Dataset Information

Suicidality and aggression during antidepressant treatment: systematic review and meta-analyses based on clinical study reports.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To study serious harms associated with selective serotonin and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Main outcome measures

Mortality and suicidality. Secondary outcomes were aggressive behaviour and akathisia.

Data sources

Clinical study reports for duloxetine, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine obtained from the European and UK drug regulators, and summary trial reports for duloxetine and fluoxetine from Eli Lilly's website.

Eligibility criteria for study selection

Double blind placebo controlled trials that contained any patient narratives or individual patient listings of harms.

Data extraction and analysis

Two researchers extracted data independently; the outcomes were meta-analysed by Peto's exact method (fixed effect model).

Results

We included 70 trials (64,381 pages of clinical study reports) with 18,526 patients. These trials had limitations in the study design and discrepancies in reporting, which may have led to serious under-reporting of harms. For example, some outcomes appeared only in individual patient listings in appendices, which we had for only 32 trials, and we did not have case report forms for any of the trials. Differences in mortality (all deaths were in adults, odds ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 4.06), suicidality (1.21, 0.84 to 1.74), and akathisia (2.04, 0.93 to 4.48) were not significant, whereas patients taking antidepressants displayed more aggressive behaviour (1.93, 1.26 to 2.95). For adults, the odds ratios were 0.81 (0.51 to 1.28) for suicidality, 1.09 (0.55 to 2.14) for aggression, and 2.00 (0.79 to 5.04) for akathisia. The corresponding values for children and adolescents were 2.39 (1.31 to 4.33), 2.79 (1.62 to 4.81), and 2.15 (0.48 to 9.65). In the summary trial reports on Eli Lilly's website, almost all deaths were noted, but all suicidal ideation events were missing, and the information on the remaining outcomes was incomplete.

Conclusions

Because of the shortcomings identified and having only partial access to appendices with no access to case report forms, the harms could not be estimated accurately. In adults there was no significant increase in all four outcomes, but in children and adolescents the risk of suicidality and aggression doubled. To elucidate the harms reliably, access to anonymised individual patient data is needed.

SUBMITTER: Sharma T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4729837 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine whether network meta-analyses, increasingly used to assess comparative effectiveness of healthcare interventions, follow the key methodological recommendations for reporting and conduct of systematic reviews.DesignMethodological systematic review of reports of network meta-analyses.Data sourcesCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Medline, and Embase, searched from inception to 12 July 2012.Review methodsAll network meta-analyses comparing clinical efficacy of three or more interventions based on randomised controlled trials, excluding meta-analyses with an open loop network of three interventions. We assessed the reporting of general characteristics and key methodological components of the systematic review process using two composite outcomes. For some components, if reporting was adequate, we assessed their conduct quality.ResultsOf 121 network meta-analyses covering a wide range of medical areas, 100 (83%) assessed pharmacological interventions and 11 (9%) non-pharmacological interventions; 56 (46%) were published in journals with a high impact factor. The electronic search strategy for each database was not reported in 88 (73%) network meta-analyses; for 36 (30%), the primary outcome was not clearly identified. Overall, 61 (50%) network meta-analyses did not report any information regarding the assessment of risk of bias of individual studies, and 103 (85%) did not report any methods to assess the likelihood of publication bias. Overall, 87 (72%) network meta-analyses did not report the literature search, searched only one database, did not search other sources, or did not report an assessment of risk of bias of individual studies. These methodological components did not differ by publication in a general or specialty journal or by public or private funding.ConclusionsEssential methodological components of the systematic review process-conducting a literature search and assessing risk of bias of individual studies-are frequently lacking in reports of network meta-analyses, even when published in journals with high impact factors.

