What if STAR*D Had Been Placebo-Controlled? A Critical Reexamination of a Foundational Study in Depression Treatment.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Kevin P Kennedy, Jonathan P Heldt, David W Oslin
{"title":"What if STAR*D Had Been Placebo-Controlled? A Critical Reexamination of a Foundational Study in Depression Treatment.","authors":"Kevin P Kennedy, Jonathan P Heldt, David W Oslin","doi":"10.1097/JCP.0000000000002025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The STAR*D trial's sequence of dose escalation, switching, and augmentation strategies has served as a model for most depression treatment guidelines. However, STAR*D was an open-label pragmatic trial that did not use a placebo control, which complicates the assessment of its outcomes. Most STAR*D treatment steps have now been studied in blinded placebo-controlled randomized trials, which could validate STAR*D and support the growing use of pragmatic trials in depression.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review evaluates outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the major STAR*D treatment steps: dose increase after inadequate response to an antidepressant (Level 1), switching the antidepressant after treatment nonresponse (Levels 2 and 3), augmenting an antidepressant with bupropion or buspirone (Level 2), augmenting an antidepressant with lithium or T3 thyroid hormone (Level 3), and using combination mirtazapine-venlafaxine (Level 4).</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>RCTs have generally not replicated the findings of STAR*D. Of the major treatment steps, there is only positive evidence for lithium augmentation and α2-antagonist-serotonin-reuptake inhibitor combination. Limitations of this review include variation in the quality and quantity of comparable RCTs for each treatment level and differences in the inclusion criteria of RCTs and STAR*D.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings raise questions about the evidence supporting widely used treatment strategies following an inadequate response to an initial antidepressant. They suggest that pragmatic trials should be interpreted cautiously in the absence of blinded placebo-controlled studies and point to the need for high-quality blinded clinical trials of second-step and third-step depression treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":15455,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JCP.0000000000002025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The STAR*D trial's sequence of dose escalation, switching, and augmentation strategies has served as a model for most depression treatment guidelines. However, STAR*D was an open-label pragmatic trial that did not use a placebo control, which complicates the assessment of its outcomes. Most STAR*D treatment steps have now been studied in blinded placebo-controlled randomized trials, which could validate STAR*D and support the growing use of pragmatic trials in depression.

Methods: This review evaluates outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the major STAR*D treatment steps: dose increase after inadequate response to an antidepressant (Level 1), switching the antidepressant after treatment nonresponse (Levels 2 and 3), augmenting an antidepressant with bupropion or buspirone (Level 2), augmenting an antidepressant with lithium or T3 thyroid hormone (Level 3), and using combination mirtazapine-venlafaxine (Level 4).

Findings: RCTs have generally not replicated the findings of STAR*D. Of the major treatment steps, there is only positive evidence for lithium augmentation and α2-antagonist-serotonin-reuptake inhibitor combination. Limitations of this review include variation in the quality and quantity of comparable RCTs for each treatment level and differences in the inclusion criteria of RCTs and STAR*D.

Conclusions: These findings raise questions about the evidence supporting widely used treatment strategies following an inadequate response to an initial antidepressant. They suggest that pragmatic trials should be interpreted cautiously in the absence of blinded placebo-controlled studies and point to the need for high-quality blinded clinical trials of second-step and third-step depression treatments.

如果STAR*D是安慰剂控制的呢?对抑郁症治疗基础研究的重新审视。
背景:STAR*D试验的剂量递增、转换和增强策略序列已成为大多数抑郁症治疗指南的模型。然而,STAR*D是一项开放标签的实用试验,没有使用安慰剂对照,这使其结果的评估变得复杂。大多数STAR*D治疗步骤现在已经在盲法安慰剂对照随机试验中进行了研究,这可以验证STAR*D,并支持在抑郁症中越来越多地使用实用试验。方法:本综述评估了主要STAR*D治疗步骤的随机对照试验(rct)的结果:抗抑郁药反应不足后增加剂量(1级),治疗无反应后切换抗抑郁药(2级和3级),安非他酮或丁螺环酮增加抗抑郁药(2级),锂或T3甲状腺激素增加抗抑郁药(3级),米氮平-文拉辛联合使用抗抑郁药(4级)。发现:随机对照试验一般没有重复STAR*D的发现。在主要治疗步骤中,只有锂离子增强和α2-拮抗剂-血清素-再摄取抑制剂联合治疗有阳性证据。本综述的局限性包括每个治疗水平的可比较rct的质量和数量存在差异,rct和STAR*D的纳入标准存在差异。结论:这些发现提出了一个问题,即在初始抗抑郁药反应不足后,是否有证据支持广泛使用的治疗策略。他们建议,在缺乏盲法安慰剂对照研究的情况下,应谨慎解读实用试验,并指出需要对第二步和第三步抑郁症治疗进行高质量的盲法临床试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
3.40%
发文量
231
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, a leading publication in psychopharmacology, offers a wide range of articles reporting on clinical trials and studies, side effects, drug interactions, overdose management, pharmacogenetics, pharmacokinetics, and psychiatric effects of non-psychiatric drugs. The journal keeps clinician-scientists and trainees up-to-date on the latest clinical developments in psychopharmacologic agents, presenting the extensive coverage needed to keep up with every development in this fast-growing field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信