Meta-analysis of the placebo response in antidepressant trials.

Division of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, University of Marburg, Germany.
Journal of Affective Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.71). 03/2009; 118(1-3):1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2009.01.029
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT 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.
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.
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.
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.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pharmaceutical companies incorporate different features into the trials for new drug applications (NDAs) to render them efficient, making use of their experience. The objective of this analysis was to examine the associations between outcome and features related to study design and clinical development experience in commercially sponsored clinical trials. We collected data of phase 2 and phase 3 trials of all the drugs that obtained approval for depression, schizophrenia, asthma, hypertension, and diabetes in Japan from 1970 to 2011. In total, 145 trials from 90 test drugs were eligible for our study. We calculated the effect size, the standard mean of differences between test drug and comparator therapeutic effects, as the objective variable for use in our analysis. A linear mixed effect model with nested and crossed random effects was used in the analysis including variety of therapeutic area, test drugs and clinical trials. The analysis showed that trial features including sample size, subjective endpoints and active comparator of the same mode of action were negatively associated with effect size. In addition, sponsors' domestic clinical development experience with similar drugs seemed to have a positive association, but prior development experience in foreign countries did not. The accumulation of skills and knowledge within sponsors, and accumulated experience in domestic professionals who implement clinical trials under study contracts with sponsors would be of great importance for yielding clear outcomes. This study provides additional evidence with respect to possible sizes and directions of the influence of study design features that must be considered when planning and implementing trials for new drug applications, and when retrospectively comparing outcomes from trials with different designs and environments.
    SpringerPlus 01/2014; 3:740. DOI:10.1186/2193-1801-3-740
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Somatoform disorders are characterised by chronic, medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS). Although different medications are part of treatment routines for people with somatoform disorders in clinics and private practices, there exists no systematic review or meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of these medications. We aimed to synthesise to improve optimal treatment decisions.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 11/2014; 11(11):CD010628. DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD010628.pub2 · 5.70 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examines the effect of amantadine on irritability in persons in the post-acute period after traumatic brain injury (TBI). 168 individuals > 6 months post-TBI with irritability were enrolled in a parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial receiving either amantadine 100mg twice daily or equivalent placebo for 60 days. Subjects were assessed at baseline and days 28 (primary end-point) and 60 of treatment using Observer-rated and Participant-rated Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-I) Most Problematic item (primary outcome), NPI Most Aberrant item, and NPI-I Distress Scores, as well as physician-rated Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale. Observer ratings between the two groups were not statistically significantly different at Day 28 or 60; however, Observers rated the majority in both groups as having improved at both intervals. Participant ratings for Day 60 demonstrated improvements in both groups with greater improvement in the amantadine group on NPI-I Most Problematic (p< .04) and NPI-I Distress (p< .04). These results were not significant with correction for multiple comparisons. CGI demonstrated greater improvement for amantadine than placebo group (p< .04). Adverse event occurrence did not differ between the two groups. While observers in both groups reported large improvements, significant group differences were not found for the primary outcome (observer ratings) at either day 28 or 60. This large placebo or non-specific effect may have masked detection of a treatment effect. The result of this study of Aamantadine 100 mg every morning and noon to reduce irritability was not positive from the Observer perspective, although there are indications of improvement may reduce irritability at day 60 from the perspective of persons with TBI and clinicians that may warrant further investigation.
    Journal of Neurotrauma 03/2015; DOI:10.1089/neu.2014.3803 · 3.97 Impact Factor


Available from
May 23, 2014