Trials

In the years after 1980, drug trials departed increasingly from the concept of treating real patients. Clinical trials accompanied psychopharmacology as a basic means of gathering evidence in the field, but they also served as the premier means of evasion and distortion used fraudulently and covertly to corrupt the evidence base of psychopharmacology. The fundamental problem in running clinical trials of depression treatments was that the “patients” were considered heterogeneous or “fantasy patients” who really had nothing. Leo Hollister recommended that depression trials be confined to patients with serious or “endogenous” depression, who were the minority of patients encountered in clinical practice.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of interventions for depressive symptoms in patients with coronary artery disease

Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Objective Depression is common in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and is associated with poor outcomes. Although different treatments are available, it is unclear which are best or most acceptable to patients, so we conducted a network meta-analysis of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of different depression treatments to ascertain relative efficacy. Methods We searched for systematic reviews of RCTs of depression treatments in CAD and updated these with a comprehensive search for recent individual RCTs. RCTs comparing depression treatments (pharmacological, psychotherapeutic, combined pharmacological/psychotherapeutic, exercise, collaborative care) were included. Primary outcomes were acceptability (dropout rate) and change in depressive symptoms 8-weeks post-treatment commencement. Change in 26-week depression and mortality were secondary outcomes. Frequentist, random effects network meta-analysis synthesized the evidence. GRADE was used to assess evidence quality. Results Thirty-three RCTs (7240 participants) provided analysable data. All treatments were equally acceptable. At 8-weeks, combination therapy (1 study), exercise (1 study), and antidepressants (10 studies) yielded the strongest effects versus comparators. At 26-weeks, antidepressants were consistently effective, but psychotherapy was only effective versus usual care. There were no differences in treatment groups for mortality. GRADE ratings ranged from very low to low. Conclusions All treatments were equally acceptable, while antidepressants appeared to have the most robust evidence base for post-CAD depression. The evidence base was limited and biased; conclusions based on this literature should be drawn cautiously and considered to be tentative. Rigorous, multi-arm intervention trials, including trials of combination therapies and exercise, are urgently needed.

Depression treatment research in people with cancer does not reflect cancer prevalence: findings from a systematic review

BackgroundOne in six people with cancer will develop depression at some point in their care. Untreated depression affects quality of life, cancer care satisfaction and healthcare expenditure. Treatments for this vulnerable heterogenous population should be evidence based and specific. A common sentiment is that psychiatric research does not reflect the prevalence of patients with cancer and comorbid depression and is biased towards certain cancers, but this has not been empirically shown.Study selection and analysisA systematic review of studies on psychological and pharmacological treatments for depression in people with cancer was conducted. Of 4621 papers identified from a search of PubMed and PsycINFO up to 27 June 2020, 84 met inclusion criteria (eg, adults with cancer; depression diagnosis; treatment study) and comprised 6048 participants with depression with cancer.FindingsCancer types are not proportionally represented in depression research in accordance with their incidence. Breast cancer is over-represented (relative frequency in research 49.3%, but 11.7% of global cancer). Cancers of the head and neck and bone and soft tissue were close to parity. All other cancers are under-represented. Representativeness varied 40-fold across different cancers.ConclusionsThe evidence base for depression treatments is dominated by a single cancer. Given heterogeneity in cancer populations (eg, stage of illness; psychological impact; cancer treatments), it is possible that depression treatments may not have the same benefits and harms across all cancers, impeding the ability to offer people with different cancers the best depression treatment. While the dominant opinion within this research field is that a cancer bias exists, this is the first study to demonstrate as such.

Chapter 1

Barker discusses the causes, frequency, and treatment of insanity, with references to contemporary articles and authorities on mental illness such as Benjamin Rush, Philippe Pinel, and Thomas Arnold. Case presentations include delirium, suicide, and problems associated with use of ardent spirits. A case of frenzy alternating with dejected behavior would today be called bipolar disorder or manic depression. Treatments include diet, bloodletting, blisters, mercurials and salivation, cathartics, cold baths, and other modalities.

Culturally adapted depression education and engagement in treatment among Hispanics in primary care: outcomes from a pilot feasibility study

Background Low use of anti-depressant medication, poor doctor-patient communication, and persistent stigma are key barriers to the treatment of depression in Hispanics. Common concerns include fears about the addictive and harmful properties of antidepressants, worries about taking too many pills, and the stigma attached to taking medications and seeking mental health treatments. In 2014, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) funded the Depression Screening and Education: Options to Reduce Barriers to Treatment (DESEO) project to implement an education intervention designed to increase disease literacy and dispel myths about depression and its treatment among Hispanic patients thus reducing stigma and increasing treatment engagement. Methods The DESEO study utilized a one-group pretest-posttest design to assess the effects a culturally-adapted Depression Education Intervention’s (DEI) on depression knowledge, stigma, and engagement in treatment in a sample of 350 Hispanic primary care patients with depression. The DEI utilized a fotonovela, a health education tool available in English and Spanish that uses posed photographs, captions, and soap opera narratives to raise awareness about depression and depression treatments. Results Participants reported significant decreases in depression symptoms and reported stigma about mental health care. Additionally, participants reported increased knowledge of depression yet greater negative perceptions about antidepressant medication. Finally, 89.5% of participants reported entering some form of treatment at follow-up. Conclusions Culturally adapted depression education shows promise in increasing understanding of depression, decreasing stigma, and increasing treatment engagement among Hispanic patients in a community-based health center. Results have implications for practice in addressing common concerns about depression treatments which include fears about the addictive and harmful properties of antidepressants, worries about taking too many pills, and the stigma attached to taking psychotropic medications. Trial registration The study was retrospectively registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02491034 July 2, 2015.