What next? A Bayesian hierarchical modeling re-examination of treatments for adolescents with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression

Major challenges in youth psychopathology: treatment-resistant depression. A narrative review

Major depressive disorder (MDD) represents a major health issue in adolescents and young adults, leading to high levels of disability and profoundly impacting overall functioning. The clinical presentation of MDD in this vulnerable age group may slightly differ from what can be observed in adult populations, and psychopharmacological strategies do not always lead to optimal response. Resistance to antidepressant treatment has a prevalence estimated around 40% in youths suffering from MDD and is associated with higher comorbidity rates and suicidality. Several factors, encompassing biological, environmental, and clinical features, may contribute to the emergence of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adolescents and young adults. Furthermore, TRD may underpin the presence of an unrecognized bipolar diathesis, increasing the overall complexity of the clinical picture and posing major differential diagnosis challenges in the clinical practice. After summarizing current evidence on epidemiological and clinical correlates of TRD in adolescents and young adults, the present review also provides an overview of possible treatment strategies, including novel fast-acting antidepressants. Despite these pharmacological agents are promising in this population, their usage is expected to rely on risk-benefit ratio and to be considered in the context of integrated models of care.

Trajectory and magnitude of response in adults with anxiety disorders: a Bayesian hierarchical modeling meta-analysis of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and benzodiazepines

BACKGROUND

How the trajectory of response to medication (and placebo response) varies among selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), benzodiazepines and across anxiety disorders is unknown.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis using weekly symptom severity data from randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials of SSRIs, SNRIs, and benzodiazepines in adults with anxiety disorders. Response was modeled for the standardized change in anxiety using Bayesian hierarchical models.

RESULTS

Across 122 trials (N=15,760), SSRIs, SNRIs, and benzodiazepines produced significant improvement in anxiety compared to placebo. Benzodiazepines produced faster improvement by the first week of treatment (p < 0.001). By week 8, the response for benzodiazepines and SSRIs (p = 0.103) and SNRIs (p = 0.911) did not differ nor did SSRIs and SNRIs differ (p = 0.057), although for patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), the benzodiazepines produced greater improvement than SNRIs at week 8 (difference - 12.42, CrI: -25.05 to -0.78, p = 0.037). Medication response was similar across anxiety disorders except for benzodiazepines, which produced greater improvement over the first 4 weeks compared to SSRIs and SNRIs in panic disorder. For SSRIs and SNRIs, women improved more than men, and for benzodiazepines, older patients improved more compared to younger patients. Finally, placebo response plateaued by week 4 of treatment, and, at week 8, social anxiety disorder trials had lower placebo response compared to other anxiety disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Benzodiazepines show early improvement compared to SSRIs and SNRIs. However, by week 8, all treatments yield similar results. Patient characteristics influence the improvement trajectory and magnitude, suggesting potential for personalized medication selection.

The Impact of Development on Antidepressant and Placebo Response in Anxiety Disorders: A Bayesian Hierarchical Meta-Analytic Examination of Randomized Controlled Trials in Children, Adolescents, and Adults

Background: Understanding how development influences medication and placebo responses in anxiety disorders could inform treatment decisions, including age-specific first- versus second-line psychopharmacological interventions. Objective: To meta-analytically compare the trajectory of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and placebo response in youth and adults with anxiety disorders. Methods: Weekly symptom severity data were extracted from prospective, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trials of SSRIs and SNRIs in children, adolescents, and adults with anxiety disorders (generalized, separation, and social anxiety disorders as well as panic disorder). Treatment response was modeled for the standardized change in continuous measures of anxiety using a Bayesian hierarchical model. Change in symptom severity was evaluated as a function of time, and post hoc analyses were conducted to determine the sensitivity of these results across sample heterogeneity and alternative functional forms. Results: Data were included from 11 trials of youth (SSRI, κ = 7; SNRI, κ = 4) and 71 studies of adults (SSRI, κ = 46; SNRI, κ = 25). In total, 1067 youth participated in SSRI trials and 1024 in SNRI trials. In total, 10,826 adults participated in SSRI trials (placebo, n = 5367; SSRI n = 5,459) and 6232 in SNRI trials (placebo, n = 3,128; SNRI n = 3,094). A logarithmic model best described the response. Placebo response was similar in youth and adults (mean difference = -1.98 ± 6.21, 95% credible interval [CrI]: -10.2 to 14.2, p = 0.750), and statistically significant improvement from baseline emerged by week 2 in both adults (mean difference: -18.34 + 1.017, 95% CrI: -20.3 to 16.3, p < 0.001) and youth (mean difference: -23.74 + 3.736, 95% CrI: -31.1 to -16.4, p < 0.001). SSRIs produced similar improvements for youth and adults (p = 0.129), but SNRIs produced slower improvement in youth than adults (p = 0.018). Conclusions: Antidepressant-related improvement occurs early in youth and adults with anxiety disorders. SSRI response is similar in adults and youth; however, SNRIs produce greater responses in adults than youth, potentially representing a developmental effect.

