Reboxetine for acute treatment of major depression: systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished placebo and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor controlled trials

Effect of reboxetine and citalopram on anal opening pressure in healthy women: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study

BACKGROUND

In placebo-controlled clinical trials, reboxetine, a selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, increases urethral pressure and relieves stress urinary incontinence symptoms in women. Considering the close connection in neural regulation of the external urethral and anal sphincters, we hypothesized that reboxetine may also enhance anal sphincter pressure. Conversely, it is believed that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors may contribute to fecal incontinence by reducing anal sphincter pressure. In this study, we investigated the effect of reboxetine and citalopram on anal opening pressure in healthy female volunteers.

METHODS

In a double-blind, three-way crossover trial, 24 female participants received single doses of 40 mg citalopram, 8 mg reboxetine, and matching placebos, with a minimum of 8-day washout between sessions. Using anal acoustic reflectometry, we measured anal opening pressure during both resting and squeezing conditions at the estimated time of peak plasma concentration for both study drugs.

KEY RESULTS

Compared with placebo, reboxetine increased anal opening pressure with 23.4 cmH2O (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.5-30.2, p < 0.001) during rest and with 22.5 cmH2O (95% CI 15.2-29.8, p < 0.001) during squeeze. Citalopram did not change anal opening pressure statistically significantly compared to placebo.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

An 8-mg dose of reboxetine increased anal opening pressure substantially in healthy women, suggesting potential benefits for fecal incontinence symptoms. In contrast, a 40-mg dose of citalopram showed a marginal and statistically insignificant effect on anal opening pressure, indicating that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors do not contribute to fecal incontinence by reducing anal sphincter tone.

Sensitivity analysis with iterative outlier detection for systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Meta-analysis is a widely used tool for synthesizing results from multiple studies. The collected studies are deemed heterogeneous when they do not share a common underlying effect size; thus, the factors attributable to the heterogeneity need to be carefully considered. A critical problem in meta-analyses and systematic reviews is that outlying studies are frequently included, which can lead to invalid conclusions and affect the robustness of decision-making. Outliers may be caused by several factors such as study selection criteria, low study quality, small-study effects, and so on. Although outlier detection is well-studied in the statistical community, limited attention has been paid to meta-analysis. The conventional outlier detection method in meta-analysis is based on a leave-one-study-out procedure. However, when calculating a potentially outlying study's deviation, other outliers could substantially impact its result. This article proposes an iterative method to detect potential outliers, which reduces such an impact that could confound the detection. Furthermore, we adopt bagging to provide valid inference for sensitivity analyses of excluding outliers. Based on simulation studies, the proposed iterative method yields smaller bias and heterogeneity after performing a sensitivity analysis to remove the identified outliers. It also provides higher accuracy on outlier detection. Two case studies are used to illustrate the proposed method's real-world performance.

Unpublished trials of alprazolam XR and their influence on its apparent efficacy for panic disorder

OBJECTIVE

To test for publication bias with alprazolam, the most widely prescribed benzodiazepine, by comparing its efficacy for panic disorder using trial results from (1) the published literature and (2) the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

METHODS

From FDA reviews, we included data from all phase 2/3 efficacy trials of alprazolam extended-release (Xanax XR) for the treatment of panic disorder. A search for matching publications was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Publication bias was examined by comparing: (1) overall trial results (positive or not) according to the FDA v. corresponding publications; (2) effect size (Hedges's g) based on FDA data v. published data.

RESULTS

The FDA review showed that five trials were conducted, only one of which (20%) was positive. Of the four not-positive trials, two were published conveying a positive outcome; the other two were not published. Thus, according to the published literature, three trials were conducted and all (100%) were positive. Alprazolam's effect size calculated using FDA data was 0.33 (CI95% 0.07-0.60) v. 0.47 (CI95% 0.30-0.65) using published data, an increase of 0.14, or 42%.

CONCLUSIONS

Publication bias substantially inflates the apparent efficacy of alprazolam XR.

Reboxetine Combination Therapy With Fluoxetine in Moderate to Severe Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVES

Reboxetine is a potent and selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor that was effective in combination with citalopram for resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). This study aims to assess its effectiveness and tolerability in combination with fluoxetine in treating OCD.

METHODS

In this 2-center, placebo-controlled, and double-blind, randomized clinical trial, 76 patients with OCD were assigned into 2 parallel groups to receive fluoxetine (up to 80 mg/d) plus placebo (F + P) or fluoxetine (up to 80 mg/d) plus reboxetine (F + R) (10 mg twice daily) for 10 weeks. Participants were assessed with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) at baseline and weeks 5 and 10.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients completed the trial. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in baseline Y-BOCS scores. General linear model repeated-measures showed significant effects on time × treatment interaction on total Y-BOCS ( F = 6.33, df = 1.42, P = 0.006) and obsession subscale scores ( F = 10.39, df = 1.48, P < 0.001), and insignificance on compulsion subscale scores ( F = 1.86, df = 1.24, P = 0.173). Reboxetine combination therapy demonstrated a higher partial and complete treatment response rate ( P < 0.01) according to the Y-BOCS total scores. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the frequency of adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Reboxetine combination therapy with fluoxetine can effectively improve symptoms in patients with OCD in a short period of treatment. However, further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.This trial was registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials ( www.irct.ir ; No IRCT20090117001556N129).

Trends in the Consumption of Antidepressant Drugs before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Canary Islands, Spain: The Case of the Province of Las Palmas

The use of antidepressants (ADs) has increased significantly as a result of COVID-19 and its consequences. However, there are some notable differences in the relative levels of use between geographical areas and population groups. The aim of this work is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on the consumption of ADs in the Canary Islands, focusing on the islands of Gran Canaria, Fuerteventura and Lanzarote, by analyzing the trends in prescriptions of ADs during the pandemic period (2020) compared to the pre-pandemic period (2016-2020). Data were extracted from the community pharmacy wholesaler at a population level. Consumption patterns are expressed as the number of defined daily doses per 1000 inhabitant/day. The overall consumption of DIDs was higher in Gran Canaria, mainly in urban areas and the capital. It was similar in both Lanzarote and Fuerteventura, but particularly localized in the capital, which are considered semi-urban areas. Lanzarote and Fuerteventura present the same pattern of prescription ADs use, whereas Gran Canaria is notably different. This finding was also observed in the more consumed active pharmaceutical ingredients, although small inter-island variations in the ranking and percentages were observed. Sertraline and escitalopram are two of the most prescribed N06AB ADs, whereas the most recent N06AX ADs such as venlafaxine, mirtazapine and desvenlafaxine are more commonly prescribed. These differences in prescription ADs can be explained by demographical characteristics, population size, the fact of living in an urban area and general medical practice. In this context, the COVID-19 pandemic did not have an impact on the overall trend of the use of ADs between 2016 and 2020 in the islands under study.

Clinical study reports published by the European Medicines Agency 2016-2018: a cross-sectional analysis

OBJECTIVES

To describe the characteristics of clinical study report (CSR) documents published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and for included pivotal trials, to quantify the timeliness of access to trial results from CSRs compared with conventional published sources.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of CSR documents published by the EMA from 2016 to 2018.

METHODS

CSR files and medication summary information were downloaded from the EMA. Individual trials in each submission were identified using document filenames. Number and length of documents and trials were determined. For pivotal trials, trial phase, dates of EMA document publication and matched journal and registry publications were obtained.

RESULTS

The EMA published documents on 142 medications that were submitted for regulatory drug approval. Submissions were for initial marketing authorisations in 64.1%. There was a median of 15 (IQR 5-46) documents, 5 (IQR 2-14) trials and 9629 (IQR 2711-26,673) pages per submission, and a median of 1 (IQR 1-4) document and 336 (IQR 21-1192) pages per trial. Of all identified pivotal trials, 60.9% were phase 3 and 18.5% were phase 1. Of 119 unique submissions to the EMA, 46.2% were supported by a single pivotal trial, with 13.4% based on a single pivotal phase 1 trial. No trial registry results were identified for 26.1% trials, no journal publications for 16.7% and 13.5% of trials had neither. EMA publication was the earliest information source for 5.8% of pivotal trials, available a median 523 days (IQR 363-882 days) before the earliest publication.

