Solving the antidepressant efficacy question: effect sizes in major depressive disorder - PubMed (original) (raw)

Review

Solving the antidepressant efficacy question: effect sizes in major depressive disorder

Paul A Vöhringer et al. Clin Ther. 2011 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Numerous reviews and meta-analyses of the antidepressant literature in major depressive disorders (MDD), both acute and maintenance, have been published, some claiming that antidepressants are mostly ineffective and others that they are mostly effective, in either acute or maintenance treatment.

Objective: The aims of this study were to review and critique the latest and most notable antidepressant MDD studies and to conduct our own reanalysis of the US Food and Drug Administration database studies specifically analyzed by Kirsch et al.

Methods: We gathered effect estimates of each MDD study. In our reanalysis of the acute depression studies, we corrected analyses for a statistical floor effect so that relative (instead of absolute) effect size differences were calculated. We also critiqued a recent meta-analysis of the maintenance treatment literature.

Results: Our reanalysis showed that antidepressant benefit is seen not only in severe depression but also in moderate depression and confirmed a lack of benefit for antidepressants over placebo in mild depression. Relative antidepressant versus placebo benefit increased linearly from 5% in mild depression to 12% in moderate depression to 16% in severe depression. The claim that antidepressants are completely ineffective, or even harmful, in maintenance treatment studies involves unawareness of the enriched design effect, which, in that analysis, was used to analyze placebo efficacy. The same problem exists for the standard interpretation of those studies, although they do not prove antidepressant efficacy either, since they are biased in favor of antidepressants.

Conclusions: In sum, we conclude that antidepressants are effective in acute depressive episodes that are moderate to severe but are not effective in mild depression. Except for the mildest depressive episodes, correction for the statistical floor effect proves that antidepressants are effective acutely. These considerations only apply to acute depression, however. For maintenance, the long-term efficacy of antidepressants is unproven, but the data do not support the conclusion that they are harmful.

Copyright © 2011 Elsevier HS Journals, Inc. All rights reserved.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Rush AJ, et al. Acute and longer-term outcomes in depressed outpatients requiring one or several treatment steps: a STAR*D report. Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163(11):1905–17. - PubMed
    1. Kirsch I, et al. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med. 2008;5(2):e45. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ioannidis JP. Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials? Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine. 2008;3(14) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Geddes JR, et al. SSRIs versus other antidepressants for depressive disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001851. - PubMed
    1. Kornstein SG, K.J., Ahmed S, Thase M, Friedman ES, Dunlop BW, Yan B, Pedersen R, Ninan PT, Li T, Keller M. Assessing the efficacy of 2 years of maintenance treatment with venlafaxine extended release 75–225 mg/day in patients with recurrent major depression: a secondary analysis of data from the PREVENT study. International clinical psychopharmacology. 2008;23(6):357–363. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding

LinkOut - more resources