What Is the Added Benefit of Combining Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Youth with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder? A Bayesian Hierarchical Modeling Meta-Analysis

Background: Treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in children and adolescents frequently involves cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), or their combination. However, how adding CBT to SSRIs affects the trajectory and magnitude of improvement has not been evaluated meta-analytically. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis using weekly data from prospective randomized parallel group trials of CBT and SSRIs in pediatric patients with OCD. Response was modeled for the change in the Child Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) using a Bayesian hierarchical model over 12 weeks. Results: Fourteen studies included pharmacotherapy arms, 4 studies included combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy, and 10 studies included a placebo or control arm. The studies included 1146 patients (mean age 12.7 ± 1.3 years, mean 42.1% female). In the logarithmic model of response, statistically significant differences in treatment effects for CBT+SSRI and SSRI monotherapy were observed compared with placebo (SSRI β = -3.59, credible interval [95% CrI]: -4.13 to -3.02, p < 0.001; SSRI+CBT β = -4.07, 95% CrI: -5.05 to -3.04, p < 0.001). Adding CBT to an SSRI produced numerically (but not statistically significantly) greater improvement over 12 weeks. Greater improvement was observed in studies with more boys (p < 0.001), younger patients (p < 0.001), and in studies with greater baseline symptom severity (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In children and adolescents with OCD, compared with placebo, both SSRIs and SSRI+CBT produced early and sustained improvement over 12 weeks, although the improvement was also related to sample characteristics. Longer term studies are needed to determine when the additive benefit of CBT emerges relative to SSRI monotherapy.

Pharmacologic predictors of benzodiazepine response trajectory in anxiety disorders: a Bayesian hierarchical modeling meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite frequent benzodiazepine use in anxiety disorders, the trajectory and magnitude of benzodiazepine response and the effects of benzodiazepine potency, lipophilicity, and dose on improvement are unknown.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis using weekly symptom severity data from randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled trials of benzodiazepines in adults with anxiety disorders. Response was modeled for the standardized change in continuous measures of anxiety using a Bayesian hierarchical model. Change in anxiety was evaluated as a function of medication, disorder, time, potency, lipophilicity, and standardized dose and compared among benzodiazepines.

RESULTS

Data from 65 trials (73 arms, 7 medications, 7110 patients) were included. In the logarithmic model of response, treatment effects emerged within 1 week of beginning treatment (standardized benzodiazepine-placebo difference = -0.235 ± 0.024, CrI: -0.283 to -0.186, P < .001) and placebo response plateaued at week 4. Doses <6 mg per day (lorazepam equivalents) produced faster and larger improvement than higher doses (P = .039 for low vs medium dose and P = .005 for high vs medium dose) and less lipophilic benzodiazepines (beta = 0.028 ± 0.013, P = .030) produced a greater response over time. Relative to the reference benzodiazepine (lorazepam), clonazepam (beta = -0.217 ± 0.95, P = .021) had a greater trajectory/magnitude of response (other specific benzodiazepines did not statistically differ from lorazepam).

CONCLUSIONS

In adults with anxiety disorders, benzodiazepine-related improvement emerges early, and the trajectory and magnitude of improvement is related to dose and lipophilicity. Lower doses and less lipophilic benzodiazepines produce greater improvement.