CONCLUSIONS

The EMA Clinical Data website contains lengthy clinical trial documents. Almost half of submissions to the EMA were based on single pivotal trials, many of which were phase 1 trials. CSRs were the only source and a timelier source of information for many trials. Access to unpublished trial information should be open and timely to support decision-making for patients.

A pharmacological challenge paradigm to assess neural signatures of script-elicited acute dissociation in women with post-traumatic stress disorder

BACKGROUND

There is limited experimentally controlled neuroimaging research available that could explain how dissociative states occur and which neurobiological changes are involved in acute post-traumatic dissociation.

AIMS

To test the causal hypothesis that acute dissociation is triggered bottom-up by a selective noradrenergic-mediated increase in amygdala activation during the processing of autobiographical trauma memories.

METHOD

Women with post-traumatic stress disorder (n = 47) and a history of interpersonal childhood trauma underwent a within-participant, placebo-controlled pharmacological challenge paradigm (4.0 mg reboxetine versus placebo) employing script-driven imagery (traumatic versus neutral autobiographical memory recall). Script-elicited brain activation patterns (measured via functional magnetic resonance imagery) were analysed by means of whole-brain analyses and a pre-registered region of interest (i.e. amygdala).

RESULTS

Self-reported acute dissociation increased significantly during trauma (versus neutral) recall but did not differ between pharmacological conditions. The pharmacological manipulation was also unsuccessful in eliciting increased amygdala activation following script-driven imagery in the reboxetine (versus placebo) condition. In the reboxetine condition, trauma retrieval resulted in similar activation patterns as in the placebo condition (e.g. elevated brain activation in the middle occipital gyrus and supramarginal gyrus), albeit with different peaks.

CONCLUSIONS

Current (null) findings cast doubt on the suggested role of the amygdala in subserving dissociative processing of trauma memories. Alternative pharmacological manipulation approaches (e.g. ketamine) and analysis techniques (e.g. event-related independent component analysis) might provide better insight into the spatiotemporal dynamics and network shifts involved in dissociative experiences and autobiographical trauma memory recall.

Harms of exercise training in patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published and unpublished controlled trials

Background

Exercise is recommended for people with cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the harms of exercise in patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatment.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis included published and unpublished controlled trials comparing exercise interventions versus controls in adults with cancer scheduled to undergo systemic treatment. The primary outcomes were adverse events, health-care utilization, and treatment tolerability and response. Eleven electronic databases and trial registries were systematically searched with no date or language restrictions. The latest searches were performed on April 26, 2022. The risk of bias was judged using RoB2 and ROBINS-I, and the certainty of evidence for primary outcomes was assessed using GRADE. Data were statistically synthesised using pre-specified random-effect meta-analyses. The protocol for this study was registered in the PROESPERO database (ID: CRD42021266882).

Findings

129 controlled trials including 12,044 participants were eligible. Primary meta-analyses revealed evidence of a higher risk of some harms, including serious adverse events (risk ratio [95% CI]: 1.87 [1.47-2.39], I2 = 0%, n = 1722, k = 10), thromboses (risk ratio [95% CI]: 1.67 [1.11-2.51], I2 = 0%, n = 934, k = 6), and fractures (risk ratio [95% CI]: 3.07 [3.03-3.11], I2 = 0%, n = 203, k = 2) in intervention versus control. In contrast, we found evidence of a lower risk of fever (risk ratio [95% CI]: 0.69 [0.55-0.87], I2 = 0% n = 1109, k = 7) and a higher relative dose intensity of systemic treatment (difference in means [95% CI]: 1.50% [0.14-2.85], I2 = 0% n = 1110, k = 13) in intervention versus control. For all outcomes, we downgraded the certainty of evidence due to imprecision, risk of bias, and indirectness, resulting in very low certainty of evidence.

Interpretation

The harms of exercise in patients with cancer undergoing systemic treatment are uncertain, and there is currently insufficient data on harms to make evidence-based risk-benefits assessments of the application of structured exercise in this population.

Funding

There was no funding for this study.

Development of a model to predict combined antidepressant medication and psychotherapy treatment response for depression among veterans

BACKGROUND

Although research shows that more depressed patients respond to combined antidepressants (ADM) and psychotherapy than either alone, many patients do not respond even to combined treatment. A reliable prediction model for this could help treatment decision-making. We attempted to create such a model using machine learning methods among patients in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA).

METHODS

A 2018-2020 national sample of VHA patients beginning combined depression treatment completed self-report assessments at baseline and 3 months (n = 658). A learning model was developed using baseline self-report, administrative, and geospatial data to predict 3-month treatment response defined by reductions in the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomatology Self-Report and/or in the Sheehan Disability Scale. The model was developed in a 70 % training sample and tested in the remaining 30 % test sample.

RESULTS

30.0 % of patients responded to treatment. The prediction model had a test sample AUC-ROC of 0.657. A strong gradient was found in probability of treatment response from 52.7 % in the highest predicted quintile to 14.4 % in the lowest predicted quintile. The most important predictors were episode characteristics (symptoms, comorbidities, history), personality/psychological resilience, recent stressors, and treatment characteristics.

LIMITATIONS

Restrictions in sample definition, a low recruitment rate, and reliance on patient self-report rather than clinician assessments to determine treatment response limited the generalizability of results.

CONCLUSIONS

A machine learning model could help depressed patients and providers predict likely response to combined ADM-psychotherapy. Parallel information about potential harms and costs of alternative treatments would be needed, though, to inform optimal treatment selection.

Assessing the robustness of results from clinical trials and meta-analyses with the fragility index

The fragility index has been increasingly used to assess the robustness of the results of clinical trials since 2014. It aims at finding the smallest number of event changes that could alter originally statistically significant results. Despite its popularity, some researchers have expressed several concerns about the validity and usefulness of the fragility index. It offers a comprehensive review of the fragility index's rationale, calculation, software, and interpretation, with emphasis on application to studies in obstetrics and gynecology. This article presents the fragility index in the settings of individual clinical trials, standard pairwise meta-analyses, and network meta-analyses. Moreover, this article provides worked examples to demonstrate how the fragility index can be appropriately calculated and interpreted. In addition, the limitations of the traditional fragility index and some solutions proposed in the literature to address these limitations were reviewed. In summary, the fragility index is recommended to be used as a supplemental measure in the reporting of clinical trials and a tool to communicate the robustness of trial results to clinicians. Other considerations that can aid in the fragility index's interpretation include the loss to follow-up and the likelihood of data modifications that achieve the loss of statistical significance.

[Effects of COVID-19 on the consumption of antidepressants in the Province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands]

Background

This work analyzed the impact of COVID-19 on antidepressant consumption during the first year of the pandemic (2020) taking as a baseline the prescribing trends during the previous 4 years (2016-2019). For this, the province of Santa Cruz de Tenerife and the 4 islands that make it up were taken as a geographical area.

Methods

Sales data in community pharmacies were taken as an aggregated database. The dose per inhabitant and day was used as an indicator of consumption.

Results

In the islands of EL Hierro and La Gomera, the increase in population does not in itself justify the relevant increases observed in the consumption of antidepressants and possibly COVID-19 and its consequences on the health of the population could be responsible for these increases. On the island of Tenerife, the increase in population could justify, to a large extent, the slight increase in consumption observed. The island of La Palma presents an increase of 1.40%, but lower than the expected value taking as baseline the prescribing trends in the last 4 years, despite an increase in population of 0,95%. All the islands present the same trends in the consumption of the different subgroups of antidepressants and active pharmaceutical ingredients, although with slight variations, with the exception of the island of La Palma which presents a statistically different behavior and trends.

Conclusions

These differences could be related to the socio-sanitary and demographic characteristics of each of the islands.

