ReviewNeuroscience applied2025
A review of psychedelics trials completed in depression, informed by European regulatory perspectives.
Review in Neuroscience applied, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Applying the EU Regulatory Framework to Determine the Benefit-Risk Profile of Psychedelics.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a growing body of clinical research on the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for the treatment of mental health disorders, notably depression. Accordingly, the new revision of the European Medicines Agency guideline on the clinical investigation of products for depression will incorporate a section covering specific regulatory recommendations for the design of studies with psychedelics. The present review investigated the methodological approaches adopted in completed controlled trials of psychedelics for depression in light of initial considerations included in the draft guideline revision. A systematic search conducted on scientific databases (Embase and Medline) and clinical trial registries (clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTPR) identified 8 completed trials as of February 2024. The trials tested psilocybin, LSD, Ayahuasca, and DMT, for major depressive disorder or treatment-resistant depression, and were all pahse 2 or 1/2. Patterns in pre-defined methodological variables pertaining to trial design, population, interventions, outcome measures and safety assessments were analysed and collated against considerations on unblinding and expectancy, choice of comparator, the definition of treatment frameworks, the characterisation of the subjective psychedelic experience and the specification of adverse events in relation to subjective psychedelic effects. Areas for future research, including long-term efficacy and safety and the influence of inter-individual differences, can be investigated in larger studies, necessary for marketing authorisation applications. Ultimately, balancing the intricacies of conducting trials with psychedelics with ensuring adherence to regulatory requirements can be facilitated by early dialogue with medicines regulators, and will be essential for the medical development of psychedelics to address unmet patient needs.
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.