Evidence for machine learning guided early prediction of acute outcomes in the treatment of depressed children and adolescents with antidepressants

BACKGROUND

The treatment of depression in children and adolescents is a substantial public health challenge. This study examined artificial intelligence tools for the prediction of early outcomes in depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine, duloxetine, or placebo.

METHODS

The study samples included training datasets (N = 271) from patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with fluoxetine and testing datasets from patients with MDD treated with duloxetine (N = 255) or placebo (N = 265). Treatment trajectories were generated using probabilistic graphical models (PGMs). Unsupervised machine learning identified specific depressive symptom profiles and related thresholds of improvement during acute treatment.

RESULTS

Variation in six depressive symptoms (difficulty having fun, social withdrawal, excessive fatigue, irritability, low self-esteem, and depressed feelings) assessed with the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised at 4-6 weeks predicted treatment outcomes with fluoxetine at 10-12 weeks with an average accuracy of 73% in the training dataset. The same six symptoms predicted 10-12 week outcomes at 4-6 weeks in (a) duloxetine testing datasets with an average accuracy of 76% and (b) placebo-treated patients with accuracies of 67%. In placebo-treated patients, the accuracies of predicting response and remission were similar to antidepressants. Accuracies for predicting nonresponse to placebo treatment were significantly lower than antidepressants.

CONCLUSIONS

PGMs provided clinically meaningful predictions in samples of depressed children and adolescents treated with fluoxetine or duloxetine. Future work should augment PGMs with biological data for refined predictions to guide the selection of pharmacological and psychotherapeutic treatment in children and adolescents with depression.

Socioeconomic Predictors of Treatment Outcomes Among Adults With Major Depressive Disorder

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the authors sought to examine the impact of socioeconomic variables on outcomes of pharmacotherapy treatments for major depressive disorder in analyses that controlled for treatment access and level of care.

METHODS

The authors used data from the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes study, a prospective clinical trial conducted from March 2008 to April 2014 with 665 adults who had major depressive disorder and were randomly assigned to three pharmacotherapeutic treatments, to develop Bayesian hierarchical models of treatment trajectories for change in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report ratings. Posterior tail probabilities were used to evaluate the effects of education, income, race-ethnicity, and employment on treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

After sex, age, and treatment type were controlled for in the analyses, not having a college education (<16 years of schooling), being unemployed, or being non-White were each associated with slower and less improvement. At the end of treatment (week 12), not having a college degree reduced treatment responses by 9.6% (p=0.045), being unemployed by 6.6% (p=0.007), and being non-White by 11.3% (p<0.001). Treatment response was significantly related to income; having an income at the 25th percentile of the income distribution decreased improvement by 4.8% compared with having an income at the 75th percentile (p=0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Within a short-term, randomized controlled trial, socioeconomic factors had a critical role in the acute response of patients to pharmacotherapy for major depression.

Neurostructural Differences in Adolescents With Treatment-Resistant Depression and Treatment Effects of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

BACKGROUND

Despite its morbidity and mortality, the neurobiology of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adolescents and the impact of treatment on this neurobiology is poorly understood.

METHODS

Using automatic segmentation in FreeSurfer, we examined brain magnetic resonance imaging baseline volumetric differences among healthy adolescents (n = 30), adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD) (n = 19), and adolescents with TRD (n = 34) based on objective antidepressant treatment rating criteria. A pooled subsample of adolescents with TRD were treated with 6 weeks of active (n = 18) or sham (n = 7) 10-Hz transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Ten of the adolescents treated with active TMS were part of an open-label trial. The other adolescents treated with active (n = 8) or sham (n = 7) were participants from a randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

Adolescents with TRD and adolescents with MDD had decreased total amygdala (TRD and MDD: -5%, P = .032) and caudal anterior cingulate cortex volumes (TRD: -3%, P = .030; MDD: -.03%, P = .041) compared with healthy adolescents. Six weeks of active TMS increased total amygdala volumes (+4%, P < .001) and the volume of the stimulated left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (+.4%, P = .026) in adolescents with TRD.