Evaluation of the Educational Quality of the Top 30 Most Viewed Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy Videos on YouTube

Background: Online surgical videos serve as useful adjuncts for surgical training. YouTube is a social media platform increasingly used for education. However, the educational qualities of these videos have not been proven. This study aims to review the topmost 30 viewed videos on laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) on YouTube. Methods: A YouTube search was performed on August 1, 2020, using the term "laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy." Inclusion criteria were LDP with or without splenectomy. Exclusion criteria were open or robotic distal pancreatectomy and radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy. To grade the videos, we used a modified version of the LAParoscopic surgery Video Educational GuidelineS (LAP-VEGaS) 24 of the original 37 consensus statements were used in our study. Results: Twenty-nine of the top 30 most viewed videos were included (1 video was a duplicate). The overall mean view count and number of likes were 7195 (range 2322-39,927) and 17 (range 0-108), respectively. Thirteen videos (44.8%) were on LDP with splenic preservation. The mean conformity to the modified LAP-VEGaS was 9.3 (range 4-16) with a mean of 38.8% (range 16.7%-66.7%) of the criteria met. There was weak correlation between the number of views and the number of criteria met (ρ = 0.189, P < .05). Twelve videos (41.4%) described about staple line management, nine videos (31%) about tips and tricks to reduce postoperative pancreatic fistula, including drainage tube management, and three videos (10.3%) identified the common hepatic artery. Videos with no commentary had the lowest mean percentage of criteria met (24.6%). Conclusion: The topmost viewed LDP surgical videos have gaps in meeting the educational needs of a trainee. Video uploaders should be cognizant of the learning needs of surgical trainees.

Predicting Publication of Clinical Trials Using Structured and Unstructured Data: Model Development and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

Publication of registered clinical trials is a critical step in the timely dissemination of trial findings. However, a significant proportion of completed clinical trials are never published, motivating the need to analyze the factors behind success or failure to publish. This could inform study design, help regulatory decision-making, and improve resource allocation. It could also enhance our understanding of bias in the publication of trials and publication trends based on the research direction or strength of the findings. Although the publication of clinical trials has been addressed in several descriptive studies at an aggregate level, there is a lack of research on the predictive analysis of a trial's publishability given an individual (planned) clinical trial description.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct a study that combined structured and unstructured features relevant to publication status in a single predictive approach. Established natural language processing techniques as well as recent pretrained language models enabled us to incorporate information from the textual descriptions of clinical trials into a machine learning approach. We were particularly interested in whether and which textual features could improve the classification accuracy for publication outcomes.

METHODS

In this study, we used metadata from ClinicalTrials.gov (a registry of clinical trials) and MEDLINE (a database of academic journal articles) to build a data set of clinical trials (N=76,950) that contained the description of a registered trial and its publication outcome (27,702/76,950, 36% published and 49,248/76,950, 64% unpublished). This is the largest data set of its kind, which we released as part of this work. The publication outcome in the data set was identified from MEDLINE based on clinical trial identifiers. We carried out a descriptive analysis and predicted the publication outcome using 2 approaches: a neural network with a large domain-specific language model and a random forest classifier using a weighted bag-of-words representation of text.

RESULTS

First, our analysis of the newly created data set corroborates several findings from the existing literature regarding attributes associated with a higher publication rate. Second, a crucial observation from our predictive modeling was that the addition of textual features (eg, eligibility criteria) offers consistent improvements over using only structured data (F₁-score=0.62-0.64 vs F₁-score=0.61 without textual features). Both pretrained language models and more basic word-based representations provide high-utility text representations, with no significant empirical difference between the two.

CONCLUSIONS

Different factors affect the publication of a registered clinical trial. Our approach to predictive modeling combines heterogeneous features, both structured and unstructured. We show that methods from natural language processing can provide effective textual features to enable more accurate prediction of publication success, which has not been explored for this task previously.

Altered serum adiponectin and interleukin-8 levels are associated in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder: A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a complex mental health condition that results in several obstacles including disabilities, loss of productivity, and economic burdens on both patients and society. Etiopathogenesis of MDD involves several factors such as sociodemographic, genetic, and biological determinants. However, any suitable biomarkers for risk assessment of depression have not been established yet. Alterations of cytokine are assumed to be involved in the pathophysiology and severity of the depressive disorder. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate serum adiponectin and interleukin-8 (IL-8) among MDD patients in Bangladesh.

METHODS

We recruited a total of 63 MDD patients and 94 age-sex matched healthy controls (HCs) in the present study. MDD patients were enrolled from a tertiary care teaching hospital, Dhaka, Bangladesh, and HCs from surrounding parts of Dhaka city. A psychiatrist assessed all the study participants following the criteria mentioned in the DSM-5. We applied the Hamilton depression (Ham-D) rating scale to assess the depression severity. Serum adiponectin and IL-8 levels were determined using ELISA kits (BosterBio, USA).

RESULTS

The mean serum concentration of adiponectin was decreased (30.67±4.43 μg/mL vs. 53.81±5.37 μg/mL), and the IL-8 level was increased (160.93±14.84 pg/mL vs. 88.68±6.33 pg/mL) in MDD patients compared to HCs. Sex-specific scatters plot graphs showed the distribution of adiponectin and IL-8 levels with Ham-D scores in MDD patients. Also, ROC curve analysis demonstrated good predictive performances of serum adiponectin and IL-8 for MDD with the area under the curve (AUC) as 0.895 and 0.806, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The present study findings suggest that alterations of serum adiponectin and IL-8 levels in MDD patients might be involved in the disease process. Therefore, we can use these changes of cytokines in serum levels as early risk assessment tools for depression. The present study findings should be considered preliminary. We propose further interventional studies to evaluate the exact role of adiponectin and IL-8 in depression.

Publication rates in small German trials remained low five years after trial completion

OBJECTIVE

To investigate publication rates in small trials and to explore which factors are associated with publication rates in small trials, including sample size, the type and number of primary and secondary outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We studied a subgroup of 'small' trials from a pre-existing dataset (IntoValue), containing German trials completed between 2009 and 2017. Small trials were defined as phase II-III, III and IV trials with 150 or fewer participants. We performed an updated publication search and collected additional data from online trial records.

RESULTS

Out of 499 trials, 325 (65%) trials published their results in a journal article or dissertation. Median time-to-publication was 3.41 years (95% CI: 3.04-4.10). Planned sample size was not associated with publication rates, but the difference between planned and achieved sample size was (per 10% unsuccessfully recruited participants, HR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91-1.00). Phase III vs. II-III trials, studied intervention (device vs. other) and clearly vs. unclearly defined primary outcomes predicted a higher likelihood of earlier publication.

CONCLUSION

About 35% of small trials in Germany remain unpublished, even after an extensive follow-up period of over 9 years. Publication rates are low and were associated with sample size, trial phase and type of intervention.

Antidepressant use and off-label prescribing in primary care in Spain (2013-2018)

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies show an increase in the use of antidepressants in minors (younger than 18 years), although few antidepressants are indicated for this age group. The aim of our study was to calculate the annual prevalence of antidepressant use in children and adolescents and to review the adherence of prescription to current indications.

METHODS

Study of the prevalence of antidepressant use in minors based on the records of the Electronic Database for Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies in Primary Care (BIFAP) of Spain for the 2013-2018 period, considering at least one prescription per year for each patient.

RESULTS

The prevalence of antidepressant prescription in patients from the BIFAP cohort increased between 2013 (7.97 prescriptions per 1000 patients) and 2018 (8.87 prescriptions per 1000 patients), in most groups and in both sexes. In this period, female patients received the most prescriptions, surpassing prescriptions in male patients by up to 2.5 points in the overall rates. In patients younger than 13 years, this trend was inverted and antidepressant use was higher in male patients. The prevalence of prescription rose with increasing patient age, as did the proportion of off-label prescriptions. The use of off-label medication decreased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a gradual increase in the prevalence of antidepressant prescription in minors younger than 18 years, with a predominance of the female sex. The high proportion of unapproved medication use in this age group calls for more thorough investigation of the risk-benefit balance of these treatments and of safer treatment alternatives.

Guidewire-assisted cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

Cannulation techniques have been recognized as being important in causing post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis (PEP). However, considerable controversy exists about the usefulness of the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique for the prevention of PEP.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique compared to the conventional contrast-assisted cannulation technique for the prevention of PEP in people undergoing diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP for biliary or pancreatic diseases.

