ReviewPsychopharmacology2021
Comparative efficacy of mitochondrial agents for bipolar disorder during depressive episodes: a network meta-analysis using frequentist and Bayesian approaches.
Review in Psychopharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Bayesian network meta-analysis of ALK inhibitor treatments in patients with ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Metabolic regulation to treat bipolar depression: mechanisms and targeting by trimetazidine.Molecular psychiatry · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleMitochondrial dysfunctions have emerged as new biological hypothesis and therapeutic target for bipolar disorder. This network meta-analysis has been done to evaluate the comparative efficacy of mitochondrial agents in bipolar depression.
methodsAfter a comprehensive literature search on PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane databases, and International Trials Registry Platform, efficacy data were extracted from 15 randomized controlled trials. Random-effects meta-analysis was done following both frequentist and Bayesian approaches to pool the effects across the interventions. A network graph was built, relative effects of interventions in respect to one another and placebo were calculated, and treatments were ranked as per P- and SUCRA scores. Change in depression rating score was the primary outcome. Data was entered in contrast level and arm level for frequentist and Bayesian approaches, respectively.
resultsAmongst mitochondrial agents, N-acetylcysteine (NAC) was shown to have the highest probability of being the best treatment, followed by coenzyme Q10 and combination therapy of alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) and acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR) as depicted by P- and SUCRA scores. In the Bayesian approach, none of the treatments had better efficacy than placebo, but in the frequentist approach, NAC (effect estimate: - 1.18 (95% CI: - 2.05; - 0.31)) was significantly better than placebo.
conclusionMethodically, there may be a difference of magnitude in frequentist and Bayesian approaches, but the direction of effect and ranking probabilities do not differ. We conclude that none of the existing mitochondrial agents showed better efficacy than placebo in bipolar depression regarding depression rating scores.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.