CONCLUSIONS

Amygdala volumes were reduced in this sample of adolescents with MDD and TRD. TMS may normalize this volumetric finding, raising the possibility that TMS has neurostructural frontolimbic effects in adolescents with TRD. TMS also appears to have positive effects proximal to the site of stimulation.

Pediatric Psychopharmacology for Depressive and Anxiety Disorders

Anxiety and depressive disorders are the most common psychiatric illnesses among children and adolescents. These disorders are associated with impairments in social, family, and educational functioning. This article summarizes the evidence base for psychopharmacologic interventions; the developmental pharmacology of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs); and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences between youths and adults that call for differences in dosage and affect response and tolerability. The authors also review the efficacy and tolerability of SSRIs and SNRIs in children and adolescents with depressive and anxiety disorder diagnoses, as well as data related to duration of therapy and SSRI/SNRI discontinuation in this population. Taken together, the current evidence suggests that SSRIs are the first-line psychopharmacologic intervention for youths with depressive and anxiety disorders, with SNRIs having a more limited role. These medications are safe and well tolerated, although emerging data and developmental pharmacologic concepts may help clinicians to choose from available SSRIs and to improve the efficacy and tolerability of these medications in children and adolescents.

Safety and efficacy of agomelatine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder receiving psychosocial counselling: a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in nine countries

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder is a severe illness that frequently manifests before the age of 18 years, often recurring later in life. Paediatric medical treatment options are scarce. The melatonin receptor agonist and 5-hydroxytryptamine_2C receptor antagonist agomelatine is used to treat adults, and could offer a new therapeutic option for paediatric patients. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the short-term antidepressant efficacy and safety of agomelatine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

METHODS

We performed a 12 week, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3 trial in 46 specialist psychiatric units or centres in Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, and Ukraine. Participants (aged 7-17 years) were eligible if they were unresponsive to psychosocial therapy during the 3-week run-in period (Children's Depression Rating Scale-revised [CDRS-R] score of ≥45). Ethnicity was not recorded. We investigated short-term antidepressant efficacy of agomelatine (10 mg or 25 mg per day) versus placebo with an active control (fluoxetine 10-20 mg depending on symptom severity) after 12 weeks of treatment in children (aged 7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to agomelatine 10 mg, agomelatine 25 mg, placebo, or fluoxetine via an interactive response system with permuted-block randomisation. Standardised manualised psychosocial counselling, developed for this trial, was initiated from selection and continued throughout the study, including the open-label extension. All people involved in the conduct of the clinical trial and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Study outcomes were measured using standardised interviews at each study visit. The primary endpoint was change in CDRS-R raw score from baseline to week 12. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2015-002181-23.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 23, 2016, and Jan 14, 2020, 466 individuals were assessed for eligibility and of 400 included patients, 396 (247 [62%] girls, 149 [38%] boys; mean age 13·7 years [SD 2·7]) were analysed (full analysis set). The primary objective was met; 25 mg/day agomelatine (n=94, with n=102 receiving 10 mg/day) resulted in an improvement versus placebo (n=101) in CDRS-R raw score of 4·22 (95% CI 0·63-7·82; p=0·040) at 12 weeks, with a similar effect for fluoxetine (n=99), establishing assay sensitivity. The overall effect was confirmed in adolescents (n=317), but not in children (n=79). No unexpected safety signals were observed with agomelatine, with no significant weight gain or effect on suicidal behaviours.

INTERPRETATION

This first study in a paediatric population supports the efficacy of 25 mg/day agomelatine, in addition to psychosocial counselling, in treating adolescent patients with major depressive disorder, with no unexpected safety signals. This medication could provide another option in the limited psychopharmaceutical repertoire for management of major depressive disorder.

FUNDING

Servier. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Combining selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and cognitive behavioral therapy in youth with depression and anxiety

BACKGROUND

Treatment studies of children and adolescents with internalizing disorders suggest that the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) consistently produces greater improvement than either treatment alone. We sought to determine how response to combined treatment varies across disorders (anxiety versus depression), and by specific patient characteristics.

METHODS

Three large National Institutes of Health-funded trials of children and adolescents with major depression (n = 2) and anxiety disorders (n = 1) were evaluated, each comparing CBT + SSRI to SSRI only, Bayesian Hierarchical Models (BHMs) were used, for endpoint response, time course of response and predictors of response in participants who received SSRI or SSRI+CBT.