SEARCH METHODS

For the previous version of this review, we searched CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and major conference proceedings, up to February 2012, with no language restrictions. An updated search was performed on 26 February 2021 for the current version of this review. Two clinical trial registries, clinicaltrials.gov and WHO ICTRP, were also searched in this update.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique versus the contrast-assisted cannulation technique in people undergoing ERCP.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors conducted study selection, data extraction, and methodological quality assessment independently. Using intention-to-treat analysis with random-effects models, we combined dichotomous data to obtain risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed heterogeneity using the Chi² test (P < 0.10) and I² statistic (> 50%). To explore sources of heterogeneity, we conducted a priori subgroup analyses according to trial design, publication type, risk of bias, use of precut sphincterotomy, inadvertent guidewire insertion or contrast injection of the pancreatic duct (PD), use of a PD stent, cannulation device, and trainee involvement in cannulation. To assess the robustness of our results, we carried out sensitivity analyses using different summary statistics (RR versus odds ratio (OR)) and meta-analytic models (fixed-effect versus random-effects) and per-protocol analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

15 RCTs comprising 4426 participants were included. There was moderate heterogeneity among trials for the outcome of PEP (P = 0.08, I² = 36%). Meta-analyses suggest that the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique probably reduces the risk of PEP compared to the contrast-assisted cannulation technique (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.72, 15 studies, moderate-certainty evidence). In addition, the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique may result in an increase in primary cannulation success (RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.12, 13 studies, low-certainty evidence), and probably reduces the need for precut sphincterotomy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.96, 10 studies, moderate-certainty evidence). Compared to the contrast-assisted cannulation technique, the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique may result in little to no difference in the risk of post-sphincterotomy bleeding (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.54, 7 studies, low-certainty evidence) and perforation (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.11 to 8.23, 8 studies, very low-certainty evidence). Procedure-related mortality was reported by eight studies, and there were no cases of deaths in both arms (moderate-certainty evidence). Subgroup analyses suggest that the heterogeneity for the outcome of PEP could be explained by differences in trial design. The results were robust in sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique probably reduces the risk of PEP compared to the contrast-assisted cannulation technique. There is low-certainty evidence that the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique may result in an increase in primary cannulation success. There is low- and very low-certainty evidence that the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique may result in little to no difference in the risk of bleeding and perforation. No procedure-related deaths were reported. Therefore, the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique appears to be superior to the contrast-assisted cannulation technique considering the certainty of evidence and the balance of benefits and harms. However, the routine use of guidewires in biliary cannulation will be dependent on local expertise, availability, and cost. Future research should assess the effectiveness and safety of the guidewire-assisted cannulation technique in the context of other pharmacologic or non-pharmacologic interventions for the prevention of PEP.

Effects of Psychotherapy on Hope/Hopelessness in Adults with Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although psychotherapy is a common treatment for hopelessness and hope, the effectiveness remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively synthesize available evidence related to the effect of a broad range of psychotherapy interventions on hope/hopelessness in cancer patients.

METHOD

Eight electronic databases were searched for studies with adult cancer patients (mean age ≥ 18 years) receiving psychotherapy interventions with hope/hopelessness measured as outcomes and written in English. We used the random-effects model to compute effect size using Hedges' g and conducted moderator analyses.

RESULTS

We found 27 primary studies which included 1,998 participants who were 57.6 ± 8.0 years old across studies. The psychotherapy effect size ranged from - 0.86 to 2.92. Researchers who conducted psychotherapy at hospital/health centers showed higher effects, that is, improved hope scores (g = 0.63), than those who conducted psychotherapy in the community (g = 0.05). When researchers enrolled participants alone, psychotherapy resulted in higher effects (g = 0.62) than when partners/caregivers were involved (g = - 0.04). Researchers who included group discussion showed lower effects (g = 0.36) than without group discussion (g = 1.10). Researchers who examined fidelity found lower effects (g = 0.16) than researchers who did not examine fidelity (g = 0.66). Interestingly, researchers who studied people with breast cancer showed higher effects (g = 0.96) than those who studied people with other types of cancer (g = 0.26). Researchers who included higher percentages of women showed greater effects (slope = 0.008, Q_model = 3.99, p = 0.046). Finally, the greater the time span between psychotherapy and the measurement of hope, the lower the psychotherapy effects (slope = - 0.002, Q_model = 4.25, p = 0.039).

CONCLUSION

Psychotherapy had a solid moderate effect on reducing hopelessness and improving hope in cancer patients compared to controls.

Mobility endpoints in marketing authorisation of drugs: what gets the European medicines agency moving?

BACKGROUND

Mobility is defined as the ability to independently move around the environment and is a key contributor to quality of life, especially in older age. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of mobility as a decisive outcome for the marketing authorisation of drugs by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

METHODS

Fifteen therapeutic areas which commonly lead to relevant mobility impairments and alter the quantity and/or the quality of walking were selected: two systemic neurological diseases, four conditions primarily affecting exercise capacity, seven musculoskeletal diseases and two conditions representing sensory impairments. European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) published by the EMA until September 2020 were examined for mobility endpoints included in their 'main studies'. Clinical study registries and primary scientific publications for these studies were also reviewed.

RESULTS

Four hundred and eighty-four EPARs yielded 186 relevant documents with 402 'main studies'. The EPARs reported 153 primary and 584 secondary endpoints which considered mobility; 70 different assessment tools (38 patient-reported outcomes, 13 clinician-reported outcomes, 8 performance outcomes and 13 composite endpoints) were used. Only 15.7% of those tools distinctly informed on patients' mobility status. Out of 402, 105 (26.1%) of the 'main studies' did not have any mobility assessment. Furthermore, none of these studies included a digital mobility outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

For conditions with a high impact on mobility, mobility assessment was given little consideration in the marketing authorisation of drugs by the EMA. Where mobility impairment was considered to be a relevant outcome, questionnaires or composite scores susceptible to reporting biases were predominantly used.

Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy: Updated comparisons and meta-analyses of newer versus older trials

BACKGROUND

Valid assessment of drug efficacy and safety requires an evidence base free of reporting bias. Using trial reports in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approval packages as a gold standard, we previously found that the published literature inflated the apparent efficacy of antidepressant drugs. The objective of the current study was to determine whether this has improved with recently approved drugs.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Using medical and statistical reviews in FDA drug approval packages, we identified 30 Phase II/III double-blind placebo-controlled acute monotherapy trials, involving 13,747 patients, of desvenlafaxine, vilazodone, levomilnacipran, and vortioxetine; we then identified corresponding published reports. We compared the data from this newer cohort of antidepressants (approved February 2008 to September 2013) with the previously published dataset on 74 trials of 12 older antidepressants (approved December 1987 to August 2002). Using logistic regression, we examined the effects of trial outcome and trial cohort (newer versus older) on transparent reporting (whether published and FDA conclusions agreed). Among newer antidepressants, transparent publication occurred more with positive (15/15 = 100%) than negative (7/15 = 47%) trials (OR 35.1, CI95% 1.8 to 693). Controlling for trial outcome, transparent publication occurred more with newer than older trials (OR 6.6, CI95% 1.6 to 26.4). Within negative trials, transparent reporting increased from 11% to 47%. We also conducted and contrasted FDA- and journal-based meta-analyses. For newer antidepressants, FDA-based effect size (ESFDA) was 0.24 (CI95% 0.18 to 0.30), while journal-based effect size (ESJournals) was 0.29 (CI95% 0.23 to 0.36). Thus, effect size inflation, presumably due to reporting bias, was 0.05, less than for older antidepressants (0.10). Limitations of this study include a small number of trials and drugs-belonging to a single class-and a focus on efficacy (versus safety).

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting bias persists but appears to have diminished for newer, compared to older, antidepressants. Continued efforts are needed to further improve transparency in the scientific literature.

