Conducting clinical research in community mental health settings: Opportunities and challenges

Tremendous progress has been made in the past decade surrounding the underlying mechanisms and treatment of neuropsychiatric disease. Technological advancements and a broadened research paradigm have contributed to the understanding of the neurochemistry, brain function and brain circuitry involved in neuropsychiatric disorders. The predominant area of unmet medical need in the United States is major psychiatric disorders, and major depressive disorder is the leading cause of disability for ages 15-44. Total spending on research and development by the pharmaceutical industry has grown exponentially during the past decade, but fewer new molecular entities (NME) for the treatment of major psychiatric disorders have received regulatory approvals compared to other therapeutic areas. Though significant expansion has occurred during the “decade of the brain”, the translation of clinical trials outcomes into the community mental health setting is deficient. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been the standard approach to clinical evaluation of the safety and efficacy of NMEs for the past 60 years; however, there are significant barriers and skepticism in the implementation of evidence-based outcomes into clinical practice. Recruitment of patients, shortages of experienced clinical researchers, regulatory requirements and later translation of outcomes into clinical practice are ever growing problems faced by investigators. The community mental health setting presents particular barriers in the replication of therapeutic outcomes from RCTs. The diagnostic complexity of major psychiatric diseases and the highly selective patient populations involved in clinical trials lend to the gap in translation from the “bench to the bedside”. The community mental health setting lends to a diverse patient population with numerous co-morbidities and environmental factors that are unaccounted in the average RCT. While we acknowledge the enormous complexity in developing novel and innovative treatments for major psychiatric disorders, we must continue to improve the translatability of clinical trials to real world settings. Progress has been rather slow but as the gap in treatment effectiveness is reduced, so will costs and barriers in community mental health.     

A mediator effect size in randomized clinical trials

To understand the process by which a treatment (T) achieves an effect on outcome (O) and thus to improve the effect of T on O, it is vital to detect mediators, to compare the impact of different mediators, and to develop hypotheses about the causal factors (all mediators) linking T and O. An index is needed to facilitate interpretation of the potential clinical importance of a mediator (M) of choice of T on treatment O in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Ideally such a mediator effect size should (1) be invariant under any rescaling of M and O consistent with the model used, and (2) reflect the difference between the overall observed effect of T on O and what the maximal effect of T on O could be were the association between T and M broken. A mediator effect size is derived first for the traditional linear model, and then more generally for any categorical (ordered or non‐ordered) potential mediator. Issues such as the problem of multiple treatments, outcomes and mediators, and of causal inferences, and the correspondence between this approach and earlier ones, are discussed. Illustrations are given of the application of the approach. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Natural History Studies and Clinical Trial Readiness for Genetic Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathies

The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies (DEEs) are the most severe group of epilepsies. They usually begin in infancy or childhood with drug-resistant seizures, epileptiform EEG patterns, developmental slowing or regression, and cognitive impairment. DEEs have a high mortality and profound morbidity; comorbidities are common including autism spectrum disorders. With advances in genetic sequencing, over 400 genes have been implicated in DEEs, with a genetic cause now identified in over 50% patients. Each genetic DEE typically has a broad genotypic-phenotypic spectrum, based on the underlying pathophysiology. There is a pressing need to improve health outcomes by developing novel targeted therapies for specific genetic DEE phenotypes that not only improve seizure control, but also developmental outcomes and comorbidities. Clinical trial readiness relies firstly on a deep understanding of phenotype-genotype correlation and evolution of a condition over time, in order to select appropriate patients for clinical trials. Understanding the natural history of the disorder informs assessment of treatment efficacy in terms of both clinical outcome and biomarker utility. Natural history studies (NHS) provide a high quality, integrated, comprehensive approach to understanding a complex disease and underpin clinical trial design for novel therapies. NHS are pre-planned observational studies designed to track the course of a disease and identify demographic, genetic, environmental, and other variables, including biomarkers, that correlate with the disease’s evolution and outcomes. Due to the rarity of individual genetic DEEs, appropriately funded high-quality DEE NHS will be required, with sustainable frameworks and equitable access to affected individuals globally.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13311-021-01133-3.     