RESULTS

SSRI+CBT significantly decreased symptoms by week 4 (p<0.001) across disorders. This improvement continued at week 8 and 12 (p<0.001); however, the additive benefit of CBT over SSRI monotherapy was not statistically significant until week 12 (p<0.001). The fastest response to SSRI+CBT was for patients who were younger, with milder baseline anxiety/depression symptoms and depressive disorders. The slowest response for SSRI+CBT was for boys, adolescents, minoritized children, those with severe symptoms and externalizing disorders.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included inconsistent moderators, variation in the number of observations over time and a lack of genetic or pharmacokinetic variables related to SSRI exposure across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The superiority of SSRI+CBT for youth with depression and anxiety is further supported. For purposes of rapid and greater relief, combination treatment is the superior approach across anxiety and depression and is robust to a range of participant characteristics. However, the added value of CBT (with an SSRI) occurs late in treatment. These findings represent a step towards understanding heterogeneity of treatment response and raise the possibility that interventions could be better tailored or adapted based on patient characteristics.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Combinatorial Pharmacogenetics Testing in Adolescent Depression

OBJECTIVE

Numerous commercial pharmacogenetics panels are now widely available for clinical use in psychiatric practice. However, there is a paucity of literature evaluating the use of combinatorial pharmacogenetics panels to enhance outcomes in the treatment of adolescents with depression. This study sought to prospectively evaluate the clinical impact of combinatorial pharmacogenetics testing in a double-blind, randomized, controlled effectiveness study for the pharmacologic treatment of adolescents with depression.

METHOD

Adolescents aged 13 to 18 years (N = 176) with moderate to severe major depressive disorder (MDD) were randomized to treatment arm guided by testing in which pharmacogenetic testing results were available at the baseline visit (GENE arm, n = 84) or a treatment-as-usual arm (TAU arm, n = 92) in which testing results were not available until an 8-week visit. Raters, participants, and families were blinded to group allocation. Symptom improvement, side effects, and satisfaction were assessed throughout the study at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months.

RESULTS

There were no differences between the GENE and TAU arms at 8 weeks or 6 months for symptom improvement, side effect burden, or satisfaction. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were prescribed at higher rates in the TAU arm compared to the GENE arm (p = .024).

CONCLUSION

Combinatorial pharmacogenetics-guided treatment did not demonstrate improved outcomes compared to TAU in adolescents with MDD. Future research should examine how specific medication-gene pairs may affect clinical outcomes in the treatment of adolescents with depression and how best to integrate pharmacogenetics into clinical practice.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

A PK/PD Genetic Variation Treatment Algorithm Versus Treatment As Usual for Adolescent Management Of Depression; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02286440.

Updates in treatment of depression in children and adolescents

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine recent evidence that informs the treatment of depression in children and adolescents.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are no new leads in the prevention and early intervention of depression in children and adolescents. For acute treatment of major depressive disorder, talking therapies are moving increasingly to internet-based platforms. Family therapy may have a slight edge over individual psychotherapy in the short-term. Patients with severe depression with endogenous features have a more robust response to pharmacotherapy than do patients with mild-to-moderate depression. Findings in relation to reward sensitivity and changes in brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels contradict research conducted in adults, suggesting developmental differences in the mechanisms underlying depression. Ketamine infusion could have a role for adolescents with treatment refractory depression. There was no new evidence concerning relapse prevention.

SUMMARY

Most new findings have been concerned with moderators and mediators of treatment.