Characteristics of completed clinical trials for spinal cord injury from 1999 to 2020

Numerous clinical trials are being conducted in the field of spinal cord injury (SCI). These trials are typically registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. The objective of this study was to identify the characteristics of the completed SCI trials and characterize the potential factors associated with publication. ClinicalTrials.gov database was queried for all the completed trials on patients with SCI. Baseline characteristics of the completed trials were assessed. The publication status of these trials was identified using PubMed or Google Scholar. The secondary and primary outcomes reported in the publication were then compared to the outcomes registered in ClinicalTrial.gov. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the characteristics associated with publication status and time to publication. A total of 457 of 1,061 trials on SCI were completed. Of those, 60% were ultimately published. Trials that had received funding from sources besides the NIH, private industries, or the federal government were more likely to remain unpublished. The median time to publish was three years, with larger trials taking a longer time. The median sample size for completed trials was 30. Assessment of mismatch rates in primary outcomes of published data to registered outcomes was 8.9%. In SCI trials, outcomes registered on ClinicalTrial.gov often matched published results. Additionally, sample size and funding source play a significant role in the publication rate of these trials. Published data represents a reliable source for clinicians, researchers, and patients; efforts to curb publication bias and reporting bias are paramount for implementing evidence-based practices and ensure proper scientific conduct.

Antidepressant efficacy of Agomelatine: Meta-analysis of placebo controlled and active comparator studies

Agomelatine is a novel antidepressant that was developed to counter the adverse effects associated with the standard SSRIs and SNRIs that limited their usage. Publication bias was identified in antidepressant trials which can potentially overestimate the treatment efficacy. This meta-analysis was designed to assess the overall antidepressant effect of Agomelatine by pooling all the published and unpublished studies available till date. Studies conducted on adult patients who met with the criteria for MDD that evaluated efficacy of Agomelatine at acute phase (6-12weeks) and at long term phase (24weeks) were included. The primary efficacy measured with SMD of final mean scores of HAM-D and MADRS. Secondary efficacy measures of Response, remission and safety parameters were evaluated with relative risks. RevMan version 5.4 was used for analysis of both continuous (Standardized mean difference) and dichotomous outcomes (response, remission and all cause of discontinuation). Efficacy parameters were presented with 99% confidence intervals while safety parameters were presented with 95% CI. A total of 9233 patients were included from 27 studies. In acute phase placebo controlled studies, Agomelatine had a statistically significant SMD of - 0.24 (-0.39 to -0.09) and response rate of (1.25, 1.07-1.47). In comparison (RR 0.99, 0.92-1.07) Agomelatine is an effective antidepressant having similar efficacy with the currently used antidepressants.

Tools for optimising pharmacotherapy in psychiatry (therapeutic drug monitoring, molecular brain imaging and pharmacogenetic tests): focus on antidepressants

Objectives: More than 40 drugs are available to treat affective disorders. Individual selection of the optimal drug and dose is required to attain the highest possible efficacy and acceptable tolerability for every patient.Methods: This review, which includes more than 500 articles selected by 30 experts, combines relevant knowledge on studies investigating the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and pharmacogenetics of 33 antidepressant drugs and of 4 drugs approved for augmentation in cases of insufficient response to antidepressant monotherapy. Such studies typically measure drug concentrations in blood (i.e. therapeutic drug monitoring) and genotype relevant genetic polymorphisms of enzymes, transporters or receptors involved in drug metabolism or mechanism of action. Imaging studies, primarily positron emission tomography that relates drug concentrations in blood and radioligand binding, are considered to quantify target structure occupancy by the antidepressant drugs in vivo. Results: Evidence is given that in vivo imaging, therapeutic drug monitoring and genotyping and/or phenotyping of drug metabolising enzymes should be an integral part in the development of any new antidepressant drug.Conclusions: To guide antidepressant drug therapy in everyday practice, there are multiple indications such as uncertain adherence, polypharmacy, nonresponse and/or adverse reactions under therapeutically recommended doses, where therapeutic drug monitoring and cytochrome P450 genotyping and/or phenotyping should be applied as valid tools of precision medicine.

Gut Microbiome Alteration after Reboxetine Administration in Type-1 Diabetic Rats

Antidepressants are drugs commonly used in clinical settings. However, there are very limited studies on the effects of these drugs on the gut microbiota. Herein, we evaluated the effect of reboxetine (RBX), a selective norepinephrine (noradrenaline) reuptake inhibitor (NRI), on gut microbiota in both diabetic and non-diabetic rats. This is the first report of relation between reboxetine use and the gut microbiota to our knowledge. In this study, type-1 diabetes induced by using streptozotocin (STZ) and RBX was administered to diabetic rats and healthy controls for 14 days. At the end of the treatment, stool samples were collected. Following DNA extraction, amplicon libraries for the V3-V4 region were prepared and sequenced with the Illumina Miseq platform. QIIME was used for preprocessing and analysis of the data. As a result, RBX had a significant effect on gut microbiota structure and composition in diabetic and healthy rats. For example, RBX exposure had a pronounced microbial signature in both groups, with a low Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio and low Lactobacillus levels. While another abundance phylum after exposure to RBX was Proteabacteria, other notable taxa in the diabetic group included Flavobacterium, Desulfovibrionaceae, Helicobacteriaceae, Campylobacterales, and Pasteurellacae when compared to the untreated group.

Benefits and harms of Risperidone and Paliperidone for treatment of patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: a meta-analysis involving individual participant data and clinical study reports

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are severe mental illnesses which are highly prevalent worldwide. Risperidone and Paliperidone are treatments for either illnesses, but their efficacy compared to other antipsychotics and growing reports of hormonal imbalances continue to raise concerns. As existing evidence on both antipsychotics are solely based on aggregate data, we aimed to assess the benefits and harms of Risperidone and Paliperidone in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, using individual participant data (IPD), clinical study reports (CSRs) and publicly available sources (journal publications and trial registries).

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Central, EMBASE and PsycINFO until December 2020 for randomised placebo-controlled trials of Risperidone, Paliperidone or Paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. We obtained IPD and CSRs from the Yale University Open Data Access project. The primary outcome Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score was analysed using one-stage IPD meta-analysis. Random-effect meta-analysis of harm outcomes involved methods for coping with rare events. Effect-sizes were compared across all available data sources using the ratio of means or relative risk. We registered our review on PROSPERO, CRD42019140556.

RESULTS

Of the 35 studies, IPD meta-analysis involving 22 (63%) studies showed a significant clinical reduction in the PANSS in patients receiving Risperidone (mean difference - 5.83, 95% CI - 10.79 to - 0.87, I2 = 8.5%, n = 4 studies, 1131 participants), Paliperidone (- 6.01, 95% CI - 8.7 to - 3.32, I2 = 4.3%, n = 13, 3821) and Paliperidone palmitate (- 7.89, 95% CI - 12.1 to - 3.69, I2 = 2.9%, n = 5, 2209). CSRs reported nearly two times more adverse events (4434 vs. 2296 publication, relative difference (RD) = 1.93, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.00) and almost 8 times more serious adverse events (650 vs. 82; RD = 7.93, 95% CI 6.32 to 9.95) than the journal publications. Meta-analyses of individual harms from CSRs revealed a significant increased risk among several outcomes including extrapyramidal disorder, tardive dyskinesia and increased weight. But the ratio of relative risk between the different data sources was not significant. Three treatment-related gynecomastia events occurred, and these were considered mild to moderate in severity.

CONCLUSION

IPD meta-analysis conclude that Risperidone and Paliperidone antipsychotics had a small beneficial effect on reducing PANSS score over 9 weeks, which is more conservative than estimates from reviews based on journal publications. CSRs also contained significantly more data on harms that were unavailable in journal publications or trial registries. Sharing of IPD and CSRs are necessary when performing meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics.

Misreporting of Results of Research in Psychiatry

Few studies address publication and outcome reporting biases of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in psychiatry. The objective of this study was to determine publication and outcome reporting bias in RCTs funded by the Stanley Medical Research Institute (SMRI), a U.S. based, non-profit organization funding RCTs in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. We identified all RCTs (n = 280) funded by SMRI between 2000 and 2011, and using non-public, final study reports and published manuscripts, we classified the results as positive or negative in terms of the drug compared to placebo. Design, outcome measures and statistical methods specified in the original protocol were compared to the published manuscript. Of 280 RCTs funded by SMRI between 2000 and 2011, at the time of this writing, three RCTs were ongoing and 39 were not performed. Among the 238 completed RCTs, 86 (36.1%) reported positive and 152 (63.9%) reported negative results: 86% (74/86) of those with positive findings were published in contrast to 53% (80/152) of those with negative findings (P < .001). In 70% of the manuscripts published, there were major discrepancies between the published manuscript and the original RCT protocol (change in the primary outcome measure or statistics, change in a number of patient groups, 25% or more reduction in sample size). We conclude that publication bias and outcome reporting bias is common in papers reporting RCTs in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. These data have major implications regarding the validity of the reports of clinical trials published in the literature.

