Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31900198›Full record

Trial reportTrials2020

Estimating dose-response for time to remission with instrumental variable adjustment: the obscuring effects of drug titration in Genome Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression Trial (GENDEP): clinical trial data.

Jennifer Hellier, Richard Emsley, Andrew Pickles

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jennifer HellierBiostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK. jennifer.hellier@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1760-3708
Richard EmsleyBiostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
Andrew PicklesBiostatistics and Health Informatics Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, De Crespigny Park, London, SE5 8AF, UK.
King's College London · GB

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2015-08-012National Institute for Health Research (GB) DRF-2015-08-012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThreshold regression, in which time to remission is modelled as a stochastic drift towards a boundary, is an alternative to the proportional hazards survival model and has a clear conceptual mechanism for examining the effects of drug dose. However, for both threshold regression and proportional hazard models, when dose titration occurs during treatment, the estimated causal effect of dose can be biased by confounding. An instrumental variable analysis can be used to minimise such bias.

methodWeekly antidepressant dose was measured in 380 men and women with major depression treated with escitalopram or nortriptyline for 12 weeks as part of the Genome Based Therapeutic Drugs for Depression (GENDEP) study. The averaged dose relative to maximum prescribing dose was calculated from the 12 trial weeks and tested for association with time to depression remission. We combined the instrumental variable approach, utilising randomised treatment as an instrument, with threshold regression and proportional hazard survival models.

resultsThe threshold model was constructed with two linear predictors. In the naïve models, averaged daily dose was not associated with reduced time to remission. By contrast, the instrumental variable analyses showed a clear and significant relationship between increased dose and faster time to remission, threshold regression (velocity estimate: 0.878, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.152-1.603) and proportional hazards (log hazards ratio: 3.012, 95% CI: 0.086-5.938).

conclusionsWe demonstrate, using the GENDEP trial, the benefits of these analyses to estimate causal parameters rather than those that estimate associations. The results for the trial dataset show the link between antidepressant dose and time to depression remission. The threshold regression model more clearly distinguishes the factors associated with initial severity from those influencing treatment effect. Additionally, applying the instrumental variable estimator provides a more plausible causal estimate of drug dose on treatment effect. This validity of these results is subject to meeting the assumptions of instrumental variable analyses.

trial registrationEudraCT, 2004-001723-38; ISRCTN, 03693000. Registered on 27 September 2007.

Indexed as

AdultAntidepressive AgentsAntidepressive Agents, Second-GenerationAntidepressive Agents, TricyclicCitalopramDepressionFemaleHumansMaleNortriptylineRemission InductionSeverity of Illness IndexTreatment OutcomeAntidepressive AgentsAntidepressive Agents, Second-GenerationAntidepressive Agents, TricyclicCitalopramNortriptylineDepressionDose responseInstrumental variablesSurvival analysisThreshold regressionTime to remission

Identifiers

PMID31900198
PMCPMC6942263
OpenAlexW2998328934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.