scholarly journals Efficacy of ketamine in the rapid treatment of major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

2016 ◽  
Vol Volume 12 ◽  
pp. 2859-2867 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Han ◽  
Jianjun Chen ◽  
Dezhi Zou ◽  
Peng Zheng ◽  
Qi Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo ◽  
Rapid Treatment

Examining the Evidence on Augmentation with Atypical Antipsychotics

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (S22) ◽  
pp. 10-12
Keyword(s):  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Atypical Antipsychotics ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Placebo

There is mounting evidence to suggest that the efficacy of all available antidepressants when used as monotherapy to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) is, at best, modest. For example, a meta-analysis of all double-blind placebo-controlled studies of antidepressants published since 1980 revealed response rates of 53% for antidepressants versus 36% for placebo (difference in response rate of 16.8%) (Slide 1). To make matters worse, if one is to assume that “negative trials” (ie, trials which do not demonstrate the superiority of a drug over placebo) are less likely to be published than “positive trials” (trials which demonstrate the superiority of a drug versus placebo), it is quite possible that the margin of efficacy of antidepressants when compared to placebo is ≤16.8%. Thus, if one were to include all unpublished along with published double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants for MDD, this efficacy margin could be ≤10%.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document