Mass Testing With Contact Tracing Compared to Test and Trace for the Effective Suppression of COVID-19 in the United Kingdom: Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Making testing available to everyone and tracing contacts might be the gold standard to control COVID-19. Many countries including the United Kingdom have relied on the symptom-based test and trace strategy in bringing the COVID-19 pandemic under control. The effectiveness of a test and trace strategy based on symptoms has been questionable and has failed to meet testing and tracing needs. This is further exacerbated by it not being delivered at the point of care, leading to rising cases and deaths. Increases in COVID-19 cases and deaths in the United Kingdom despite performing the highest number of tests in Europe suggest that symptom-based testing and contact tracing might not be effective as a control strategy. An alternative strategy is making testing available to all.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this review was to compare mass testing and contact tracing with the conventional test and trace method in the suppression of SARS-CoV-2 infections. The secondary objective was to determine the proportion of asymptomatic COVID-19 cases reported during mass testing interventions.

METHODS

Literature in English was searched from September through December 2020 in Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Mendeley, and PubMed. Search terms included "mass testing," "test and trace," "contact tracing," "COVID-19," "SARS-CoV-2," "effectiveness," "asymptomatic," "symptomatic," "community screening," "UK," and "2020." Search results were synthesized without meta-analysis using the direction of effect as the standardized metric and vote counting as the synthesis metric. A statistical synthesis was performed using Stata 14.2. Tabular and graphical methods were used to present findings.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 286 articles from Google Scholar, 20 from ScienceDirect, 14 from Mendeley, 27 from PubMed, and 15 through manual search. A total of 35 articles were included in the review, with a sample size of nearly 1 million participants. We found a 76.9% (10/13, 95% CI 46.2%-95.0%; P=.09) majority vote in favor of the intervention under the primary objective. The overall proportion of asymptomatic cases among those who tested positive and in the tested sample populations under the secondary objective was 40.7% (1084/2661, 95% CI 38.9%-42.6%) and 0.0% (1084/9,942,878, 95% CI 0.0%-0.0%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There was low-level but promising evidence that mass testing and contact tracing could be more effective in bringing the virus under control and even more effective if combined with social distancing and face coverings. The conventional test and trace method should be superseded by decentralized and regular mass rapid testing and contact tracing, championed by general practitioner surgeries and low-cost community services.

Suicide risk with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and other new-generation antidepressants in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

There is ongoing controversy whether antidepressant use alters suicide risk in adults with depression and other treatment indications.

METHODS

Systematic review of observational studies, searching MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, PsycARTICLES and SCOPUS for case-control and cohort studies. We included studies on depression and various indications unspecified (including off-label use) reporting risk of suicide and/or suicide attempt for adult patients using selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and other new-generation antidepressants relative to non-users. Effects were meta-analytically aggregated with random-effects models, reporting relative risk (RR) estimates with 95% CIs. Publication bias was assessed via funnel-plot asymmetry and trim-and-fill method. Financial conflict of interest (fCOI) was defined present when lead authors' professorship was industry-sponsored, they received industry-payments, or when the study was industry-sponsored.

RESULTS

We included 27 studies, 19 on depression and 8 on various indications unspecified (n=1.45 million subjects). SSRI were not definitely related to suicide risk (suicide and suicide attempt combined) in depression (RR=1.03, 0.70-1.51) and all indications (RR=1.19, 0.88-1.60). Any new-generation antidepressant was associated with higher suicide risk in depression (RR=1.29, 1.06-1.57) and all indications (RR=1.45, 1.23-1.70). Studies with fCOI reported significantly lower risk estimates than studies without fCOI. Funnel-plots were asymmetrical and imputation of missing studies with trim-and-fill method produced considerably higher risk estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to new-generation antidepressants is associated with higher suicide risk in adult routine-care patients with depression and other treatment indications. Publication bias and fCOI likely contribute to systematic underestimation of risk in the published literature.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/eaqwn/.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous clinical trials and observational studies have investigated various pharmacological agents as potential treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the results are heterogeneous and sometimes even contradictory to one another, making it difficult for clinicians to determine which treatments are truly effective.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We carried out a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions and the level of evidence behind each treatment regimen in different clinical settings. Both published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and confounding-adjusted observational studies which met our predefined eligibility criteria were collected. We included studies investigating the effect of pharmacological management of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 management. Mild patients who do not require hospitalization or have self-limiting disease courses were not eligible for our NMA. A total of 110 studies (40 RCTs and 70 observational studies) were included. PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, SSRN, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the beginning of 2020 to August 24, 2020. Studies from Asia (41 countries, 37.2%), Europe (28 countries, 25.4%), North America (24 countries, 21.8%), South America (5 countries, 4.5%), and Middle East (6 countries, 5.4%), and additional 6 multinational studies (5.4%) were included in our analyses. The outcomes of interest were mortality, progression to severe disease (severe pneumonia, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and/or mechanical ventilation), viral clearance rate, QT prolongation, fatal cardiac complications, and noncardiac serious adverse events. Based on RCTs, the risk of progression to severe course and mortality was significantly reduced with corticosteroids (odds ratio (OR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.86, p = 0.032, and OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91, p = 0.002, respectively) and remdesivir (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.50, p < 0.001, and OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.98, p = 0.041, respectively) compared to standard care for moderate to severe COVID-19 patients in non-ICU; corticosteroids were also shown to reduce mortality rate (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73, p < 0.001) for critically ill patients in ICU. In analyses including observational studies, interferon-alpha (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.39, p = 0.004), itolizumab (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.92, p = 0.042), sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.88, p = 0.030), anakinra (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82, p = 0.019), tocilizumab (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60, p < 0.001), and convalescent plasma (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.96, p = 0.038) were associated with reduced mortality rate in non-ICU setting, while high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.49, p = 0.003), ivermectin (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.57, p = 0.005), and tocilizumab (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90, p = 0.012) were associated with reduced mortality rate in critically ill patients. Convalescent plasma was the only treatment option that was associated with improved viral clearance rate at 2 weeks compared to standard care (OR 11.39, 95% CI 3.91 to 33.18, p < 0.001). The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was shown to be associated with increased QT prolongation incidence (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.20, p = 0.003) and fatal cardiac complications in cardiac-impaired populations (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.00, p = 0.007). No drug was significantly associated with increased noncardiac serious adverse events compared to standard care. The quality of evidence of collective outcomes were estimated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The major limitation of the present study is the overall low level of evidence that reduces the certainty of recommendations. Besides, the risk of bias (RoB) measured by RoB2 and ROBINS-I framework for individual studies was generally low to moderate. The outcomes deducted from observational studies could not infer causality and can only imply associations. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42020186527).

CONCLUSIONS

In this NMA, we found that anti-inflammatory agents (corticosteroids, tocilizumab, anakinra, and IVIG), convalescent plasma, and remdesivir were associated with improved outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not provide clinical benefits while posing cardiac safety risks when combined with azithromycin, especially in the vulnerable population. Only 29% of current evidence on pharmacological management of COVID-19 is supported by moderate or high certainty and can be translated to practice and policy; the remaining 71% are of low or very low certainty and warrant further studies to establish firm conclusions.

Comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of COVID-19: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Numerous clinical trials and observational studies have investigated various pharmacological agents as potential treatment for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but the results are heterogeneous and sometimes even contradictory to one another, making it difficult for clinicians to determine which treatments are truly effective.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We carried out a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to systematically evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions and the level of evidence behind each treatment regimen in different clinical settings. Both published and unpublished randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and confounding-adjusted observational studies which met our predefined eligibility criteria were collected. We included studies investigating the effect of pharmacological management of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 management. Mild patients who do not require hospitalization or have self-limiting disease courses were not eligible for our NMA. A total of 110 studies (40 RCTs and 70 observational studies) were included. PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, medRxiv, SSRN, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the beginning of 2020 to August 24, 2020. Studies from Asia (41 countries, 37.2%), Europe (28 countries, 25.4%), North America (24 countries, 21.8%), South America (5 countries, 4.5%), and Middle East (6 countries, 5.4%), and additional 6 multinational studies (5.4%) were included in our analyses. The outcomes of interest were mortality, progression to severe disease (severe pneumonia, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), and/or mechanical ventilation), viral clearance rate, QT prolongation, fatal cardiac complications, and noncardiac serious adverse events. Based on RCTs, the risk of progression to severe course and mortality was significantly reduced with corticosteroids (odds ratio (OR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 0.86, p = 0.032, and OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.91, p = 0.002, respectively) and remdesivir (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.50, p < 0.001, and OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.98, p = 0.041, respectively) compared to standard care for moderate to severe COVID-19 patients in non-ICU; corticosteroids were also shown to reduce mortality rate (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.73, p < 0.001) for critically ill patients in ICU. In analyses including observational studies, interferon-alpha (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.39, p = 0.004), itolizumab (OR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.92, p = 0.042), sofosbuvir plus daclatasvir (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.88, p = 0.030), anakinra (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82, p = 0.019), tocilizumab (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60, p < 0.001), and convalescent plasma (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.96, p = 0.038) were associated with reduced mortality rate in non-ICU setting, while high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.49, p = 0.003), ivermectin (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.57, p = 0.005), and tocilizumab (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90, p = 0.012) were associated with reduced mortality rate in critically ill patients. Convalescent plasma was the only treatment option that was associated with improved viral clearance rate at 2 weeks compared to standard care (OR 11.39, 95% CI 3.91 to 33.18, p < 0.001). The combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was shown to be associated with increased QT prolongation incidence (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.26 to 3.20, p = 0.003) and fatal cardiac complications in cardiac-impaired populations (OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.00, p = 0.007). No drug was significantly associated with increased noncardiac serious adverse events compared to standard care. The quality of evidence of collective outcomes were estimated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The major limitation of the present study is the overall low level of evidence that reduces the certainty of recommendations. Besides, the risk of bias (RoB) measured by RoB2 and ROBINS-I framework for individual studies was generally low to moderate. The outcomes deducted from observational studies could not infer causality and can only imply associations. The study protocol is publicly available on PROSPERO (CRD42020186527).

CONCLUSIONS

In this NMA, we found that anti-inflammatory agents (corticosteroids, tocilizumab, anakinra, and IVIG), convalescent plasma, and remdesivir were associated with improved outcomes of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Hydroxychloroquine did not provide clinical benefits while posing cardiac safety risks when combined with azithromycin, especially in the vulnerable population. Only 29% of current evidence on pharmacological management of COVID-19 is supported by moderate or high certainty and can be translated to practice and policy; the remaining 71% are of low or very low certainty and warrant further studies to establish firm conclusions.

The magnitude and heterogeneity of antidepressant response in depression: A meta-analysis of over 45,000 patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative variability and magnitude of symptomatic improvement in antidepressant-treated individuals compared to placebo-treated individuals, and to investigate moderating factors.

METHODS

Multiple databases and previous publications were searched through February 2019 to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing placebo and antidepressants in acute treatment of depression. Primary outcome was relative variability of change in symptom severity in antidepressant-treated individuals compared to placebo-treated patients quantified using the coefficient of variation ratio (CVR).

RESULTS

Of 9389 identified records, 134 were found to be eligible (total n = 46,646). Antidepressant-treated patients showed a significantly greater magnitude (g = 0.28, 95% CI 0.25-0.30, p < .0001) and lower variability (CVR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.93-0.95, p < .0001) of change in symptom severity relative to placebo-treated patients. Compared to placebo antidepressant-related improvement was more uniform in older studies (z = 3.01, p = .003) and in studies where antidepressants showed greater efficacy (z = -7.21, p < .0001). | Imipramine, moclobemide, amitriptyline and mirtazapine showed significantly lower CVR than several other antidepressants. However, no difference in CVR exists between multiple and single-neurotransmitter profile antidepressants (z = -0.01, p = .99).

CONCLUSION

There is lower variability and greater magnitude of change in symptom severity with antidepressant treatment relative to placebo. This is not consistent with our hypothesis that there are distinct sub-groups of treatment-responsive and treatment-resistant patients with major depression. Our results in-stead suggest that antidepressants show a relatively uniform effect.

Impact of investigator initiated trials and industry sponsored trials on medical practice (IMPACT): rationale and study design

BACKGROUND

The German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) initiated large research programs to foster high quality clinical research in the academic area. These investigator initiated trials (IITs) cover important areas of medical research and often go beyond the scope of industry sponsored trials (ISTs). The purpose of this project was to understand to what extent results of randomized controlled IITs and ISTs have an impact on medical practice, measured by their availability for decisions in healthcare and their implementation in clinical practice. We aimed to determine study characteristics influencing a trial's impact such as type of sponsor and place of conduct. In this article, we describe the rationale and design of this project and present the characteristics of the trials included in our study cohort.

METHODS

The research impact of the following sub-cohorts was compared: German IITs (funded by DFG and BMBF or by other German non-commercial organizations), international IITs (without German contribution), German ISTs, and international ISTs. Trials included were drawn from the DFG-/BMBF-Websites, the German Clinical Trials Register, and from ClinicalTrials.gov . Research impact was measured as follows: 1) proportion of published trials, 2) time to publication, 3) proportion of publications appropriately indexed in biomedical databases, 4) proportion of openly accessible publications, 5) broadness of publication's target group, 6) citation of publications by systematic reviews or meta-analyses, and 7) appearance of publications or citing systematic reviews or meta-analyses in clinical practice guidelines. We also aimed to identify study characteristics associated with the impact of trials.

RESULTS

We included 691 trials: 120 German IITs, 200 International IITs, 171 German ISTs and 200 International ISTs. The median number of participants was 150, 30% were international trials and 70% national trials, 48% drug-trials and 52% non-drug trials. Overall, 72% of the trials had one pre-defined primary endpoint, 28% two or more (max. 36).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this project deepen our understanding of the impact of biomedical research on clinical practice and healthcare policy, add important insights for the efficient allocation of scarce research resources and may facilitate providing accountability to the different stakeholders involved.

Changes of central noradrenaline transporter availability in immunotherapy-naïve multiple sclerosis patients

The neurotransmitter noradrenaline (NA) mediates arousal, attention and mood, and exerts anti-inflammatory and neuroprotective effects. Alterations of monoamine signalling were reported in multiple sclerosis (MS) and psychiatric illness and may account for the high prevalence of comorbid depression and fatigue in MS patients. We assessed central noradrenaline transporter (NAT) availability using positron emission tomography (PET) and the NAT selective radiotracer S,S-[¹¹C]O-methylreboxetine in immunotherapy-naïve patients with relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS; n = 11) compared to healthy controls (HC; n = 12), and its association to lesion load, time since manifestation, the expanded disability status scale (EDSS), the fatigue scale Würzburger Erschöpfungsinventar bei MS (WEIMuS) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). We found NAT availability to be increased in the thalamus, amygdala, putamen and pons/midbrain of MS patients. No relation to clinical or psychometric variables was found. These first data indicate higher NAT availability in subcortical brain regions of immunotherapy-naïve RRMS patients. If these changes of noradrenergic neurotransmission predispose to psychiatric symptoms or associate with disease activity needs to be investigated in longitudinal studies or a larger sample which allows subgroup analyses.

Publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research: a multimethod study

Background

Bias in the publication and reporting of research findings (referred to as publication and related bias here) poses a major threat in evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making. Although this bias has been well documented in clinical research, little is known about its occurrence and magnitude in health services and delivery research.

Objectives

To obtain empirical evidence on publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research; to examine current practice in detecting/mitigating this bias in health services and delivery research systematic reviews; and to explore stakeholders’ perception and experiences concerning such bias.

