Live data from Hacker News

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

thelancet.com

41–50 of 113 posts

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#41
post #6

A professional I know in the field (who repudiates drugs for CBT, and so is probably biassed, but still...) says that the lack of clarity over how an antagonist and a suppressant can both be claimed to operate on the same underlying problem and have adherents, points to bad understanding of what actually causes the problem.

Few drugs solely act to agonize or antagonize a single type of receptor in a single part of the brain. Many of these compounds do a lot of different things, some big and some small. Anti-depressants have very complex mechanisms of action which we don't fully understand, and may not understand for a long time. They are a rough and imprecise solution to what for some is an otherwise intractable and potentially fatal problem.

Obviously therapy and other techniques should be attempted before drug prescription, but your friend is grossly oversimplifying how these drugs work and how psychiatrists portray how they work.

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#42
post #8

I think that the United States is getting better about dealing with mental health, but we still have a long way to go. This is a little soap-boxy and anecdotal, and I apologize if it's inappropriate here. If I hadn't gotten a prescription for Prozac I probably would have killed myself by now. And I definitely would have destroyed my marriage and most of my important friendships. That's not an over-dramatization, it's…

>If I hadn't gotten a prescription for Prozac I probably would have killed myself by now. The majority of people with depression just get better of their own accord, for no obvious reason. The NNT for most antidepressants is ~7, meaning you need to give them to about seven patients for one patient to see a clinically-significant improvement. The evidence suggests that there's no significant relationship between SSRI…

[deleted]

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#43
post #8

I think that the United States is getting better about dealing with mental health, but we still have a long way to go. This is a little soap-boxy and anecdotal, and I apologize if it's inappropriate here. If I hadn't gotten a prescription for Prozac I probably would have killed myself by now. And I definitely would have destroyed my marriage and most of my important friendships. That's not an over-dramatization, it's…

>If I hadn't gotten a prescription for Prozac I probably would have killed myself by now. The majority of people with depression just get better of their own accord, for no obvious reason. The NNT for most antidepressants is ~7, meaning you need to give them to about seven patients for one patient to see a clinically-significant improvement. The evidence suggests that there's no significant relationship between SSRI…

NNT might be 7 for one drug and one try, but the therapist will try several drugs and doses.

I could imagine that NNT might significantly improve if you consider “use antidepressants” instead of “use 1 antidepressant 1 time”

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#44

> meta-analysis I knew a lot of other grad students, myself included, who would throw anything with meta-analysis in the introduction in the trash. You cannot deal with controls across completely different studies in meaningful ways. I'm also hesitant about anything that tries to claim things definitively without question. Science is about continually questioning your axioms. Without doubt[1] there is no progress. As…

Hopefully you and those other grad students will have learned more by the time you finish your degree. A proper meta analysis does consider the differences in controls across studies, and can be extremely useful in understanding why different studies got different results and identify bad studies. Not only do they help gain a better understanding of results, but they help find ways to better design future studies.

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#45
post #6

A professional I know in the field (who repudiates drugs for CBT, and so is probably biassed, but still...) says that the lack of clarity over how an antagonist and a suppressant can both be claimed to operate on the same underlying problem and have adherents, points to bad understanding of what actually causes the problem.

Few drugs solely act to agonize or antagonize a single type of receptor in a single part of the brain. Many of these compounds do a lot of different things, some big and some small. Anti-depressants have very complex mechanisms of action which we don't fully understand, and may not understand for a long time. They are a rough and imprecise solution to what for some is an otherwise intractable and potentially fatal pr…

I grossly oversimplified what he said, and he's a trained clinical psychologist. The underlying point is exactly what you said: Anti-depressants have very complex mechanisms of action which we don't fully understand, and may not understand for a long time.

That they work is good. That they work about as well as CBT does, poses questions which as you observe goes to: Obviously therapy and other techniques should be attempted before drug prescription

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#46
post #40
post #6

A professional I know in the field (who repudiates drugs for CBT, and so is probably biassed, but still...) says that the lack of clarity over how an antagonist and a suppressant can both be claimed to operate on the same underlying problem and have adherents, points to bad understanding of what actually causes the problem.

I don't understand the part about " an antagonist and a suppressant". Do you mean agonist-antagonist mechanism of action of some drugs that treat the same condition? As far as I know different drugs can work on serotonin/dopamine/norepinephrine but in different parts of the brain and produce different results.

I am a layman so probably use words inadvisably. Some drugs supress effects in the brain, some enhance. Yet both are seen to be deployed to try and treat depression. This is a very confusing signal. If the condition can present from either too much or not enough of something, what diagnostic determines which to try? What evidence do we have, of a mechanism to determine which except for "suck it and see"

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#47
post #6

A professional I know in the field (who repudiates drugs for CBT, and so is probably biassed, but still...) says that the lack of clarity over how an antagonist and a suppressant can both be claimed to operate on the same underlying problem and have adherents, points to bad understanding of what actually causes the problem.

True, but man found fire very useful for millennium before we understood it. And as little as we know about how drugs work we know less about how CBT works.

Yes, "push a man into a fire, and end his hunger forever" useful stuff fire.

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#48
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SSRIs are generally indicated for what's called mild/moderate depression, the most common form, not for the serious conditions that you highlighted. There were some older meta-studies that called into question their general efficacy vs. placebo even for mild/moderate depression but this new meta-study (with the additional previously unpublished data from their initial approval trials) looks like it has finally settle…

I am obviously confused, as usual. I'm not used to reading these studies. I'm looking at the study. I'm looking at the #3 graph under Tables and Functions Tab. It says amitriptyline is the best drug? Isn't that an older drug, or am I misreading the chart?

relevant: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/30/prescriptions-paradoxes...

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#49

As another person who is on antidepressants, and tried going off them for a while: well, duh. Yeah, I know, anecdotes aren't data, and I'm glad this is being verified by more reliable statistical methods, but this is not news to the many of us who might be dead or worse if someone hadn't said "you are sick--go see a doctor" and if that doctor hadn't said "you need medication--let's see if this works". Without antidep…

> it's amazing what you can do when you actually have enough neurotransmitters in your brain

Anything except having an orgasm, in my case.

Re: Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs

#50
post #4
post #2

>"We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials that were incomplete or included 20% or more of participants with bipolar disorder, psychotic depression, or treatment-resistant depression." Wikipedia defines treatment resistant depression as "cases of major depressive disorder that do not respond adequately to appropriate courses of at least two antidepressants." Maybe I'm unfamiliar with study methodology, but does…

SSRIs are generally indicated for what's called mild/moderate depression, the most common form, not for the serious conditions that you highlighted. There were some older meta-studies that called into question their general efficacy vs. placebo even for mild/moderate depression but this new meta-study (with the additional previously unpublished data from their initial approval trials) looks like it has finally settle…

treatment-resistant doesn't mean severe, it means treatment resistant.
Post reply on HN