Project description:Inflammatory cytokines are commonly elevated in acute depression and are associated with resistance to monoaminergic treatment. To examine the potential role of cytokines in the pathogenesis and treatment of depression, we carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of antidepressant activity of anti-cytokine treatment using clinical trials of chronic inflammatory conditions where depressive symptoms were measured as a secondary outcome. Systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane databases, search of reference lists and conference abstracts, followed by study selection process yielded 20 clinical trials. Random effect meta-analysis of seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2370 participants showed a significant antidepressant effect of anti-cytokine treatment compared with placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD)=0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.22-0.59). Anti-tumour necrosis factor drugs were most commonly studied (five RCTs); SMD=0.33 (95% CI; 0.06-0.60). Separate meta-analyses of two RCTs of adjunctive treatment with anti-cytokine therapy and eight non-randomised and/or non-placebo studies yielded similar small-to-medium effect estimates favouring anti-cytokine therapy; SMD=0.19 (95% CI, 0.00-0.37) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.34-0.67), respectively. Adalimumab, etanercept, infliximab and tocilizumab all showed statistically significant improvements in depressive symptoms. Meta-regression exploring predictors of response found that the antidepressant effect was associated with baseline symptom severity (P=0.018) but not with improvement in primary physical illness, sex, age or study duration. The findings indicate a potentially causal role for cytokines in depression and that cytokine modulators may be novel drugs for depression in chronically inflamed subjects. The field now requires RCTs of cytokine modulators using depression as the primary outcome in subjects with high inflammation who are free of other physical illnesses.

Project description:Introduction: Neuromodulation is an important group of therapeutic modalities for neuropsychiatric disorders. Prior studies have focused on efficacy and adverse events associated with neuromodulation. Less is known regarding the influence of neuromodulation treatments on suicidality. This systematic review sought to examine the effects of various neuromodulation techniques on suicidality. Methods: A systematic review of the literature from 1940 to 2020 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline was conducted. Any reported suicide-related outcome, including suicidal ideation, suicide intent, suicide attempt, completed suicide in reports were considered as a putative measure of treatment effect on suicidality. Results: The review identified 129 relevant studies. An exploratory analysis of a randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of sertraline and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) for treating depression reported a decrease in suicidal ideation favoring tDCS vs. placebo and tDCS combined with sertraline vs. placebo. Several studies reported an association between repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and improvements in suicidal ideation. In 12 of the studies, suicidality was the primary outcome, ten of which showed a significant improvement in suicidal ideation. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and magnetic seizure therapy was also shown to be associated with lower suicidal ideation and completed suicide rates. There were 11 studies which suicidality was the primary outcome and seven of these showed an improvement in suicidal ideation or suicide intent and fewer suicide attempts or completed suicides in patients treated with ECT. There was limited literature focused on the potential protective effect of vagal nerve stimulation with respect to suicidal ideation. Data were mixed regarding the potential effects of deep brain stimulation on suicidality. Conclusions: Future prospective studies of neuromodulation that focus on the primary outcome of suicidality are urgently needed. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=125599, identifier: CRD42019125599.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the benefits and harms of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines. DATA SOURCES:Clinical study reports obtained from the European Medicines Agency and GlaxoSmithKline from 2014 to 2017. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:Randomised trials that compared an HPV vaccine with a placebo or active comparator in healthy participants of all ages. APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS:Two researchers extracted data and judged risk of bias with the Cochrane tool (version 2011). Risk ratio (RR) estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. OUTCOMES:Clinically relevant outcomes in intention to treat populations-including HPV-related cancer precursors irrespective of involved HPV types, treatment procedures and serious and general harms. RESULTS:Twenty-four of 50 eligible clinical study reports were obtained with 58,412 pages of 22 trials and 2 follow-up studies including 95,670 participants: 79,102 females and 16,568 males age 8-72; 393,194 person-years; and 49?months mean weighted follow-up. We judged all 24 studies to be at high risk of bias. Serious harms were incompletely reported for 72% of participants (68,610/95,670). Nearly all control participants received active comparators (48,289/48,595, 99%). No clinical study report included complete case report forms. At 4 years follow-up, the HPV vaccines reduced HPV-related carcinoma in situ (367 in the HPV vaccine group vs. 490 in the comparator group, RR 0.73 [95% confidence interval, CI, 0.53 to 1.00], number needed to vaccinate [NNV] 387, P?=?0.05, I2 =?67%) and HPV-related treatment procedures (1018 vs. 1416, RR 0.71 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.80], NNV 75, P?<?0.00001, I2 =?45%). The HPV vaccines increased serious nervous system disorders (exploratory analysis: 72 vs. 46, RR 1.49 [1.02 to 2.16], number needed to harm [NNH] 1325, P?=?0.040, I2 =?0%) and general harms (13,248 vs. 12,394, RR 1.07 [95% CI 1.03 to 1.11], NNH 51, P?= 0.0002, I2 =?77%) but did not significantly increase fatal harms (45 vs. 38, RR 1.19 [95% CI 0.65 to 2.19], P?=?0.58, I2 =?30%) or serious harms (1404 vs. 1357, RR 1.01 [95% CI 0.94 to 1.08], P?=?0.79, I2 =?0%). CONCLUSION:At 4 years follow-up, the HPV vaccines decreased HPV-related cancer precursors and treatment procedures but increased serious nervous system disorders (exploratory analysis) and general harms. As the included trials were primarily designed to assess benefits and were not adequately designed to assess harms, the extent to which the HPV vaccines' benefits outweigh their harms is unclear. Limited access to clinical study reports and trial data with case report forms prevented a thorough assessment. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:CRD42017056093. Our systematic review protocol was registered on PROSPERO in January 2017: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/56093_PROTOCOL_20170030.pdf. Two protocol amendments were registered on PROSPERO on November 2017: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPEROFILES/56093_PROTOCOL_20171116.pdf. Our index of the HPV vaccine studies was published in Systematic Reviews in January 2018: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0675-z. A description of the challenges obtaining the data was published in September 2018: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k3694.