Methods

The project included five distinct but interrelated work packages. Work package 1 was a systematic review of empirical and methodological studies. Work package 2 involved a survey (meta-epidemiological study) of randomly selected systematic reviews of health services and delivery research topics (n = 200) to evaluate current practice in the assessment of publication and outcome reporting bias during evidence synthesis. Work package 3 included four case studies to explore the applicability of statistical methods for detecting such bias in health services and delivery research. In work package 4 we followed up four cohorts of health services and delivery research studies (total n = 300) to ascertain their publication status, and examined whether publication status was associated with statistical significance or perceived ‘positivity’ of study findings. Work package 5 involved key informant interviews with diverse health services and delivery research stakeholders (n = 24), and a focus group discussion with patient and service user representatives (n = 8).

Results

We identified only four studies that set out to investigate publication and related bias in health services and delivery research in work package 1. Three of these studies focused on health informatics research and one concerned health economics. All four studies reported evidence of the existence of this bias, but had methodological weaknesses. We also identified three health services and delivery research systematic reviews in which findings were compared between published and grey/unpublished literature. These reviews found that the quality and volume of evidence and effect estimates sometimes differed significantly between published and unpublished literature. Work package 2 showed low prevalence of considering/assessing publication (43%) and outcome reporting (17%) bias in health services and delivery research systematic reviews. The prevalence was lower among reviews of associations than among reviews of interventions. The case studies in work package 3 highlighted limitations in current methods for detecting these biases due to heterogeneity and potential confounders. Follow-up of health services and delivery research cohorts in work package 4 showed positive association between publication status and having statistically significant or positive findings. Diverse views concerning publication and related bias and insights into how features of health services and delivery research might influence its occurrence were uncovered through the interviews with health services and delivery research stakeholders and focus group discussion conducted in work package 5.

Conclusions

This study provided prima facie evidence on publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research. This bias does appear to exist, but its prevalence and impact may vary depending on study characteristics, such as study design, and motivation for conducting the evaluation. Emphasis on methodological novelty and focus beyond summative assessments may mitigate/lessen the risk of such bias in health services and delivery research. Methodological and epistemological diversity in health services and delivery research and changing landscape in research publication need to be considered when interpreting the evidence. Collection of further empirical evidence and exploration of optimal health services and delivery research practice are required.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016052333 and CRD42016052366.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

For knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous, and transparent at all stages of design, execution, and reporting. Assessment of researchers still rarely includes considerations related to trustworthiness, rigor, and transparency. We have developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) as part of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behaviors that strengthen research integrity. We present five principles: responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity. For each principle, we provide a rationale for its inclusion and provide examples where these principles are already being adopted.

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

For knowledge to benefit research and society, it must be trustworthy. Trustworthy research is robust, rigorous, and transparent at all stages of design, execution, and reporting. Assessment of researchers still rarely includes considerations related to trustworthiness, rigor, and transparency. We have developed the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) as part of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity with a specific focus on the need to drive research improvement through ensuring that researchers are explicitly recognized and rewarded for behaviors that strengthen research integrity. We present five principles: responsible research practices; transparent reporting; open science (open research); valuing a diversity of types of research; and recognizing all contributions to research and scholarly activity. For each principle, we provide a rationale for its inclusion and provide examples where these principles are already being adopted.

The evidence base for psychotropic drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency: a meta-assessment of all European Public Assessment Reports

AIMS

To systematically assess the level of evidence for psychotropic drugs approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of all European Public Assessment Reports (EPARs) and meta-analyses of the many studies reported in these EPARs. Eligible EPARs were identified from the EMA's website and individual study reports were requested from the Agency when necessary. All marketing authorisation applications (defined by the drug, the route of administration and given indications) for psychotropic medications for adults (including drugs used in psychiatry and addictology) were considered. EPARs solely based on bioequivalence studies were excluded. Our primary outcome measure was the presence of robust evidence of comparative effectiveness, defined as at least two 'positive' superiority studies against an active comparator. Various other features of the approvals were assessed, such as evidence of non-inferiority v. active comparator and superiority v. placebo. For studies with available data, effect sizes were computed and pooled using a random effect meta-analysis for each dose of each drug in each indication.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven marketing authorisations were identified. For one, comparative effectiveness was explicitly considered as not needed in the EPAR. Of those remaining, 21/26 (81%) did not provide any evidence of superiority against an active comparator, 2/26 (8%) were based on at least two trials showing superiority against active comparator and three (11%) were based on one positive trial; 1/26 provided evidence for two positive non-inferiority analyses v. active comparator and seven (26%) provided evidence for one. In total, 20/27 (74%) evaluations reported evidence of superiority v. placebo with two or more trials. Among the meta-analyses of initiation studies against active comparator (57 available comparisons), the median effect size was 0.051 (range -0.503; 0.318). Twenty approved evaluations (74%) reported evidence of superiority v. placebo on the basis of two or more initiation trials and seven based on a single trial. Among meta-analyses of initiation studies against placebo (125 available comparisons), the median effect size was -0.283 (range -0.820; 0.091). Importantly, among the 89 study reports requested on the EMA website, only 19 were made available 1 year after our requests.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for psychiatric drug approved by the EMA was in general poor. Small to modest effects v. placebo were considered sufficient in indications where an earlier drug exists. Data retrieval was incomplete after 1 year despite EMA's commitment to transparency. Improvements are needed.

Catecholaminergic and opioidergic system mediated effects of reboxetine on diabetic neuropathic pain

RATIONALE

Current data indicate that the noradrenergic system plays a critical role in neuropathic pain treatment. Notably, drugs that directly affect this system may have curative potential in neuropathy-associated pain.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential therapeutic efficacy of reboxetine, a potent and selective noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, on hyperalgesia and allodynia responses in rats with experimental diabetes. Furthermore, mechanistic studies were performed to elucidate the possible mode of actions.

METHODS

Experimental diabetes was induced by a single dose of streptozotocin. Mechanical hyperalgesia, mechanical allodynia, thermal hyperalgesia, and thermal allodynia responses in diabetic rats were evaluated by Randall-Selitto, dynamic plantar, Hargreaves, and warm plate tests, respectively.

RESULTS

Reboxetine treatment (8 and 16 mg/kg for 2 weeks) demonstrated an effect comparable to that of the reference drug, pregabalin, improving the hyperalgesic and allodynic responses secondary to diabetes mellitus. Pretreatment with phentolamine, metoprolol, SR 59230A, and atropine did not alter the abovementioned effects of reboxetine; however, the administration of α-methyl-para-tyrosine methyl ester, propranolol, ICI-118,551, SCH-23390, sulpiride, and naltrindole significantly inhibited these effects. Moreover, reboxetine did not induce a significant difference in the rat plasma glucose levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that the antihyperalgesic and antiallodynic effects of reboxetine are mediated by the catecholaminergic system; β₂-adrenoceptors; D₁-, D₂/D₃-dopaminergic receptors; and δ-opioid receptors. The results suggest that this analgesic effect of reboxetine, besides its neutral profile on glycemic control, may be advantageous in the pharmacotherapy of diabetic neuropathy-induced pain.

Clinical trial registry use in minimally invasive surgical oncology systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Publication bias can arise in systematic reviews when unpublished data are omitted and lead to inaccurate clinical decision making and adverse clinical outcomes. By conducting searches of clinical trial registries (CTRs), researchers can create more accurate systematic reviews and mitigate the risk of publication bias. The aims of this study are: to evaluate CTR use in systematic reviews and meta-analyses within the minimally invasive surgical oncology (MISO) literature; to conduct a search of ClinicalTrials.gov for a subset of reviews to determine if eligible trials exist that could have been used. This is a cross-sectional study of 197 systematic reviews and meta-analyses retrieved from PubMed. Of 137 included studies, 18 (13.1%) reported searching a CTR. Our ClinicalTrials.gov search revealed that of the 25 randomly selected systematic reviews that failed to conduct a trial registry search, 16 (64.0%) would have identified additional data sources. MISO systematic reviews and meta-analyses do not regularly use CTRs in their data collection, despite eligible trials being freely available.