The Impact of Marijuana on Antidepressant Treatment in Adolescents: Clinical and Pharmacologic Considerations

The neuropharmacology of marijuana, including its effects on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI)/antidepressant metabolism and the subsequent response and tolerability in youth, has received limited attention. We sought to (1) review clinically relevant pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) interactions between cannabinoids and selected SSRIs, (2) use PK models to examine the impact of cannabinoids on SSRI exposure (area under curve (AUC)) and maximum concentration (C_MAX) in adolescents, and (3) examine the frequency of adverse events reported when SSRIs and cannabinoids are used concomitantly. Cannabinoid metabolism, interactions with SSRIs, impact on relevant PK/PD pathways and known drug–drug interactions were reviewed. Then, the impact of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) on exposure (AUC₂₄) and C_MAX for escitalopram and sertraline was modeled using pediatric PK data. Using data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS), the relationship between CBD and CYP2C19-metabolized SSRIs and side effects was examined. Cannabis and CBD inhibit cytochrome activity, alter serotonergic transmission, and modulate SSRI response. In PK models, CBD and/or THC increases sertraline and es/citalopram concentrations in adolescents, and coadministration of CBD and CYP2C19-metabolized SSRIs increases the risk of cough, diarrhea, dizziness, and fatigue. Given the significant SSRI–cannabinoid interactions, clinicians should discuss THC and CBD use in youth prescribed SSRIs and be aware of the impact of initiating, stopping, or decreasing cannabinoid use as this may significantly affect es/citalopram and sertraline exposure.

The Impact of Failed Antidepressant Trials on Outcomes in Children and Adolescents with Anxiety and Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To identify predictors of medication-placebo differences in double-blind placebo-controlled antidepressant trials in children and adolescents with anxiety and depression. Methods: Clinical trials in patients <18 years of age with major depressive disorder or generalized, separation or social anxiety disorders were obtained from PubMed, the Cochrane Database and clinicaltrials.gov searches from inception through 2019. Forty-nine trials (43 published and 6 unpublished) of anxiety (κ = 13) and depression (κ = 36) evaluated 19 antidepressants in 8642 child and adolescent patients; placebo and medication response rates, trial characteristics, disorder, medication class, and funding source were extracted. Antidepressant-placebo differences were examined using Bayesian hierarchical models and estimates of response were determined for trial design, disorder, and medication class variables. Using meta-regression, correlates of antidepressant-placebo difference and placebo response were examined. Results: Funding source differentiated medication-placebo differences regardless of disorder. Industry trials had larger placebo response rates (mean difference: 0.189 ± 0.066, credible interval [CrI]: 0.067 to 0.33, p = 0.0008) and smaller medication-placebo differences (-0.235 ± 0.078, CrI: -0.397 to -0.086, p = 0.005) compared with federally funded trials. However, medication response was similar for industry- and federally-funded studies (-0.046 ± 0.042, CrI: -0.130 to 0.038, p = 0.252). Conclusions: The impact of study sponsorship on trial outcome supports the assertion that industry-funded trials with high placebo response rates and small drug-placebo differences are "failed trials" and should not be described as "negative trials" or used to determine public health estimates of antidepressant efficacy in children and adolescents with anxiety and depression. Identifying the proper role and value of industry-funded trials is critical to establishing the evidence base for antidepressants in youth.

Left prefrontal transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression in adolescents: a double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled trial

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is prevalent and associated with a substantial psychosocial burden and mortality. There are few prior studies of interventions for TRD in adolescents. This was the largest study to date examining the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of 10-Hz transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) for adolescents with TRD. Adolescents with TRD (aged 12-21 years) were enrolled in a randomized, sham-controlled trial of TMS across 13 sites. Treatment resistance was defined as an antidepressant treatment record level of 1 to 4 in a current episode of depression. Intention-to-treat patients (n = 103) included those randomly assigned to active NeuroStar TMS monotherapy (n = 48) or sham TMS (n = 55) for 30 daily treatments over 6 weeks. The primary outcome measure was change in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-24) score. After 6 weeks of blinded treatment, improvement in the least-squares mean (SE) HAM-D-24 scores were similar between the active (-11.1 [2.03]) and sham groups (-10.6 [2.00]; P = 0.8; difference [95% CI], - 0.5 [-4.2 to 3.3]). Response rates were 41.7% in the active group and 36.4% in the sham group (P = 0.6). Remission rates were 29.2% in the active group and 29.0% in the sham group (P = 0.95). There were no new tolerability or safety signals in adolescents. Although TMS treatment produced a clinically meaningful change in depressive symptom severity, this did not differ from sham treatment. Future studies should focus on strategies to reduce the placebo response and examine the optimal dosing of TMS for adolescents with TRD.