Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T02:18:26.138Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A randomized, prospective pilot study of patient expectancy and antidepressant outcome

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2012

B. R. Rutherford ,
S. M. Marcus ,
P. Wang ,
J. R. Sneed ,
G. Pelton ,
D. Devanand ,
N. Duan  and
S. P. Roose
B. R. Rutherford*
Affiliation:
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
S. M. Marcus
Affiliation:
New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
P. Wang
Affiliation:
New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
J. R. Sneed
Affiliation:
Queens College of the City University of New York, Flushing, NY, USA
G. Pelton
Affiliation:
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
D. Devanand
Affiliation:
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
N. Duan
Affiliation:
New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
S. P. Roose
Affiliation:
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA
*
*Address for correspondence: Dr B. R. Rutherford, New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Drive, New York, NY 10032, USA. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

This study is a randomized, prospective, investigation of the relationships between clinical trial design, patient expectancy and the outcome of treatment with antidepressant medication.

Method

Adult out-patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) were randomized to either placebo-controlled (PC, 50% probability of receiving active medication) or comparator (COMP, 100% probability of receiving active medication) administration of antidepressant medication. Independent-samples t tests and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were used to determine whether the probability of receiving active medication influenced patient expectancy and to compare medication response in the PC v. COMP conditions. We also tested the correlations between baseline expectancy score and final improvement in depressive symptoms across study groups.

Results

Subjects randomized to the COMP condition reported greater expectancy of improvement compared to subjects in the PC condition (t = 2.60, df = 27, p = 0.015). There were no statistically significant differences in the analyses comparing antidepressant outcomes between subjects receiving medication in the COMP condition and those receiving medication in the PC condition. Higher baseline expectancy of improvement was correlated with lower final depression severity scores (r = 0.53, p = 0.021) and greater improvement in depressive symptoms over the course of the study (r = 0.44, p = 0.058).

Conclusions

The methods described represent a promising way of subjecting patient expectancy to scientific study. Expectancy of improvement is affected by the probability of receiving active antidepressant medication and seems to influence antidepressant response.

Keywords

Antidepressantclinical trialdepressionexpectancyplacebo effect
Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 43 , Issue 5 , May 2013 , pp. 975 - 982
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

APA (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edn, text revision (DSM-IV-TR). American Psychiatric Association: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Auquier, P, Robitail, S, Llorca, PM, Rive, B (2003). Comparison of escitalopram and citalopram efficacy: a meta-analysis. International Journal of Psychiatry in Clinical Practice 7, 259–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, AT, Ward, CH, Mendelson, M, Mock, J, Erbaugh, J (1961). An inventory of measuring depression. Archives of General Psychiatry 4, 53–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borkovec, TD, Costello, E (1993). Efficacy of applied relaxation and cognitive-behavioral therapy in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 61, 611–619.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borkovec, TD, Nau, SD (1972). Credibility of analogue therapy rationales. Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 3, 257–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devilly, GJ, Borkovec, TD (2000). Psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire. Journal of Behavioral Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 31, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
First, MB, Spitzer, RL, Gibbon, M, Williams, JBW (1996). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Clinician Version (SCID-CV). American Psychiatric Press: Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Guy, W (1976). Clinical Global Impressions. New Clinical Drug Evaluation Unit (ECDEU) Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology, pp. 218–222. National Institute of Mental Health: Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
Hamilton, M (1960). A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 23, 56–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirsch, I (1997). Specifying nonspecifics: psychological mechanisms of placebo effects. In The Placebo Effect: An Interdisciplinary Exploration (ed. Harrington, A.), pp. 166–186. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Krell, HV, Leuchter, AF, Morgan, M, Cook, IA, Abrams, M (2004). Subject expectations of treatment effectiveness and outcome of treatment with an experimental antidepressant. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 65, 1174–1179.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, B, Pilkonis, PA, Krupnick, JL, Egan, MK, Simmens, SJ, Sotsky, SM (2002). Treatment expectancies, patient alliance, and outcome: further analyses from the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 70, 1051–1055.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papakostas, GI, Fava, M (2009). Does the probability of receiving placebo influence clinical trial outcome? A meta-regression of double-blind, randomized clinical trials in MDD. European Neuropsychopharmacology 19, 34–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutherford, BR, Sneed, JR, Eisenstadt, R, Roose, SP (2010 a). Antidepressant study design affects patient expectations: initial results from a randomized controlled trial. Psychological Medicine 40, 781–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, BR, Sneed, JR, Roose, SP (2009). Does study design affect outcome? The effects of placebo control and treatment duration in antidepressant trials. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 78, 172–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutherford, BR, Sneed, JR, Tandler, J, Peterson, BS, Roose, SP (2011). Deconstructing pediatric depression trials: an analysis of the effects of expectancy and therapeutic contact. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 50, 782–795.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutherford, BR, Wager, TD, Roose, SP (2010 b). Expectancy effects in the treatment of depression: a review of experimental methodology, effects on patient outcome, and neural mechanisms. Current Reviews in Psychiatry 6, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinyor, M, Levitt, AJ, Cheung, AH, Schaffer, A, Kiss, A, Dowlati, Y, Lanctot, KL (2010). Does inclusion of a placebo arm influence response to active antidepressant treatment in randomized controlled trials? Results from pooled and meta-analyses. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 71, 270–279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sneed, JR, Rutherford, BR, Rindskopf, D, Lane, DT, Sackeim, HA, Roose, SP (2008). Design makes a difference: a meta-analysis of antidepressant response rates in placebo-controlled versus comparator trials in late-life depression. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 16, 65–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sotsky, AM, Glass, DR, Shea, MT, Pilkonis, PA, Collins, F, Elkin, I, Watkins, JT, Imber, SD, Leber, WR, Moyer, J, Oliveri, ME (1991). Patient predictors of response to psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy: findings in the NIMH Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program. American Journal of Psychiatry 148, 997–1008.Google ScholarPubMed
Svensson, S, Mansfield, PR (2004). Escitalopram: superior to citalopram of chiral chimera? Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 73, 10–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed