Worsening of depressive symptoms prior to randomization in clinical trials: a possible screen for placebo responders?

被引:24
作者
Evans, KR
Sills, T
Wunderlich, GR
McDonald, HP
机构
[1] Axon Clin Res, Toronto, ON M5V 3B5, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dept Psychiat, Toronto, ON M5T 1R8, Canada
[3] Boehringer Ingelheim Canada Ltd, Burlington, ON L7L 5H4, Canada
[4] Innovus Res Inc, Burlington, ON L7L 6B8, Canada
关键词
anti-depressants; depression; fluoxetine; Hamilton depression rating scale; paroxetine; placebo response;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpsychires.2003.11.006
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
A common practice in depression trials is to exclude patients whose depressive symptoms improve between Screen and Baseline evaluations under the assumption that they are more likely to respond to placebo. The present study investigated this contention by examining the relationship between pre-randomization changes in Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD) scores to post-randomization placebo response and drug-placebo separation. Four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (active medication = fluoxetine or paroxetine) were conducted in outpatients with Major Depressive Disorder using a novel design in which a depressive severity inclusion criterion (HAMD greater than or equal to 22) was utilized only at Screen. Patients with no change or minimal (I point) improvement on the HAMD between Screen and Baseline had the lowest placebo response and the best drug-placebo separation. Patients with pre-randomization improvement of 2 points or greater had moderately higher placebo response and poorer drug-placebo separation. Patients who worsened between Screen and Baseline showed the highest placebo response and the poorest drug-placebo separation. There were no obvious differences in demographic variables between the groups which could account for the findings. In our original analyses 3/4 studies failed to show significant drug-placebo separation. When only patients with no change or pre-randomization improvement of I point were used in the analyses, 3/4 studies showed significant drug-placebo separation while the other study approached significance, p < 0.07. These results suggest that pre-randomization changes in HAMD scores may predict post-randomization placebo response and drug-placebo separation. Further.. pre-randomization increases in HAMD scores (i.e., worsening) may be the best predictor of heightened placebo responding and poor drug placebo separation. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:437 / 444
页数:8
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1987, DIAGNOSTIC STAT MANU, V4th
[2]   Novel treatments for anxiety and depression: hurdles in bringing them to the market [J].
Buller, R ;
Legrand, V .
DRUG DISCOVERY TODAY, 2001, 6 (23) :1220-1230
[3]   The double-blind variable placebo lead-in period: Results from two antidepressant clinical trials [J].
Faries, DE ;
Heiligenstein, JH ;
Tollefson, GD ;
Potter, WZ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2001, 21 (06) :561-568
[4]   PLACEBO WASHOUT IS NOT A MEANINGFUL PART OF ANTIDEPRESSANT DRUG TRIALS [J].
GREENBERG, RP ;
FISHER, S ;
RITER, JA .
PERCEPTUAL AND MOTOR SKILLS, 1995, 81 (02) :688-690
[5]   A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSION [J].
HAMILTON, M .
JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY NEUROSURGERY AND PSYCHIATRY, 1960, 23 (01) :56-62
[6]  
HAMILTON M, 1967, BRIT J SOC CLIN PSYC, V6, P278, DOI [10.1111/j.2044-8260.1967.tb00530.x, DOI 10.1111/J.2044-8260.1967.TB00530.X]
[7]   Severity of depression and response to antidepressants and placebo: An analysis of the Food and Drug Administration database [J].
Khan, A ;
Leventhal, RM ;
Khan, SR ;
Brown, WA .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2002, 22 (01) :40-45
[8]  
Kirsch I., 1998, Prevention Treatment, V1, DOI DOI 10.1037/1522-3736.1.1.12A
[9]   A reevaluation of the exclusion criteria used in antidepressant efficacy trials [J].
Posternak, MA ;
Zimmerman, M ;
Keitner, GI ;
Miller, IW .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2002, 159 (02) :191-200
[10]   Placebos, drug effects, and study design: A clinician's guide [J].
Quitkin, FM .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 1999, 156 (06) :829-836