysis, which accounts for both direct and indirect comparisons, to assess the effects of 12 new-generation antidepressants on major depression. METHODS We systematically reviewed 117 randomised controlled trials (25 928 participants) from 1991 up to Nov 30, 2007, which compared any of the following antidepressants at therapeutic dose range for the acute treatment of unipolar major depression in adults: bupropion, citalopram, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, milnacipran, mirtazapine, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine. The main outcomes were the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Analysis was done on an intention-to-treat basis. FINDINGS Mirtazapine, escitalopram, venlafaxine, and sertraline were significantly more efficacious than duloxetine (odds ratios [OR] 1.39, 1.33, 1.30 and 1.27, respectively), fluoxetine (1.37, 1.32, 1.28, and 1.25, respectively), fluvoxamine (1.41, 1.35, 1.30, and 1.27, respectively), paroxetine (1.35, 1.30, 1.27, and 1.22, respectively), and reboxetine (2.03, 1.95, 1.89, and 1.85, respectively). Reboxetine was significantly less efficacious than all the other antidepressants tested. Escitalopram and sertraline showed the best profile of acceptability, leading to significantly fewer discontinuations than did duloxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, reboxetine, and venlafaxine. INTERPRETATION Clinically important differences exist between commonly prescribed antidepressants for both efficacy and acceptability in favour of escitalopram and sertraline. Sertraline might be the best choice when starting treatment for moderate to severe major depression in adults because it has the most favourable balance between benefits, acceptability, and acquisition cost.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 15 antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The question of which antipsychotic drug should be preferred for the treatment of schizophrenia is controversial, and conventional pairwise meta-analyses cannot provide a hierarchy based on the randomised evidence. We aimed to integrate the available evidence to create hierarchies of the comparative efficacy, risk of all-cause discontinuation, and major side-effects of antipsychotic drugs. METHODS We did a Bayesian-framework, multiple-treatments meta-analysis (which uses both direct and indirect comparisons) of randomised controlled trials to compare 15 antipsychotic drugs and placebo in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Groups specialised register, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for reports published up to Sept 1, 2012. Search results were supplemented by reports from the US Food and Drug Administration website and by data requested from pharmaceutical companies. Blinded, randomised controlled trials of patients with schizophrenia or related disorders were eligible. We excluded trials done in patients with predominant negative symptoms, concomitant medical illness, or treatment resistance, and those done in stable patients. Data for seven outcomes were independently extracted by two reviewers. The primary outcome was efficacy, as measured by mean overall change in symptoms. We also examined all-cause discontinuation, weight gain, extrapyramidal side-effects, prolactin increase, QTc prolongation, and sedation. FINDINGS We identified 212 suitable trials, with data for 43 049 participants. All drugs were significantly more effective than placebo. The standardised mean differences with 95% credible intervals were: clozapine 0·88, 0·73-1·03; amisulpride 0·66, 0·53-0·78; olanzapine 0·59, 0·53-0·65; risperidone 0·56, 0·50-0·63; paliperidone 0·50, 0·39-0·60; zotepine 0·49, 0·31-0·66; haloperidol 0·45, 0·39-0·51; quetiapine 0·44, 0·35-0·52; aripiprazole 0·43, 0·34-0·52; sertindole 0·39, 0·26-0·52; ziprasidone 0·39, 0·30-0·49; chlorpromazine 0·38, 0·23-0·54; asenapine 0·38, 0·25-0·51; lurasidone 0·33, 0·21-0·45; and iloperidone 0·33, 0·22-0·43. Odds ratios compared with placebo for all-cause discontinuation ranged from 0·43 for the best drug (amisulpride) to 0·80 for the worst drug (haloperidol); for extrapyramidal side-effects 0·30 (clozapine) to 4·76 (haloperidol); and for sedation 1·42 (amisulpride) to 8·82 (clozapine). Standardised mean differences compared with placebo for weight gain varied from -0·09 for the best drug (haloperidol) to -0·74 for the worst drug (olanzapine), for prolactin increase 0·22 (aripiprazole) to -1·30 (paliperidone), and for QTc prolongation 0·10 (lurasidone) to -0·90 (sertindole). Efficacy outcomes did not change substantially after removal of placebo or haloperidol groups, or when dose, percentage of withdrawals, extent of blinding, pharmaceutical industry sponsorship, study duration, chronicity, and year of publication were accounted for in meta-regressions and sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION Antipsychotics differed substantially in side-effects, and small but robust differences were seen in efficacy. Our findings challenge the straightforward classification of antipsychotics into first-generation and second-generation groupings. Rather, hierarchies in the different domains should help clinicians to adapt the choice of antipsychotic drug to the needs of individual patients. These findings should be considered by mental health policy makers and in the revision of clinical practice guidelines. FUNDING None.

Atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: systematic overview and meta-regression analysis

Abstract Objective: To develop an evidence base for recommendations on the use of atypical antipsychotics for patients with schizophrenia. Design: Systematic overview and meta-regression analyses of randomised controlled trials, as a basis for formal development of guidelines. Subjects: 12 649 patients in 52 randomised trials comparing atypical antipsychotics (amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and sertindole) with conventional antipsychotics (usually haloperidol or chlorpromazine) or alternative atypical antipsychotics. Main outcome measures: Overall symptom scores. Rate of drop out (as a proxy for tolerability) and of side effects, notably extrapyramidal side effects. Results: For both symptom reduction and drop out, there was substantial heterogeneity between the results of trials, including those evaluating the same atypical antipsychotic and comparator drugs. Meta-regression suggested that dose of conventional antipsychotic explained the heterogeneity. When the dose was ≤12 mg/day of haloperidol (or equivalent), atypical antipsychotics had no benefits in terms of efficacy or overall tolerability, but they still caused fewer extrapyramidal side effects. Conclusions: There is no clear evidence that atypical antipsychotics are more effective or are better tolerated than conventional antipsychotics. Conventional antipsychotics should usually be used in the initial treatment of an episode of schizophrenia unless the patient has previously not responded to these drugs or has unacceptable extrapyramidal side effects.

Efficacy and safety of electroconvulsive therapy in depressive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Summary Background We aimed to review published work for the efficacy and safety of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) with simulated ECT, ECT versus pharmacotherapy, and different forms of ECT for patients with depressive illness. Methods We designed a systematic overview and metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. We obtained data from the Cochrane Collaboration Depressive Anxiety and Neurosis and Schizophrenia Group Controlled trial registers, Cochrane Controlled Trials register, Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and SIGLE, reference lists, and specialist textbooks. Our main outcome measures were depressive symptoms, measures of cognitive function, and mortality. Findings Meta-analysis of data of short-term efficacy from randomised controlled trials was possible. Real ECT was significantly more effective than simulated ECT (six trials, 256 patients, standardised effect size [SES] ‐0·91, 95% CI ‐1·27 to ‐0·54). Treatment with ECT was significantly more effective than pharmacotherapy (18 trials, 1144 participants, SES ‐0·80, 95% CI ‐1·29 to ‐0·29). Bilateral ECT was more effective than unipolar ECT (22 trials, 1408 participants, SES ‐0·32, 95% CI ‐0·46 to ‐0·19). Interpretation ECT is an effective short-term treatment for depression, and is probably more effective than drug therapy. Bilateral ECT is moderately more effective than unilateral ECT, and high dose ECT is more effective than low dose.BACKGROUND We aimed to review published work for the efficacy and safety of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) with simulated ECT, ECT versus pharmacotherapy, and different forms of ECT for patients with depressive illness. METHODS We designed a systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. We obtained data from the Cochrane Collaboration Depressive Anxiety and Neurosis and Schizophrenia Group Controlled trial registers, Cochrane Controlled Trials register, Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and SIGLE, reference lists, and specialist textbooks. Our main outcome measures were depressive symptoms, measures of cognitive function, and mortality. FINDINGS Meta-analysis of data of short-term efficacy from randomised controlled trials was possible. Real ECT was significantly more effective than simulated ECT (six trials, 256 patients, standardised effect size [SES] -0.91, 95% CI -1.27 to -0.54). Treatment with ECT was significantly more effective than pharmacotherapy (18 trials, 1144 participants, SES -0.80, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.29). Bilateral ECT was more effective than unipolar ECT (22 trials, 1408 participants, SES -0.32, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.19). INTERPRETATION ECT is an effective short-term treatment for depression, and is probably more effective than drug therapy. Bilateral ECT is moderately more effective than unilateral ECT, and high dose ECT is more effective than low dose.

Evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants: A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines

A revision of the 2008 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken in order to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in September 2012. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were then revised after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided which identifies the quality of evidence upon which the recommendations are made. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse and stopping treatment. Significant changes since the last guidelines were published in 2008 include the availability of new antidepressant treatment options, improved evidence supporting certain augmentation strategies (drug and non-drug), management of potential long-term side effects, updated guidance for prescribing in elderly and adolescent populations and updated guidance for optimal prescribing. Suggestions for future research priorities are also made.

