Antidepressants

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Attending1985

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
776
Reaction score
753
Points
5,441
  1. Resident [Any Field]
  2. Attending Physician
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Recently read Mad in America. Thought some points were very valid. Does anyone have any thoughts on the evidence showing that use of antidepressants worsens long term outcomes for depression. Have tried to bring this up to some in my program and have not received any thoughtful answers.
 
How would such data exist? I’m sure that if you looked at a cohort of people and followed them, the ones that used antidepressants would be more depressed than those that didn’t. The only way to find the answer you seek would be to find at risk people and deny half of them known effective treatment. This will not be happening anytime soon.
 
The research is looking at RCTs comparing those with improved with placebo versus those who improved with antidepressant therapy and their long term outcomes
 
How long-term are we talking here? In the literature, "long-term" is generally a 1 or 2 year time span. By and large, those studies seem to support a combo-therapy approach (meds+therapy) to either mono-therapy or placebo. Although, caveats abound. You could also look at STAR*D, but once again, lots of debate about methodology there as well. In short, you will be hard pressed to find anything solid that goes beyond 1-2 years time frame.
 
Recently read Mad in America. Thought some points were very valid. Does anyone have any thoughts on the evidence showing that use of antidepressants worsens long term outcomes for depression. Have tried to bring this up to some in my program and have not received any thoughtful answers.
There is always a need for more long term research into use of medications, but books like that can be as misleading as only relying on pharmaceutical company studies. To me there are several big questions regarding anti-depressant medications that spring to my mind.
1. What are the effects when given to people with different etiologies and severity of depression?
2. Should we use the medication consistently for an episodic illness?
3. What are the long term outcomes of treating other illnesses such as PTSD or BPD or substance use disorders (without an overlapping major mood disorder) with anti-depressant medications?
There is also evidence that a sole reliance on medication isn't beneficial for psychotic disorders either, but this does not mean that the medication is the problem so much as not addressing the rest of the person's needs is.
 
I think Marti Keller at Brown has the best followed longest cohort of depression study patients that I know of. I saw him present some of his data, but this was more than ten years ago.
 
Oh great. Another "psychiatry is evil" haven out there.

I wonder where the "mental illness is evil and we're doing the best we know how" haven is?
 
There are additional multiple potential confounders, such as age at diagnosis, age at treatment, subclass of depression, etc., that may play a role as well. I'm not particularly familiar with this book; however, I thought that after the Tom Insel op-ed following the publishing of the 7 year followup to the anti-psychotics taper paper, we might expect that similar studies would in fact be funded along these lines for other medications; however, we no longer have Insel in charge and with the RDoC, comparing US government funded, clinical trials to prior data is going to become increasingly difficult. However, perhaps work along these lines going forward may be a possibility. Ultimately, however, popular press decrying of reasonable best practice is probably a worst, not best, practice for everyone involved.

To respond to some, randomizing to a non-SSRI treatment for MDD (therapy, SSRI, SSRI + therapy; all with close clinical monitoring) isn't exactly the same as penicillin vs. placebo for syphilis. There are other evidence based treatments with reasonable outcomes and the questions of long term efficacy, dependence, and optimal administration (e.g. aggressive, time limited taper attempts), is open. The problem is, these sorts of studies are highly unlikely to be funded privately (same problem in most fields of medicine for long term outcome studies)

http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2013/antipsychotics-taking-the-long-view.shtml
 
This is the article that Robert Whitaker cites in a blog post. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3133866/

downwithDTB - was not aware of the antipsychotic taper study. Very interesting thanks for sharing.

I think these arguments are important to look at and consider as while these opinions are certainly extreme there is some merit to some of them.
 
Oh, so antipsychotics aren't necessarily the panacea we thought they were. I'm shocked...

I know we do the best we can with the limited knowledge we have, but I try to keep that in mind every day. I'm ok with knowing that future generations will look back at what we're doing and think we're a bunch of idiots. I think it would be interesting to take the timeline of psychiatry and compared it to the timeline of medicine in general and see where medicine was at the same age.
 
Oh, so antipsychotics aren't necessarily the panacea we thought they were. I'm shocked...

I know we do the best we can with the limited knowledge we have, but I try to keep that in mind every day. I'm ok with knowing that future generations will look back at what we're doing and think we're a bunch of idiots. I think it would be interesting to take the timeline of psychiatry and compared it to the timeline of medicine in general and see where medicine was at the same age.
Leeches? The four humors? 🙂 The unfortunate side of this is that the ambiguity and uncertainty at this stage of our knowledge can lead some to overvalue the little we know and others to discount it all.
 
Recently read Mad in America. Thought some points were very valid. Does anyone have any thoughts on the evidence showing that use of antidepressants worsens long term outcomes for depression. Have tried to bring this up to some in my program and have not received any thoughtful answers.

I have yet to see any good evidence that antidepressants worsen long-term outcomes. Your program probably doesn't provide good answers because there is no good research here.

Such studies for or against would take years and involve tens of millions of dollars.
 
because we cannot study this using an RCT you need to look at other data. We don't necessarily need RCT level data to help us answer this question. Currently, we don't know. But you should read the Giovanni Fava's papers on antidepressants and Rif El-Malakh, who coined the term "tardive dysphoria" to describe the depression that he hypothesizes results from chronic administration of antidepressants. It is certainly very plausible. Personally I think there are good psychological explanations of why people might become dependent on antidepressants and their use may undermine individual resources and create a narrative of helplessness where individuals come to see themselves as defective, their problems the result of aberrant neurochemistry, and come to feel powerless to change their life circumstances. A good psychiatrist will prescribe antidepressants communicating that the aim is to reduce the level of distress the patient is experience and give them the ability to make the changes the patient needs to. Unfortunately, we know this does not happen as often as it should and most antidepressants are not even prescribed by psychiatrists anyway but used to silence patients.

For me the most compelling data to start raising questions is we know that the incidence of depression is falling, but the prevalence has been increasing somewhat. This suggests that depression is becoming more chronic. Similarly, the incidence of antidepressant prescriptions hasn't increased as much as the prevalence, in fact incident prescriptions have been fairly stable the past 18 years or so. What we see is that people continue on them longer term. There is certainly a huge problem (particularly in primary care) where the long-term use of these drugs (along with others) is not carefully reviewed and prescriptions are unthinkingly refilled. Furthermore, we do not know enough about the appropriate way to withdraw these drugs in a way to minimize the chances of relapse of a withdrawal dysphoria syndrome.

Frankly, I think we need to always be open minded and reflective about the possibility of the harm we may be causing. Psychiatry has a terrible track record of denying the adverse effects of treatments: ECT and cognitive impairment, benzodiazepines and dependence, antidepressants and withdrawal syndrome/dependence, neuroleptics and tardive dyskinesia are among the effects that were initially underplayed or outright denied as ridiculous, and this has undermined the credibility of the field.
 
Top Bottom