Orphan comparisons and indirect meta-analysis: a case study on antidepressant efficacy in dysthymia comparing tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors by using general linear models - PubMed (original) (raw)
Comparative Study
Orphan comparisons and indirect meta-analysis: a case study on antidepressant efficacy in dysthymia comparing tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors by using general linear models
Javier Ballesteros. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2005 Apr.
Abstract
Direct comparisons of the efficacy of competing interventions are not always available in the literature. This situation leads to the presence of clinically relevant "orphan comparisons" of therapeutic interventions which have never been compared head-to-head. To overcome this limitation, simple methods for indirect meta-analysis have been suggested. Nevertheless, their results are prone to bias when more than 1 indirect comparison is tested because of the likely duplication of data for some comparisons. In contrast, general linear models can be used to extend simple indirect meta-analysis beyond 1 indirect comparison by fitting to incomplete data using maximum likelihood within the framework of multitreatment comparisons. This study presents a tutorial application of general linear models to the comparative efficacy of several antidepressants in dysthymia (tricyclic antidepressants, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and monoamine oxidase inhibitors. Working with previously published data comparing the efficacy of antidepressants with placebo, it is shown that tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors present similar efficacy (odds ratio = 1.19, P = 0.37; relative risk = 1.10, P = 0.24; risk difference = 0.03, P = 0.53), whereas monoamine oxidase inhibitors outperform both tricyclic antidepressants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, at least for some effect scales (odds ratio = 1.57, P = 0.05; relative risk = 1.25, P = 0.05; risk difference = 0.09, P = 0.08). This finding, which is an instance of a relevant orphan comparison and could not be obtained otherwise, could motivate the conduct of clinical trials or focused systematic reviews to support or refute its importance through appropriate head-to-head comparisons.
Similar articles
- Benefits and risks of pharmacotherapy for dysthymia: a systematic appraisal of the evidence.
De Lima MS, Hotopf M. De Lima MS, et al. Drug Saf. 2003;26(1):55-64. doi: 10.2165/00002018-200326010-00006. Drug Saf. 2003. PMID: 12495364 Review. - The long-term outcome of dysthymia in private practice: clinical features, temperament, and the art of management.
Haykal RF, Akiskal HS. Haykal RF, et al. J Clin Psychiatry. 1999 Aug;60(8):508-18. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v60n0802. J Clin Psychiatry. 1999. PMID: 10485632 Clinical Trial. - Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants in the acute treatment of chronic depression and dysthymia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
von Wolff A, Hölzel LP, Westphal A, Härter M, Kriston L. von Wolff A, et al. J Affect Disord. 2013 Jan 10;144(1-2):7-15. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.06.007. Epub 2012 Sep 7. J Affect Disord. 2013. PMID: 22963896 Review. - Influence of an adjuvant antidepressant on the efficacy of electroconvulsive therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Pluijms EM, Kamperman AM, Hoogendijk WJ, Birkenhäger TK, van den Broek WW. Pluijms EM, et al. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2021 Apr;55(4):366-380. doi: 10.1177/0004867420952543. Epub 2020 Sep 8. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2021. PMID: 32900217 Free PMC article. - Antidepressants and posttraumatic stress disorder.
Meek JK, Kablinger A. Meek JK, et al. J La State Med Soc. 1998 Oct;150(10):487-9. J La State Med Soc. 1998. PMID: 9805875 Review.
Cited by
- The Impact of Excluding Trials from Network Meta-Analyses - An Empirical Study.
Zhang J, Yuan Y, Chu H. Zhang J, et al. PLoS One. 2016 Dec 7;11(12):e0165889. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165889. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27926924 Free PMC article. - Sensitivity to Excluding Treatments in Network Meta-analysis.
Lin L, Chu H, Hodges JS. Lin L, et al. Epidemiology. 2016 Jul;27(4):562-9. doi: 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000482. Epidemiology. 2016. PMID: 27007642 Free PMC article. - Evaluation of inconsistency in networks of interventions.
Veroniki AA, Vasiliadis HS, Higgins JP, Salanti G. Veroniki AA, et al. Int J Epidemiol. 2013 Feb;42(1):332-45. doi: 10.1093/ije/dys222. Int J Epidemiol. 2013. PMID: 23508418 Free PMC article. - Estrogen-receptor status and outcomes of modern chemotherapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer.
Berry DA, Cirrincione C, Henderson IC, Citron ML, Budman DR, Goldstein LJ, Martino S, Perez EA, Muss HB, Norton L, Hudis C, Winer EP. Berry DA, et al. JAMA. 2006 Apr 12;295(14):1658-67. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.14.1658. JAMA. 2006. PMID: 16609087 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources