Experience, plasticity, and context: Beyond single-level models of antidepressant action.

IF 5.3 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
David Eckert
{"title":"Experience, plasticity, and context: Beyond single-level models of antidepressant action.","authors":"David Eckert","doi":"10.1177/02698811261473402","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The re-emergence of serotonergic psychedelics has introduced rapid-acting antidepressant effects and has been widely described as a paradigmatic shift in depression treatment. Recently, there has been intense debate about whether the acute subjective effects of psychedelics are necessary for their therapeutic efficacy or merely byproducts of underlying neuroplastic processes. Recent conceptualizations of \"psychoplastogens\" emphasize rapid induction of neuroplasticity as a potential common pathway across mechanistically diverse rapid-acting antidepressants. Here, some argue that the psychedelic experience itself may not be required for enduring therapeutic change while others highlight the clinical and existential significance of the subjective experience and its integration within structured psychotherapeutic settings. This Perspective argues that the debate is often framed too narrowly as a binary opposition between experience and mechanism and opts for a complementary model in which receptor-level signalling, network reorganization, subjective experience, and psychotherapeutic context represent interacting dimensions of a single intervention architecture. Within this framework, subjective experience may be clinically meaningful without being biologically indispensable, while neuroplasticity may constitute an enabling condition without being sufficient in isolation. Rather than asking whether experience or mechanism is primary, the clinically relevant question becomes under which conditions, for which patients, and within which care structures different plasticity-inducing interventions, hallucinogenic or non-hallucinogenic, are most appropriate. This question is further complicated by methodological challenges in isolating those contributions empirically. Psychedelic research thus challenges not only neurobiological models of depression but also existing assumptions about how pharmacological and psychotherapeutic processes converge in antidepressant treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":16892,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychopharmacology","volume":" ","pages":"2698811261473402"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02698811261473402","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The re-emergence of serotonergic psychedelics has introduced rapid-acting antidepressant effects and has been widely described as a paradigmatic shift in depression treatment. Recently, there has been intense debate about whether the acute subjective effects of psychedelics are necessary for their therapeutic efficacy or merely byproducts of underlying neuroplastic processes. Recent conceptualizations of "psychoplastogens" emphasize rapid induction of neuroplasticity as a potential common pathway across mechanistically diverse rapid-acting antidepressants. Here, some argue that the psychedelic experience itself may not be required for enduring therapeutic change while others highlight the clinical and existential significance of the subjective experience and its integration within structured psychotherapeutic settings. This Perspective argues that the debate is often framed too narrowly as a binary opposition between experience and mechanism and opts for a complementary model in which receptor-level signalling, network reorganization, subjective experience, and psychotherapeutic context represent interacting dimensions of a single intervention architecture. Within this framework, subjective experience may be clinically meaningful without being biologically indispensable, while neuroplasticity may constitute an enabling condition without being sufficient in isolation. Rather than asking whether experience or mechanism is primary, the clinically relevant question becomes under which conditions, for which patients, and within which care structures different plasticity-inducing interventions, hallucinogenic or non-hallucinogenic, are most appropriate. This question is further complicated by methodological challenges in isolating those contributions empirically. Psychedelic research thus challenges not only neurobiological models of depression but also existing assumptions about how pharmacological and psychotherapeutic processes converge in antidepressant treatment.

经验,可塑性和环境:超越抗抑郁药作用的单水平模型。
5 -羟色胺类致幻剂的重新出现带来了快速的抗抑郁作用,并被广泛描述为抑郁症治疗的典范转变。最近,关于致幻剂的急性主观效应是其治疗效果所必需的,还是仅仅是潜在神经可塑性过程的副产品,一直存在激烈的争论。最近对“精神致塑剂”的概念强调快速诱导神经可塑性是一种潜在的共同途径,可以跨越多种机制的速效抗抑郁药。在这里,一些人认为,迷幻体验本身可能不需要持久的治疗变化,而另一些人则强调了主观体验的临床和存在意义,以及它在结构化心理治疗环境中的整合。这一观点认为,争论往往被过于狭隘地框框为经验和机制之间的二元对立,并选择了一个互补的模型,其中受体水平的信号传导、网络重组、主观经验和心理治疗背景代表了单一干预架构的相互作用维度。在这个框架内,主观经验可能在临床上有意义,但在生物学上是不可缺少的,而神经可塑性可能构成一种使能条件,但在孤立情况下不是充分的。而不是问经验或机制是主要的,临床相关的问题变成了在哪些条件下,对哪些患者,以及在哪些护理结构中,不同的可塑性诱导干预(致幻或非致幻)是最合适的。从经验上孤立这些贡献的方法挑战使这个问题进一步复杂化。因此,迷幻药的研究不仅挑战了抑郁症的神经生物学模型,也挑战了关于抗抑郁药物治疗中药理学和心理治疗过程如何融合的现有假设。
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
Journal of Psychopharmacology
Journal of Psychopharmacology 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
4.90%
发文量
126
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Psychopharmacology is a fully peer-reviewed, international journal that publishes original research and review articles on preclinical and clinical aspects of psychopharmacology. The journal provides an essential forum for researchers and practicing clinicians on the effects of drugs on animal and human behavior, and the mechanisms underlying these effects. The Journal of Psychopharmacology is truly international in scope and readership.
×
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
小红书