Suppr超能文献

难治性抑郁症多种治疗方案的定量评估。

Quantitative evaluation of multiple treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression.

作者信息

Feng Yulin, Lv Yinghua, Yang Juan, Xu Ling, Chen Junchao, Huang Jihan, Ren Jiyuan, Zheng Qingshan, Li Lujin

机构信息

Center for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.

State Key Laboratory of Integration and Innovation of Classic Formula and Modern Chinese Medicine, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai, China.

出版信息

Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2025 Feb 4;28(2). doi: 10.1093/ijnp/pyaf007.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to quantitatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of various treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) across oral, intravenous, and intranasal routes to inform clinical guidelines.

METHODS

A systematic review identified randomized controlled trials on TRD, with efficacy measured by changes in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). We developed pharmacodynamic and covariate models for different administration routes, using Monte Carlo simulations to estimate efficacy distribution. Dropout and adverse event-related dropout rates were analyzed via single-arm meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Involving 22 studies with 56 treatment arms and 3059 patients, our findings suggest combination therapies outperform monotherapy, achieving an additional 6.5% reduction in MADRS scores over 12 weeks. The most effective combinations were olanzapine with fluoxetine and quetiapine with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/ selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. Injectable treatments, particularly ayahuasca, produced rapid effects, with a 77% reduction in MADRS scores at 15 days. Intranasal treatments reached efficacy sooner than oral ones, with 28-day efficacy similar to the 12-week efficacy of the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. Dropout rates due to adverse events were similar across methods (4.5%-5.2%), but total dropouts were highest for oral (17.9%) and lowest for intranasal routes (10.6%). Additionally, there was considerable variation in the incidence of headache, dizziness, and nausea across different administration routes.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantitative evaluation of 22 TRD treatments illuminates key pharmacodynamic parameters, bolstering the development of clinical guidelines and aiding the design of clinical trials and medical decision-making.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在定量评估经口服、静脉注射和鼻内给药途径治疗难治性抑郁症(TRD)的各种治疗方案的疗效和安全性,以为临床指南提供参考。

方法

一项系统评价确定了关于TRD的随机对照试验,疗效通过蒙哥马利-Åsberg抑郁评定量表(MADRS)的变化来衡量。我们为不同给药途径建立了药效学和协变量模型,使用蒙特卡洛模拟来估计疗效分布。通过单臂荟萃分析分析脱落率和不良事件相关脱落率。

结果

涉及22项研究、56个治疗组和3059名患者,我们的研究结果表明联合疗法优于单一疗法,在12周内MADRS评分额外降低6.5%。最有效的联合用药是奥氮平与氟西汀以及喹硫平与选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂/选择性5-羟色胺和去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂。注射治疗,尤其是死藤水,起效迅速,在15天时MADRS评分降低77%。鼻内治疗比口服治疗起效更快,28天的疗效与奥氮平-氟西汀联合用药12周的疗效相似。不同方法因不良事件导致的脱落率相似(4.5%-5.2%),但口服治疗的总脱落率最高(17.9%),鼻内给药途径最低(10.6%)。此外,不同给药途径的头痛、头晕和恶心发生率存在相当大的差异。

结论

对22种TRD治疗方法的定量评估阐明了关键的药效学参数,有助于临床指南的制定,并辅助临床试验设计和医疗决策。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3054/11879141/9e5eb9ef8683/pyaf007_fig1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验