Project description:ImportancePopulation-based findings on physician suicide are of great relevance because this is an important and understudied topic.ObjectiveTo evaluate male and female physician suicide risks compared with the general population from 1980 to date and test whether there is a reduction of SMR in cohorts after 1980 compared with before 1980 via a meta-analysis, modeling studies, and a systematic review emphasizing physician suicide risk factors.Data sourcesThis study uses studies retrieved from PubMed, Scielo, PsycINFO, and Lilacs for human studies published by October 3, 2019, using the search term "(((suicide) OR (self-harm) OR (suicidality)) AND ((physicians) OR (doctors)))." Databases were also searched from countries listed in articles selected for review. Data were also extracted from an existing article by other authors to facilitate comparisons of the pre-1980 suicide rate with the post-1980 changes.Study selectionOriginal articles assessing male and/or female physician suicide were included; for the meta-analysis, only cohorts from 1980 to the present were included.Data extraction and synthesisThe preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis followed Cochrane, PRISMA, and MOOSE guidelines. Data were extracted into standardized tables per a prespecified structured checklist, and quality scores were added. Heterogeneity was tested via Q test, I2, and τ2. For pooled effect estimates, we used random-effects models. The Begg and Egger tests, sensitivity analyses, and meta-regression were performed. Proportional mortality ratios were presented when SMR data could not be extracted.Main outcomes and measuresSuicide SMRs for male and female physicians from 1980 to the present and changes over time (before and after 1980).ResultsOf 7877 search results, 32 articles were included in the systematic review and 9 articles and data sets in the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis showed a significantly higher suicide SMR in female physicians compared with women in general (1.46 [95% CI, 1.02-1.91]) and a significantly lower suicide SMR in male physicians compared with men in general (0.67 [95% CI, 0.55-0.79]). Male and female physician SMRs significantly decreased after 1980 vs before 1980 (male physicians: SMR, -0.84 [95% CI, -1.26 to -0.42]; P < .001; female physicians: SMR, -1.96 [95% CI, -3.09 to -0.84]; P = .002). No evidence of publication bias was found.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, suicide SMR was found to be high in female physicians and low in male physicians since 1980 but also to have decreased over time in both groups. Physician suicides are multifactorial, and further research into these factors is critical.