ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Mental Health
The Case Against Antidepressants
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FunkOdyssey" data-source="post: 232727" data-attributes="member: 44064"><p>This paper claims the relapse prevention trials that form the basis of long-term antidepressant treatment are fatally flawed due to withdrawal symptoms. In other words, people often become depressed due to the discontinuation syndrome associated with stopping the drug, rendering the conclusions invalid:</p><p></p><p><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225779/#" target="_blank">Ther Adv Psychopharmacol.</a> 2020; 10: 2045125320921694.</p><p>Published online 2020 May 8. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2045125320921694" target="_blank">10.1177/2045125320921694</a></p><h3>How effective are antidepressants for depression over the long term? A critical review of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding</h3><p><a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Hengartner%20MP%5BAuthor%5D" target="_blank">Michael P. Hengartner</a></p><h3>Abstract</h3><p>The aim of this article is to discuss the validity of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding in these trials. Recommendations for long-term antidepressant treatment are based almost exclusively on discontinuation trials. In these relapse prevention trials, participants with remitted depression are randomised either to have the antidepressant abruptly discontinued and replaced by inert placebo or to continue active treatment. The drug–placebo difference in relapse rates at the end of the maintenance phase is then interpreted as a prophylactic drug effect. These trials consistently produce remarkable benefits for maintenance treatment. However, the internal validity of this trial protocol is compromised, as research has shown that abruptly stopping antidepressants can cause severe withdrawal reactions that lead to (or manifest as) depression relapses. That is, there is substantial withdrawal confounding in discontinuation trials, which renders their findings uninterpretable. It is not clear to what degree the drug–placebo separation in relapse prevention (discontinuation) trials is due to withdrawal reactions, but various estimations suggest that it is presumably the majority. A review of findings based on other methodologies, including real-world long-term effectiveness trials like STAR*D and various naturalistic cohort studies, do not indicate that antidepressants have considerable prophylactic effects. As absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence, no definitive conclusions can be drawn from the literature. To enable a thorough risk–benefit evaluation, real-world effectiveness trials should not only focus on relapse prevention, but also assess antidepressants’ long-term effects on social functioning and quality of life. Thus far, reliable long-term data on these outcome domains are lacking.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225779/[/URL]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FunkOdyssey, post: 232727, member: 44064"] This paper claims the relapse prevention trials that form the basis of long-term antidepressant treatment are fatally flawed due to withdrawal symptoms. In other words, people often become depressed due to the discontinuation syndrome associated with stopping the drug, rendering the conclusions invalid: [URL='https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225779/#']Ther Adv Psychopharmacol.[/URL] 2020; 10: 2045125320921694. Published online 2020 May 8. doi: [URL='https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2045125320921694']10.1177/2045125320921694[/URL] [HEADING=2]How effective are antidepressants for depression over the long term? A critical review of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding[/HEADING] [URL='https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Hengartner%20MP%5BAuthor%5D']Michael P. Hengartner[/URL] [HEADING=2]Abstract[/HEADING] The aim of this article is to discuss the validity of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding in these trials. Recommendations for long-term antidepressant treatment are based almost exclusively on discontinuation trials. In these relapse prevention trials, participants with remitted depression are randomised either to have the antidepressant abruptly discontinued and replaced by inert placebo or to continue active treatment. The drug–placebo difference in relapse rates at the end of the maintenance phase is then interpreted as a prophylactic drug effect. These trials consistently produce remarkable benefits for maintenance treatment. However, the internal validity of this trial protocol is compromised, as research has shown that abruptly stopping antidepressants can cause severe withdrawal reactions that lead to (or manifest as) depression relapses. That is, there is substantial withdrawal confounding in discontinuation trials, which renders their findings uninterpretable. It is not clear to what degree the drug–placebo separation in relapse prevention (discontinuation) trials is due to withdrawal reactions, but various estimations suggest that it is presumably the majority. A review of findings based on other methodologies, including real-world long-term effectiveness trials like STAR*D and various naturalistic cohort studies, do not indicate that antidepressants have considerable prophylactic effects. As absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence, no definitive conclusions can be drawn from the literature. To enable a thorough risk–benefit evaluation, real-world effectiveness trials should not only focus on relapse prevention, but also assess antidepressants’ long-term effects on social functioning and quality of life. Thus far, reliable long-term data on these outcome domains are lacking. [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7225779/[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
Mental Health
The Case Against Antidepressants
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top