Section of Negative Affect and Social Processes, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Anxiety Disorders Outpatient Program, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
PLoS Med. 2021 Jun 10;18(6):e1003664. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003664. eCollection 2021 Jun.
Anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, and stress-related disorders frequently co-occur, and patients often present symptoms of several domains. Treatment involves the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), but data on comparative efficacy and acceptability are lacking. We aimed to compare the efficacy of SSRIs, SNRIs, and placebo in multiple symptom domains in patients with these diagnoses over the lifespan through a 3-level network meta-analysis.
We searched for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials that aimed to assess the efficacy of SSRIs or SNRIs in participants (adults and children) with diagnosis of any anxiety, obsessive-compulsive, or stress-related disorder in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to 23 April 2015, with an update on 11 November 2020. We supplemented electronic database searches with manual searches for published and unpublished randomized controlled trials registered in publicly accessible clinical trial registries and pharmaceutical companies' databases. No restriction was made regarding comorbidities with any other mental disorder, participants' age and sex, blinding of participants and researchers, date of publication, or study language. The primary outcome was the aggregate measure of internalizing symptoms of these disorders. Secondary outcomes included specific symptom domains and treatment discontinuation rate. We estimated standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 3-level network meta-analysis with random slopes by study for medication and assessment instrument. Risk of bias appraisal was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. This study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017069090). We analyzed 469 outcome measures from 135 studies (n = 30,245). All medications were more effective than placebo for the aggregate measure of internalizing symptoms (SMD -0.56, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.51, p < 0.001), for all symptom domains, and in patients from all diagnostic categories. We also found significant results when restricting to the most used assessment instrument for each diagnosis; nevertheless, this restriction led to exclusion of 72.71% of outcome measures. Pairwise comparisons revealed only small differences between medications in efficacy and acceptability. Limitations include the moderate heterogeneity found in most outcomes and the moderate risk of bias identified in most of the trials.
In this study, we observed that all SSRIs and SNRIs were effective for multiple symptom domains, and in patients from all included diagnostic categories. We found minimal differences between medications concerning efficacy and acceptability. This three-level network meta-analysis contributes to an ongoing discussion about the true benefit of antidepressants with robust evidence, considering the significantly larger quantity of data and higher statistical power when compared to previous studies. The 3-level approach allowed us to properly assess the efficacy of these medications on internalizing psychopathology, avoiding potential biases related to the exclusion of information due to distinct assessment instruments, and to explore the multilevel structure of transdiagnostic efficacy.
焦虑症、强迫症和与压力相关的障碍经常同时发生,患者通常会出现多个领域的症状。治疗包括使用选择性 5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)和 5-羟色胺和去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SNRIs),但缺乏关于比较疗效和可接受性的数据。我们旨在通过 3 级网络荟萃分析比较这些诊断患者在多个症状领域中 SSRIs、SNRIs 和安慰剂的疗效。
我们在 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆中搜索了从成立到 2015 年 4 月 23 日发表和未发表的随机对照试验,旨在评估 SSRIs 或 SNRIs 在任何焦虑、强迫症或压力相关障碍诊断的参与者(成人和儿童)中的疗效,2020 年 11 月 11 日进行了更新。我们通过手动搜索公开获取的临床试验注册处和制药公司数据库中已注册的发表和未发表的随机对照试验,补充了电子数据库搜索。没有对任何其他精神障碍的合并症、参与者的年龄和性别、参与者和研究人员的盲法、发表日期或研究语言进行限制。主要结局是这些疾病的内在症状的综合衡量标准。次要结局包括特定症状领域和治疗停药率。我们使用随机斜率的 3 级网络荟萃分析,根据研究对药物和评估工具估计标准化均数差(SMD)。使用 Cochrane 协作风险偏倚工具进行风险偏倚评估。本研究在 PROSPERO(CRD42017069090)中进行了注册。我们分析了来自 135 项研究(n=30245)的 469 个结局指标。与安慰剂相比,所有药物对内在症状的综合衡量标准(SMD-0.56,95%CI-0.62 至-0.51,p<0.001)、所有症状领域和所有诊断类别的患者都更有效。当限制为每个诊断最常用的评估工具时,我们也发现了显著的结果;然而,这种限制导致 72.71%的结局指标被排除在外。两两比较显示药物在疗效和可接受性方面仅有微小差异。局限性包括大多数结果中发现的中度异质性和大多数试验中确定的中度偏倚风险。
在这项研究中,我们观察到所有 SSRIs 和 SNRIs 对多个症状领域都有效,对所有纳入的诊断类别患者都有效。我们发现药物在疗效和可接受性方面的差异很小。与之前的研究相比,这项 3 级网络荟萃分析使用了大量的数据和更高的统计能力,为正在进行的关于抗抑郁药真正益处的讨论提供了有力的证据。3 级方法有助于正确评估这些药物对内隐精神病理学的疗效,避免因使用不同的评估工具而排除信息所导致的潜在偏倚,并探索跨诊断疗效的多层次结构。