Antidepressants

PTSD, pharma, adjuvants, bad movies -- these are a few of my favorite things, and readers' too. What's Neil doing here? He wasn't on Neuron Culture; I posted his clip on my catch-all, David Dobbs's Somatic Marker, because I love him. So he comes first. From 1986. Looks as if he's having a particularly good time here. Neuron Culture's Top Five from Jan 2010 NEJM study finds post-event morphine cuts combat PTSD rates in half "This is a pretty big deal if it holds up in future trials. One caveat I've not had time to check out is whether the morphine was often applied as part of an more…
1. Maybe it was just the headline ... but the runaway winner was "No pity party, no macho man." Psychologist Dave Grossman on surviving killing. Actually I think it was the remarkable photo, which looks like a painting. Check it out. 2. I'm not vulnerable, just especially plastic. Risk genes, environment, and evolution, in the Atlantic. The blog post about the article that led to the book. 3. Senator Asks Pentagon To Review Antidepressants 4. Gorgeous thing of the day: Sky's-eye view of the Maldives & other islands 5. The Weird History of Vaccine Adjuvants, even though it was from Oct 1…
There is a thought-provoking editorial in the openly-accessible Journal of Psychiatry of Neuroscience (JPN): Has the time come for clinical trials on the antidepressant effect of vitamin D?  (45 KB PDF).  In it, the editor of the the Journal, Simon N. Young, PhD, argues that there is enough evidence to justify increased research efforts. He points to a recent article in the Archives of General Psychiatry to support this view: Depression Is Associated With Decreased 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Increased Parathyroid Hormone Levels in Older AdultsWitte J. G. Hoogendijk, MD, PhD; Paul Lips, MD, PhD;…
Recently, a discussion has sparked on ScienceBlogs over how the word "addiction," could be used to describe some substances that aren't necessarily harmful such as antidepressants. Scicurious from Neurotopia points out that if a substance changes one's physical self, there will be physical effects if that drug is discontinued—a property of addiction. Likewise, PalMD from Denialism Blog suspects the negative nature of the word "addiction" may make drug companies hesitant to describe their products as such, even though it's accurate.
The Kirsch study published a few weeks ago has stirred much discussion of the placebo power of antidepressants (or is it the antidepressant power of placebos?); it's clear that the act of taking a pill that you expect to help you often does help you. But can the availability of a pill meant for depression make you feel (or think of yourself as) depressed? That's the question behind another part of the drug debate, regarding whether the drug industry encourages us to medicalize ordinary experience. In pondering these things I ran across this fascinating New York Times >article from 2004…
With so much written here lately about placebos and drug effectiveness, I would not want to leave out this remarkable study: Placebo effect is stronger, apparently, if you pay more for the placebo. This is a fascinating study described in a letter to the Journal of the American Medical Association. A crudely shortened version: Some researchers at MIT (none of them Bill Murray, as far as I can tell) gave light shocks to volunteers, then gave them some placebos that were costly and some that were cheap. The costly ones worked better. It sounds like a bit of a stunt, but as Respectful…
The ripples from the PLOS Medicine antidepressants-don't-work study by Kirsch et alia, which I covered below, just keep spreading. Those who want to follow it can do well by visiting or bookmarking this search I did (an ingenious Google News search for "Kirsch SSRI"). It seems to be tracking the press coverage pretty well. Note that the heavier and higher-profile coverage comes mainly from UK. As far as I can tell, none of the top 3 or 4 US papers have yet covered it. This blog search should help as well. Some of the more notable responses since yesterday: Science weighs in. The Times…
I've not had time to thoroughly read this yet. But on the heels of another study published a few weeks ago (I blogged on it here) showing that SSRIs have little therapeutic effect if you include the (unflattering) clinical trials the industry had previously hidden, PLOS Medicine now publishes a larger study -- a meta-analysis of all available data on clinical trials of SSRIs -- that shows that "compared with placebo, the new-generation antidepressants do not produce clinically significant improvements in depression in patients who initially have moderate or even very severe depression" --…
I've written before, both here and in print, about how FDA policy and drug company practices have allowed drug makers to publish (and the FDA to base approval on) only the most flattering drug-trial results while keeping less-flattering studies in the drawer. Today a New England Journal of Medicine report shows how things change when you include the results from the drawer: The effectiveness of many SSRIs dives to near placebo-level. This despite that the companies design and conduct most of these trials in a way calculated to produce positive results. When I wrote on this for Scientific…
I haven't gotten back to the "selection of antidepressants" series.  Mostly that is because, alphabetically, the next one is supposed to be citalopram.  While href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citalopram">citalopram (Celexa™) is a perfectly fine antidepressant, it is kind of boring. So to spice things up a little bit, I'm going to jump ahead to href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desvenlafaxine" rel="tag">desvenlafaxine.  This is a drug that is in development by href="http://www.wyeth.com/" rel="tag">Wyeth.  They plan to market it with the brand name, href="http://www.wyeth.…
