Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34029378›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

New generation antidepressants for depression in children and adolescents: a network meta-analysis.

Sarah E Hetrick, Joanne E McKenzie, Alan P Bailey, Vartika Sharma, Carl I Moller, Paul B Badcock, Georgina R Cox, Sally N Merry, Nicholas Meader

3 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 103 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
103citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
7.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT05814640 phase1 / phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Adolescent Depression (STAR-AD): a Pragmatic Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFirst Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityRan2023 to 2027Enrolled520ConditionsDepression, SequestraArmsFluoxetine, Sertraline, Vortioxetine, Duloxetine, Aripiprazole
NCT07185438 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Feasibility, Safety, and Preliminary Clinical Efficacy of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-guided Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) in Adolescents With Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorFirst Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityRan2025 to 2027Enrolled45ConditionsDepression - Major Depressive DisorderArmsExperimental target rTMS treatment, Conventional target rTMS treatment, Sham stimulation treatment
NCT07185464 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy and Safety of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (tACS) in Adolescents With First-episode Depression Who Are Drug-naive: A Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorFirst Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical UniversityRan2025 to 2026Enrolled30ConditionsDepression - Major Depressive DisorderArmstACS
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

103 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

43 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarah E HetrickDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Joanne E McKenzieSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Alan P BaileyOrygen, Parkville, Australia.
Vartika SharmaDepartment of Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Carl I MollerOrygen, Parkville, Australia.
Paul B BadcockOrygen, Parkville, Australia.
Georgina R CoxDepartment of Paediatrics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Sally N MerryDepartment of Psychological Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Nicholas MeaderCentre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, UK.
University of Auckland · NZMonash University · AUAustralian Psychological Society · AUCochrane · GBOrygen · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMajor depressive disorders have a significant impact on children and adolescents, including on educational and vocational outcomes, interpersonal relationships, and physical and mental health and well-being. There is an association between major depressive disorder and suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide. Antidepressant medication is used in moderate to severe depression; there is now a range of newer generations of these medications.

objectivesTo investigate, via network meta-analysis (NMA), the comparative effectiveness and safety of different newer generation antidepressants in children and adolescents with a diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD) in terms of depression, functioning, suicide-related outcomes and other adverse outcomes. The impact of age, treatment duration, baseline severity, and pharmaceutical industry funding was investigated on clinician-rated depression (CDRS-R) and suicide-related outcomes. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR)), together with Ovid Embase, MEDLINE and PsycINFO till March 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of six to 18 year olds of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed major depressive disorder were included. Trials that compared the effectiveness of newer generation antidepressants with each other or with a placebo were included. Newer generation antidepressants included: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine reuptake inhibitors; norepinephrine dopamine disinhibitors (NDDIs); and tetracyclic antidepressants (TeCAs). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data as Odds Ratios (ORs), and continuous data as Mean Difference (MD) for the following outcomes: depression symptom severity (clinician rated), response or remission of depression symptoms, depression symptom severity (self-rated), functioning, suicide related outcomes and overall adverse outcomes. Random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted in a frequentist framework using multivariate meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA). We used "informative statements" to standardise the interpretation and description of the results. MAIN

resultsTwenty-six studies were included. There were no data for the two primary outcomes (depressive disorder established via clinical diagnostic interview and suicide), therefore, the results comprise only secondary outcomes. Most antidepressants may be associated with a "small and unimportant" reduction in depression symptoms on the CDRS-R scale (range 17 to 113) compared with placebo (high certainty evidence: paroxetine: MD -1.43, 95% CI -3.90, 1.04; vilazodone: MD -0.84, 95% CI -3.03, 1.35; desvenlafaxine MD -0.07, 95% CI -3.51, 3.36; moderate certainty evidence: sertraline: MD -3.51, 95% CI -6.99, -0.04; fluoxetine: MD -2.84, 95% CI -4.12, -1.56; escitalopram: MD -2.62, 95% CI -5.29, 0.04; low certainty evidence: duloxetine: MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.03, -0.37; vortioxetine: MD 0.60, 95% CI -2.52, 3.72; very low certainty evidence for comparisons between other antidepressants and placebo). There were "small and unimportant" differences between most antidepressants in reduction of depression symptoms (high- or moderate-certainty evidence). Results were similar across other outcomes of benefit. In most studies risk of self-harm or suicide was an exclusion criterion for the study. Proportions of suicide-related outcomes were low for most included studies and 95% confidence intervals were wide for all comparisons. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of mirtazapine (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.03, 8.04), duloxetine (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.72, 1.82), vilazodone (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.68, 1.48), desvenlafaxine (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59, 1.52), citalopram (OR 1.72, 95% CI 0.76, 3.87) or vortioxetine (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.29, 8.60) on suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is low certainty evidence that escitalopram may "at least slightly" reduce odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.43, 1.84). There is low certainty evidence that fluoxetine (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87, 1.86), paroxetine (OR 1.81, 95% CI 0.85, 3.86), sertraline (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.60, 15.22), and venlafaxine (OR 13.84, 95% CI 1.79, 106.90) may "at least slightly" increase odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with placebo. There is moderate certainty evidence that venlafaxine probably results in an "at least slightly" increased odds of suicide-related outcomes compared with desvenlafaxine (OR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56) and escitalopram (OR 0.06, 95% CI 0.01, 0.56). There was very low certainty evidence regarding other comparisons between antidepressants. AUTHORS'

conclusionsOverall, methodological shortcomings of the randomised trials make it difficult to interpret the findings with regard to the efficacy and safety of newer antidepressant medications. Findings suggest that most newer antidepressants may reduce depression symptoms in a small and unimportant way compared with placebo. Furthermore, there are likely to be small and unimportant differences in the reduction of depression symptoms between the majority of antidepressants. However, our findings reflect the average effects of the antidepressants, and given depression is a heterogeneous condition, some individuals may experience a greater response. Guideline developers and others making recommendations might therefore consider whether a recommendation for the use of newer generation antidepressants is warranted for some individuals in some circumstances. Our findings suggest sertraline, escitalopram, duloxetine, as well as fluoxetine (which is currently the only treatment recommended for first-line prescribing) could be considered as a first option. Children and adolescents considered at risk of suicide were frequently excluded from trials, so that we cannot be confident about the effects of these medications for these individuals. If an antidepressant is being considered for an individual, this should be done in consultation with the child/adolescent and their family/caregivers and it remains critical to ensure close monitoring of treatment effects and suicide-related outcomes (combined suicidal ideation and suicide attempt) in those treated with newer generation antidepressants, given findings that some of these medications may be associated with greater odds of these events. Consideration of psychotherapy, particularly cognitive behavioural therapy, as per guideline recommendations, remains important.

Indexed as

AdolescentAntidepressive AgentsBiasChildCitalopramDesvenlafaxine SuccinateDuloxetine HydrochlorideFemaleFluoxetineHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMirtazapineParoxetineSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertralineAntidepressive AgentsCitalopramDesvenlafaxine SuccinateDuloxetine HydrochlorideFluoxetineMirtazapineParoxetineSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertralineVenlafaxine HydrochlorideVilazodone HydrochlorideVortioxetine

Identifiers

PMID34029378
PMCPMC8143444
OpenAlexW3041287493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.