PsyQ Emmen, Emmen, Netherlands.
Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Dec 7;12(12):CD004044. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004044.pub5.
Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an antipsychotic, another treatment (e.g. mifepristone), or combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and last updated in 2015.
A search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR); Ovid MEDLINE (1950-); Embase (1974-); and PsycINFO (1960-) was conducted on 21 February 2020. Reference lists of all included studies and related reviews were screened and key study authors contacted.
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with acute major depression with psychotic features, as well as RCTs consisting of participants with acute major depression with or without psychotic features, that reported separately on the subgroup of participants with psychotic features.
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in the included studies, according to criteria from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data were entered into RevMan 5.1. We used intention-to-treat data. Primary outcomes were clinical response for efficacy and overall dropout rate for harm/tolerance. Secondary outcome were remission of depression, change from baseline severity score, quality of life, and dropout rate due to adverse effects. For dichotomous efficacy outcomes (i.e. response and overall dropout), risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Regarding the primary outcome of harm, only overall dropout rates were available for all studies. If the study did not report any of the response criteria as defined above, remission as defined here could be used as an alternative. For continuously distributed outcomes, it was not possible to extract data from the RCTs. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 3947 abstracts, but only 12 RCTs with a total of 929 participants could be included in the review. Because of clinical heterogeneity, few meta-analyses were possible. The main outcome was reduction in severity (response) of depression, not of psychosis. For depression response, we found no evidence of a difference between antidepressant and placebo (RR 8.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 142.27; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or between antipsychotic and placebo (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.73; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found no evidence of a difference in overall dropouts with antidepressant (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.51; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.08; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No evidence suggests a difference in depression response (RR 2.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 6.82; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or overall dropouts (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.18 to 18.02; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) between antidepressant and antipsychotic. For depression response, low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests that the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic may be more effective than antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.38; participants = 447, studies = 4), more effective than antidepressant monotherapy (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80; participants = 245, studies = 5), and more effective than placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.82; participants = 148, studies = 2). Very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in overall dropouts between the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.01; participants = 447, studies = 4), antidepressant monotherapy (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50; participants = 245, studies = 5), or placebo alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; participants = 148, studies = 2). No study measured change in depression severity from baseline, quality of life, or dropouts due to adverse events. We found no RCTs with mifepristone that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Risk of bias is considerable: we noted differences between studies with regards to diagnosis, uncertainties around randomisation and allocation concealment, treatment interventions (pharmacological differences between various antidepressants and antipsychotics), and outcome criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Psychotic depression is heavily under-studied, limiting confidence in the conclusions drawn. Some evidence indicates that combination therapy with an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic is more effective than either treatment alone or placebo. Evidence is limited for treatment with an antidepressant alone or with an antipsychotic alone. Evidence for efficacy of mifepristone is lacking.
关于治疗精神病性抑郁症最有效的药物治疗方法,证据有限:抗抑郁药单药治疗、抗精神病药单药治疗、米非司酮单药治疗、另一种治疗方法(例如米非司酮)或抗抑郁药联合抗精神病药。这是 2005 年首次发表并于 2015 年更新的综述的更新。
对 Cochrane 图书馆 Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、Cochrane 常见精神障碍对照试验注册库(CCMDCTR)、Ovid MEDLINE(1950-)、Embase(1974-)和 PsycINFO(1960-)进行了搜索。于 2020 年 2 月 21 日进行。对所有纳入研究和相关综述的参考文献进行筛选,并联系了关键研究作者。
所有包括有急性重度抑郁症伴精神病特征的参与者的随机对照试验(RCT),以及包括有或没有精神病特征的急性重度抑郁症的参与者的 RCT,均单独报告有精神病特征的参与者亚组的结果。
两名综述作者独立提取数据,并根据 Cochrane 系统评价干预措施手册中的标准评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。数据输入 RevMan 5.1。我们使用意向治疗数据。主要结局是疗效的临床反应和总体不良事件发生率。次要结局是抑郁缓解、从基线严重程度评分的变化、生活质量和因不良反应导致的脱落率。对于二分类疗效结局(即反应和总体脱落),计算风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)。对于主要结局危害,所有研究都仅报告了总体脱落率。如果研究未报告上述任何反应标准,则可使用此处定义的缓解来替代。对于连续分布的结局,无法从 RCT 中提取数据。
搜索共确定了 3947 篇摘要,但只有 12 项 RCT 共 929 名参与者符合纳入标准。由于临床异质性,很少能进行荟萃分析。主要结局是降低抑郁的严重程度(反应),而不是精神病。对于抑郁反应,我们没有发现抗抑郁药与安慰剂之间(RR 8.40,95%CI 0.50 至 142.27;参与者=27,研究=1;非常低确定性证据)或抗精神病药与安慰剂之间(RR 1.13,95%CI 0.74 至 1.73;参与者=201,研究=2;非常低确定性证据)的差异。此外,我们没有发现抗抑郁药(RR 1.24,95%CI 0.34 至 4.51;参与者=27,研究=1;非常低确定性证据)或抗精神病药单药治疗(RR 0.79,95%CI 0.57 至 1.08;参与者=201,研究=2;非常低确定性证据)的总体脱落率差异。没有证据表明抗抑郁药与抗精神病药(RR 2.09,95%CI 0.64 至 6.82;参与者=36,研究=1;非常低确定性证据)或抗抑郁药与抗精神病药(RR 1.79,95%CI 0.18 至 18.02;参与者=36,研究=1;非常低确定性证据)之间的反应差异。对于抑郁反应,低至非常低确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药联合抗精神病药可能比抗精神病药单药治疗更有效(RR 1.83,95%CI 1.40 至 2.38;参与者=447,研究=4),比抗抑郁药单药治疗更有效(RR 1.42,95%CI 1.11 至 1.80;参与者=245,研究=5),比安慰剂更有效(RR 1.86,95%CI 1.23 至 2.82;参与者=148,研究=2)。非常低确定性证据表明,抗抑郁药联合抗精神病药与抗精神病药单药治疗(RR 0.79,95%CI 0.63 至 1.01;参与者=447,研究=4)、抗抑郁药单药治疗(RR 0.91,95%CI 0.55 至 1.50;参与者=245,研究=5)或安慰剂单药治疗(RR 0.75,95%CI 0.48 至 1.18;参与者=148,研究=2)之间的总体脱落率无差异。没有研究测量从基线开始的抑郁严重程度变化、生活质量或因不良反应而导致的脱落率。我们没有发现符合纳入标准的米非司酮的 RCT。偏倚风险很大:我们注意到研究之间在诊断、随机化和分配隐藏的不确定性、治疗干预措施(各种抗抑郁药和抗精神病药之间的药理学差异)和结局标准方面存在差异。
精神病性抑郁症研究不足,限制了对结论的信心。一些证据表明,抗抑郁药联合抗精神病药治疗比单独治疗或安慰剂更有效。单独使用抗抑郁药或抗精神病药的疗效证据有限。米非司酮疗效的证据不足。