Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41282890›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025

Restoring STAR*D: A RIAT Reanalysis of Medication Augmentation Therapy After Failed SSRI Treatment Using Patient-Level Data with Fidelity to the Original Research Protocol.

Colin Xu, Thomas T Kim, Martin Plöderl, Kevin P Kennedy, Irving Kirsch, Jay D Amsterdam, H Edmund Pigott

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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

7 authors.

Colin XuDepartment of Psychology & Communication, University of Idaho.
Thomas T KimVassar College.
Martin PlöderlCenter for Inpatient Psychotherapy and Crisis Intervention; Department for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatics; Paracelsus Medical University, Austria.
Kevin P KennedyMental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center; Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia.
Irving KirschHarvard University.
Jay D AmsterdamUniversity of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine.
H Edmund PigottIndependent researcher/unaffiliated.

Funding

Sequence-structure-function relationships in human visual photopigmentsP20GM104420 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO · PI VAN LEUVEN, JAMES · 2015 to 2024
$22.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM104420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The STAR*D trial is the most influential study of sequential antidepressant treatment strategies. However, major STAR*D publications deviated from the protocol-defined analytic plan. Prior re-analyses found lower cumulative remission rates than STAR*D publications reported, sustained remission rates of only 3.1 to 8.4% at 12 months, and high rates of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation (TESI) during medication-switch therapy. A similar reanalysis is warranted for STAR*D's augmentation study in which citalopram was augmented with sustained-release bupropion or buspirone. Methods: We reanalyzed STAR*D's patient-level augmentation dataset with fidelity to the original protocol or relevant STAR*D publications where the protocol did not prespecify an analytic plan. Results: This reanalysis identified 124 patients (21.9% of enrolled subjects) who were inappropriately included in the original STAR*D analysis, including 54 who were in protocol-defined remission before starting augmentation therapy. Remission rates as defined in the protocol were lower than reported in the original publication for bupropion SR (25.0% vs 29.7%) and buspirone (25.8% vs. 30.1%). Using a secondary definition of remission, bupropion SR's rate was significantly lower than reported in original publications (29.2% vs. 39.0%). Sustained remission through 12 months was low (4.9-12.5%). TESI rates were significantly higher for buspirone (13.9%) than bupropion SR (3.6%) augmentation. Conclusion: Compared with the original STAR*D publication, our reanalysis identified inflated remission rates, low sustained remission, and marked differences in TESI risk between augmentation strategies. These findings suggest that both treatments offer lower acute and sustained benefit than is widely understood, with buspirone associated with more TESI.

Identifiers

PMID41282890
PMCPMC12636637

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.