Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39862179›Full record

SynthesisThe international journal of neuropsychopharmacology2025

Quantitative evaluation of multiple treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression.

Yulin Feng, Yinghua Lv, Juan Yang, Ling Xu, Junchao Chen, Jihan Huang, Jiyuan Ren, Qingshan Zheng, Lujin Li

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

9 authors.

Yulin FengCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Yinghua LvCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Juan YangCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Ling XuCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Junchao ChenCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jihan HuangCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Jiyuan RenCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Qingshan ZhengCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.
Lujin LiCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.ORCID 0000-0003-2923-3206

Funding

China National Key Research and Development Program 2022YFC3502000National Natural Science Funds of China 82174229Shanghai S&T Innovation Plan 17401970900
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aims to quantitatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of various treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) across oral, intravenous, and intranasal routes to inform clinical guidelines.

methodsA systematic review identified randomized controlled trials on TRD, with efficacy measured by changes in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). We developed pharmacodynamic and covariate models for different administration routes, using Monte Carlo simulations to estimate efficacy distribution. Dropout and adverse event-related dropout rates were analyzed via single-arm meta-analysis.

resultsInvolving 22 studies with 56 treatment arms and 3059 patients, our findings suggest combination therapies outperform monotherapy, achieving an additional 6.5% reduction in MADRS scores over 12 weeks. The most effective combinations were olanzapine with fluoxetine and quetiapine with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/ selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Injectable treatments, particularly ayahuasca, produced rapid effects, with a 77% reduction in MADRS scores at 15 days. Intranasal treatments reached efficacy sooner than oral ones, with 28-day efficacy similar to the 12-week efficacy of the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. Dropout rates due to adverse events were similar across methods (4.5%-5.2%), but total dropouts were highest for oral (17.9%) and lowest for intranasal routes (10.6%). Additionally, there was considerable variation in the incidence of headache, dizziness, and nausea across different administration routes.

conclusionsThe quantitative evaluation of 22 TRD treatments illuminates key pharmacodynamic parameters, bolstering the development of clinical guidelines and aiding the design of clinical trials and medical decision-making.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsDepressive Disorder, Treatment-ResistantOutcome Assessment, Health CareDrug Therapy, CombinationHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntidepressive Agentsefficacy evaluationmodel-based meta-analysismodeling and simulationtreatment-resistant depression

Identifiers

PMID39862179
PMCPMC11879141

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.