Antidepressant drugs don't work – official study
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
By Jeremy Laurance
They are among the biggest-selling drugs of all time, the "happiness
pills" that supposedly lift the moods of those who suffer depression
and are taken by millions of people in the UK every year.
But one of the largest studies of modern antidepressant drugs has found that
they have no clinically significant effect. In other words, they don't work.
The finding will send shock waves through the medical profession and
patients and raises serious questions about the regulation of the
multinational pharmaceutical industry, which was accused yesterday of
withholding data on the drugs.
It also came as Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary, announced that 3,600
therapists are to be trained during the next three years to provide
nationwide access through the GP service to "talking treatments" for
depression, instead of drugs, in a £170m scheme. The popularity of the new
generation of antidepressants, which include the best known brands Prozac
and Seroxat, soared after they were launched in the late 1980s, heavily
promoted by drug companies as safer and leading to fewer side-effects than
the older tricyclic antidepressants.
The publication in 1994 of Listening to Prozac by Peter Kramer, in which he
suggested anyone with too little "joy juice" might give themselves a dose of
the "mood brightener" Prozac , lifted sales into the stratosphere.
In the UK, an estimated 3.5 million people take the drugs, collectively
known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in any one year
and 29 million prescriptions were issued in 2004. Prozac, the best known of
the SSRIs made by Eli Lilly, was the world's fastest-selling drug until it
was overtaken by Viagra.
In the study, researchers conducted a meta-analysis of all 47 clinical
trials, published and unpublished, submitted to the Food and Drug
Administration in the US, made in support of licensing applications for six
of the best known antidepressant drugs, including Prozac, Seroxat – which is
made by GlaxoSmithKline – and Efexor made by Wyeth. The results showed the
drugs were effective only in a very small group of the most extremely
depressed.
Two drugs were excluded from the study because of incomplete data. A third
drug, chemical name nafazodone, has been withdrawn from the market because
of side-effects.
Professor Irving Kirsch of the University of Hull, who led the study
published in the online journal Public Library of Science (PLoS) Medicine ,
said the data submitted to the FDA would also have been submitted to the
licensing authorities in Britain and Europe. It showed the drugs produced a
"very small" improvement compared with placebo of two points on the 51-point
Hamilton depression scale.
That was sufficient to grant the drugs a licence but did not meet the
minimum three-point difference required by the National Institute for
Clinical Excellence (Nice) to establish "clinical" significance. Yet Nice
approved the drugs for use on the NHS in the UK because it only had access
to the published trials, which showed a larger effect.
Professor Kirsch said: "Given these results, there seems to be little reason
to prescribe antidepressant medication to any but the most severely
depressed patients, unless alternative treatments have failed to provide a
benefit. This study raises serious issues that need to be addressed
surrounding drug licensing and how drug trial data is reported."
Five years ago, there were allegations that antidepressant drugs were
addictive and could trigger suicides. All but Prozac were banned for
children, although a major investigation on the safety of medicines cleared
them of causing suicide in adults.
Alternative treatments for depression, such as counselling or physical
exercise , should be tried first, Professor Kirsch said. The pharmaceutical
companies had withheld data that was available to the licensing authorities
so that doctors and patients did not understand the true efficacy, or lack
of it, of the drugs.
"This has been the frustration. It has made it very difficult to answer the
question of whether the drugs work. The pharmaceutical companies should be
obliged when they get a drug licensed to make all the data available to the
public. When you analyse all the trials of these SSRIs, both published and
unpublished, it leads you to more sober conclusions," he said.
Tim Kendall, deputy director of the Royal College of Psychiatrists' research
unit, said the findings, if proved true, would not be surprising. As head of
the National Collaborating Centre for Nice guidelines on mental health, he
said it had proved impossible to get access to unpublished trials in the
past.
"The companies have this data but they will not release it. When we were
drawing up the guidelines on prescribing antidepressants to children [in
2004] we wrote to all the companies asking for it but they said no. The
Government pledged in its manifesto to compel the drug companies to give
access to their data but that commitment has not been met."
The new finding would make doctors "much more cautious about prescribing the
drugs," Mr Kendall added.
GlaxoSmithKline, makers of Seroxat, said the authors of the study had
"failed to acknowledge" the very positive benefits of SSRIs and their
conclusions were "at odds with the very positive benefits seen in actual
clinical practice." A spokesperson added: "This one study should not be used
to cause unnecessary alarm for patients.
Lilly said in a statement: "Extensive scientific and medical experience has
demonstrated that fluoxetine [Prozac] is an effective antidepressant.
Wyeth said: "We recognise the need for both pharmacological and
non-pharmacological treatments for depression."
On the new training for therapists, Mr Johnson said the programme signalled
a decisive shift away from drugs in favour of non-drug treatments for
depression. "We are not taking the decision away from clinicians," he said.
"For many, medication is successful. But talking therapies can have dramatic
effects. We have put a lot of emphasis on medication in the past and it is
about time we redressed the balance and put more emphasis on talking
treatments."
The treatments that do work
* Exercise: Helps some people with depression. Douglas Adams, author
of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, said running helped him cope with
depression.
* Friends: Talking through your feelings can help in mild depression
with a friend or relative or in a self-help group.
* Cognitive behavioural therapy: Teaches you to challenge negative
thoughts and feelings of hopelessness.
* Interpersonal therapy: Focuses on relationships and problems such
as difficulties with communication.
* Counselling: Helps you think about the problems in your life and
find new ways of dealing with them.
* Antidepressants: Increasingly seen as a second-line treatment, if
exercise or talking treatments do not work.