New Oxford textbook of psychiatry

PART 1 - THE SUBJECT MATTER OF AND APPROACH TO PSYCHIATRY PART 2 - THE SCIENTIFIC BASIS OF PSYCHIATRIC AETIOLOGY PART 3 - PSYCHODYNAMIC CONTRIBUTIONS TO PSYCHIATRY PART 4 - CLINICAL SYNDROMES OF ADULT PSYCHIATRY PART 5 - PSYCHIATRY AND MEDICINE PART 6 - TREATMENT METHODS IN PSYCHIATRY PART 7 - SOCIAL PSYCHIATRY AND SERVICE PROVISION PART 8 - THE PSYCHIATRY OF OLD AGE PART 9 - CHILD AND ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY PART 10 - INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY PART 11 - FORENSIC PSYCHIATRY

Evidence-based guidelines for treating bipolar disorder: Revised third edition recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

The British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines specify the scope and targets of treatment for bipolar disorder. The third version is based explicitly on the available evidence and presented, like previous Clinical Practice Guidelines, as recommendations to aid clinical decision making for practitioners: it may also serve as a source of information for patients and carers, and assist audit. The recommendations are presented together with a more detailed review of the corresponding evidence. A consensus meeting, involving experts in bipolar disorder and its treatment, reviewed key areas and considered the strength of evidence and clinical implications. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from these participants. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials and, where available, observational studies employing quasi-experimental designs was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations has been described using the GRADE approach. The guidelines cover the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, clinical management, and strategies for the use of medicines in short-term treatment of episodes, relapse prevention and stopping treatment. The use of medication is integrated with a coherent approach to psychoeducation and behaviour change.

Schizophrenia and Violence: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Seena Fazel and colleagues investigate the association between schizophrenia and other psychoses and violence and violent offending, and show that the increased risk appears to be partly mediated by substance abuse comorbidity.

Structural Neuroimaging Studies in Major Depressive Disorder: Meta-analysis and Comparison With Bipolar Disorder

CONTEXT Although differences in clinical characteristics exist between major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD), consistent structural brain abnormalities that distinguish the disorders have not been identified. OBJECTIVES To investigate structural brain changes in MDD using meta-analysis of primary studies; assess the effects of medication, demographic, and clinical variables; and compare the findings with those of a meta-analysis of studies on BD. DATA SOURCES The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies from January 1, 1980, to February 2, 2010. STUDY SELECTION Two hundred twenty-five studies that used magnetic resonance imaging or x-ray computed tomography to compare brain structure in patients with MDD with that of controls were included in an online database, and 143 that measured common brain structures were selected for meta-analysis. DATA EXTRACTION Twenty-five variables, including demographic and clinical data, were extracted from each study, when available. For the meta-analysis, mean structure size and standard deviation were extracted for continuous variables, and the proportion of patients and controls with an abnormality in brain structure was extracted for categorical variables. DATA SYNTHESIS Compared with the structure of a healthy brain, MDD was associated with lateral ventricle enlargement; larger cerebrospinal fluid volume; and smaller volumes of the basal ganglia, thalamus, hippocampus, frontal lobe, orbitofrontal cortex, and gyrus rectus. Patients during depressive episodes had significantly smaller hippocampal volume than patients during remission. Compared with BD patients, those with MDD had reduced rates of deep white matter hyperintensities, increased corpus callosum cross-sectional area, and smaller hippocampus and basal ganglia. Both disorders were associated with increased lateral ventricle volume and increased rates of subcortical gray matter hyperintensities compared with healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS The meta-analyses revealed structural brain abnormalities in MDD that are distinct from those observed in BD. These findings may aid investigators attempting to discriminate mood disorders using structural magnetic resonance imaging data.

The Prevalence of Mental Disorders among the Homeless in Western Countries: Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis

Background There are well over a million homeless people in Western Europe and North America, but reliable estimates of the prevalence of major mental disorders among this population are lacking. We undertook a systematic review of surveys of such disorders in homeless people. Methods and Findings We searched for surveys of the prevalence of psychotic illness, major depression, alcohol and drug dependence, and personality disorder that were based on interviews of samples of unselected homeless people. We searched bibliographic indexes, scanned reference lists, and corresponded with authors. We explored potential sources of any observed heterogeneity in the estimates by meta-regression analysis, including geographical region, sample size, and diagnostic method. Twenty-nine eligible surveys provided estimates obtained from 5,684 homeless individuals from seven countries. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in prevalence estimates for mental disorders among the studies (all Cochrans χ2 significant at p < 0.001 and all I 2 > 85%). The most common mental disorders were alcohol dependence, which ranged from 8.1% to 58.5%, and drug dependence, which ranged from 4.5% to 54.2%. For psychotic illness, the prevalence ranged from 2.8% to 42.3%, with similar findings for major depression. The prevalence of alcohol dependence was found to have increased over recent decades. Conclusions Homeless people in Western countries are substantially more likely to have alcohol and drug dependence than the age-matched general population in those countries, and the prevalences of psychotic illnesses and personality disorders are higher. Models of psychiatric and social care that can best meet these mental health needs requires further investigation.