tags: researchblogging.org, mental health, suicide, depression, bipolar disorder, SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antidepressants, FDA black-box warning Prozac. Image: Tom Varco After a 2003 report linking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, with increased suicide rates among children and teen agers was published, the use of this class of antidepressants in these age groups has decreased dramatically. This led to a change in labeling in 2003 that warned that use of the medications could increase suicidal thoughts and behavior among youths. Sadly, this 'black…
My gut response after reading this question was: Well, duh--obviously, summer is more conducive to happiness. I mean, you can make a good case for the virtues of spring and fall, but they're really less seasons than they are opening acts. And apart from Christmas and skiing, winter doesn't have a whole lot to recommend it. Nope. If you're ranking seasons, summertime is the clear winner. Summer=hot sun, slow, quiet afternoons, and water-logged family vacations. What more does a human being need to be happy, apart from an air-conditioner and an ample supply of snacks? Proving my theory seemed…
T face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">his is another post in a series detailing the selection of antidepressant medication.  Use the "Antidepressants" link in the "Categories" part of the sidebar to find the other posts in the series. In this post, I am sort of assuming that the reader has read the previous posts, or has an adequate fund of general knowledge on the subject. href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bupropion" rel="tag">Bupropion is not a member of a family.  Most antidepressants can be placed in a family of drugs that share similar properties, but there is no other drug like…
face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">This is an interesting drug.  Rarely prescribed, but interesting.  It is older than what we typically give today.  It is an antidepressant with a twist. face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">In order to understand why it is interesting, you need to know a little bit about the pharmacology of the drug. rel="tag" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amoxapine">Amoxapine is a tricyclic antidepressant, in my book, or at least in my head; but I have seen it referred to as a tetracyclic.  It depends on whether you think all the rings have to have an…
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Amitriptyline-2D-skeletal.png"> face="Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif">This post is about amitriptyline, one of the oldest antidepressants on the market in the USA.  It also used to be the most widely-prescribed antidepressant. I've decided to not attempt an encyclopedic style of description of the pharmacological action of the individual antidepressants.  That is readily available already at Wikipedia, among others.  But in order to fully understand the topic, those who are not familiar with the pharmacology should probably go to the general…
A while back I started a series about the science and logic (and other factors) involved in the selection of antidepressant medication.  I suppose I could put in the pinks to the first four parts, but anyone can use the search box in the left-hand sidebar to search for "selection of antidepressants" to find them.  I suppose when I am done I will go back to the first one and put in a list of links to all the posts in the series. style="font-family: Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif;"> The first four posts presented a top-down view, looking at the concepts and principles used when choosing an…
Joltvolta (great name, by the way), asked a good question after I posted part 3. When you say proceed methodically, employ good data collection, etc. How does the individual do that for themselves? If they don't have the availability to see a specialist multiple times a week, or even in a month, what options do they have? I will get to that, eventually, but there are a few more things I have to cover first.  After all, part of my agenda in writing this series is to enable patients to do more for themselves.  There is a shortage of specialists, and so long as that is the case, it will be good…
It occurs to me that in order to go any farther explaining how to choose an antidepressant, I should take a moment to explain the concept of an adequate trial.  Earlier, I mentioned that the patient's history of response to previous antidepressant trials is one of the most important factors to consider.  Having said that, it is important to realize  that there are problems with that, both practical and theoretical. In order to derive valid conclusions from the outcome of any prior trial on an antidepressant, it is necessary to have the right information. Having the right information means…
(Part One is href="http://scienceblogs.com/corpuscallosum/2007/02/basic_concepts_selection_of_an.php">here) Now we get to the heart of the matter: how does one decide what antidepressant to prescribe?  First, let's take a look at the factors that are considered relevant to the choice.  If you understand what factors are relevant, and why they are relevant, then you will start to see how the decision is made.  In the process of deciding which drug to prescribe, there are two bodies of information.  Well, actually there are more, but to keep things simple, I am going to artificially…
Many ScienceBloggers, and some science bloggers, are writing posts about basic concepts.  I thought that was a good idea, but could not think of one that would be interesting and that I felt like writing about and that I was particularly well-suited to write. Psychiatry is not a basic science.  It is a medical practice that is derived from several basic sciences: psychology, pharmacology, physiology, anatomy, epidemiology, and so forth.  So this is not really a basic concept, in the sense of explaining something fundamental about nature.  Rather, it explains something that is fundamental in…