Randomized controlled trials in psychiatry. Part II: their relationship to clinical practice

OBJECTIVE: To discuss the extent to which the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in psychiatry can be generalized to clinical practice. METHOD: Threats to internal and external validity in psychiatric RCTs are reviewed. RESULTS: Threats to internal validity increase the possibility of bias. Psychiatric RCTs have problems with small samples, arbitrary definitions of caseness, disparate definitions of outcome and high spontaneous recovery rates. Particular issues arise in psychotherapy RCTs. Threats to external validity reduce the extent to which the results of a RCT produce a correct basis for generalization to other circumstances. These include high rates of comorbidity and sub syndromal pathology in normal clinical practice, manual-based treatment protocols and varying definitions of successful treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Randomized controlled trials remain the most robust design to investigate the effectiveness of treatments. They should be applied to important clinical questions; and carried out, as far as possible, with typical patients in the clinical conditions in which the treatment is likely to be used.     

Filling the gaps on stroke research: Focus on inflammation and immunity

For the last two decades, researchers have placed hopes in a new era in which a combination of reperfusion and neuroprotection would revolutionize the treatment of stroke. Nevertheless, despite the thousands of papers available in the literature showing positive results in preclinical stroke models, randomized clinical trials have failed to show efficacy. It seems clear now that the existing data obtained in preclinical research have depicted an incomplete picture of stroke pathophysiology. In order to ameliorate bench-to-bed translation, in this review we first describe the main actors on stroke inflammatory and immune responses based on the available preclinical data, highlighting the fact that the link between leukocyte infiltration, lesion volume and neurological outcome remains unclear. We then describe what is known on neuroinflammation and immune responses in stroke patients, and summarize the results of the clinical trials on immunomodulatory drugs. In order to understand the gap between clinical trials and preclinical results on stroke, we discuss in detail the experimental results that served as the basis for the summarized clinical trials on immunomodulatory drugs, focusing on (i) experimental stroke models, (ii) the timing and selection of outcome measuring, (iii) alternative entry routes for leukocytes into the ischemic region, and (iv) factors affecting stroke outcome such as gender differences, ageing, comorbidities like hypertension and diabetes, obesity, tobacco, alcohol consumption and previous infections like Covid-19.We can do better for stroke treatment, especially when targeting inflammation following stroke. We need to re-think the design of stroke experimental setups, notably by (i) using clinically relevant models of stroke, (ii) including both radiological and neurological outcomes, (iii) performing long-term follow-up studies, (iv) conducting large-scale preclinical stroke trials, and (v) including stroke comorbidities in preclinical research.     

Nocebo in clinical trials for depression: A meta-analysis

Nocebo refers to adverse events (AEs) related to negative expectations that medical treatment will likely harm instead of heal and can be assessed in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs). We sought to examine the AEs following placebo administration in RCTs for depression (D). After a systematic Medline search for RCTs in depression published in the last decade we assessed percentages of placebo-treated patients reporting at least one AE or discontinuing due to placebo intolerance and searched for factors influencing nocebo's extent. Data were extracted from 21 RCTs fulfilling search criteria. Of 3255 placebo-treated patients, 44.7% (95% CI: 22.3–68.3%) reported at least one AE, and 4.5% (95% CI: 3.4–5.8%) discontinued placebo treatment due to intolerance. AE rates in placebo and active drug treated patients were correlated quantitatively (r=0.915, p<0.001) and qualitatively, but not dropout rates (r=0.047). We conclude that almost one out of 20 placebo treated patients discontinued treatment due to AEs, indicating a significant nocebo in trials for depression treatment adversely affecting adherence and efficacy of current treatments in clinical practice, with additional implications for trial designing.     

Comorbidity, socioeconomic status and multiple sclerosis

ObjectiveMultiple sclerosis (MS) is associated with substantial morbidity. The impact of comorbidity on MS is unknown, but comorbidity may explain some of the unpredictable progression. Comorbidity is common in the general population, and is associated with adverse health outcomes. To begin understanding the impact of comorbidity on MS, we need to know the breadth, type, and frequencies of comorbidities among MS patients. Using the North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) Registry, we aimed to describe comorbidities and their demographic predictors in MS.MethodsIn October 2006, we queried NARCOMS participants regarding physical comorbidities. Of 16,141 participants meeting the inclusion criteria, 8983 (55.7%) responded.ResultsComorbidity was relatively common; if we considered conditions which are very likely to be accurately self-reported, then 3280 (36.7%) reported at least one physical comorbidity. The most frequently reported comorbidities were hypercholesterolemia (37%), hypertension (30%), and arthritis (16%). Associated with the risk of comorbidity were being male [females vs. males, odds ratio (OR) 0.77; 0.69-0.87]; age (age >60 years vs. age $100,000, OR 1.37; 1.10-1.70).ConclusionsComorbidity is common in MS and similarly associated with socioeconomic status.     

Quality-of-life and behavioral outcome measures in randomized controlled trials of antiepileptic drugs: a systematic review of methodology and reporting standards

PURPOSE: To review the methodology and use of quality-of-life and behavioral measures used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antiepileptic drugs in patients with epilepsy. METHODS: Trial reports were found by searching a previously developed comprehensive database of epilepsy RCTs and searching through journals by hand. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and methodological and quality-of-life and behavioral measure data were extracted. RESULTS: There were 52 different measures used in 46 trials, with the Profile of Mood States, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and the Washington Psychosocial Seizure Inventory being applied the most frequently. Overall, evidence of the reliability, validity, and sensitivity of measures used in populations of people with epilepsy was sparse. There was also little information on the clinical interpretation of the results. CONCLUSION: Our results highlight a consistent failure to apply quality-of-life and behavioral measures in RCTs in a systematic way. We found repeated evidence of researchers' failure to review the use of previous measures and selection of measures without evidence of their appropriateness for use in a population with epilepsy. We recommend the use of quality-of-life and behavioral measures in RCTs with proven psychometric properties in a population with epilepsy.     

The case for practical clinical trials in psychiatry

OBJECTIVE: Clinical trials in psychiatry frequently fail to maximize clinical utility for practicing clinicians, or, stated differently, available evidence is not perceived by clinicians (and other decision makers) as sufficiently relevant to clinical practice, thereby diluting its impact. To attain maximum clinical relevance and acceptability, researchers must conduct clinical trials designed to meet the needs of clinicians and others who are making decisions about patients' care. The authors present the case for psychiatry's adoption of the practical clinical trials model, which is widely used in research in other areas of medicine. METHOD: The authors outline the characteristics and scope of practical clinical trials, give examples of practical clinical trials, and discuss the challenges of using the practical clinical trials model in psychiatry, including issues of funding. RESULTS: Practical clinical trials, which are intended to provide generalizable answers to important clinical questions without bias, are characterized by eight key features: a straightforward clinically relevant question, a representative sample of patients and practice settings, sufficient power to identify modest clinically relevant effects, randomization to protect against bias, clinical uncertainty regarding the outcome of treatment at the patient level, assessment and treatment protocols that enact best clinical practices, simple and clinically relevant outcomes, and limited subject and investigator burden. CONCLUSIONS: To implement the practical clinical trials model in psychiatry will require stable funding for network construction and maintenance plus methodological innovation in governance and trial selection, assessment, treatment, data management, site management, and data analytic procedures.     

Epilepsy – success in clinical practice: translating trials to practice

Success in clinical practice results from the combination of a clinician's experience, an understanding of patient preferences and factors that influence patient perceptions, and careful interpretation of data from clinical trials. However, successful clinical trials fulfil rigid methodological requirements in order to provide a basis from which to evaluate the place of a drug within a therapeutic strategy. Their translation into practice is therefore complicated by an intrinsic tension between the requirements for scientific methods that minimize error, and the need for clinically relevant data. In practice, the clinician has the flexibility to individualize epilepsy management to maximize benefits and minimize adverse effects of antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy. AED adverse effects and psychiatric comorbidity, in particular depression, have a profound impact on subjective health status; systematic screening for these confounding variables can guide clinical management and optimize quality of life. In addition, patient preferences can be acknowledged in any management plan. To achieve success in clinical practice, we need to remember that the information gleaned from clinical trials provides only part of the picture and needs to be augmented by our clinical experience, patient assessment (including routine screening for adverse effects and depression) and patient preference.     

Systemic illness moderates the impact of N-acetyl cysteine in bipolar disorder

Objectives

Bipolar disorder (BD) is intricately associated with chronic clinical conditions. Medical comorbidity is not only more prevalent in mood disorders, but is associated with increased costs, cognitive impairment and, ultimately, premature mortality. Oxidative stress and inflammation may mediate part of this association. To further investigate the association between medical comorbidity status and clinical improvement with adjuvant N acetyl cysteine (NAC) in the context of a placebo-controlled trial.

Methods

Placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial assessing the effect of NAC over 24 weeks. Symptomatic and functional outcomes were collected over the study period. Medical comorbidities were self-reported, and we took special interest in cardiovascular and endocrine conditions. We evaluated change from baseline to endpoint and the interaction between change and reported medical comorbidities.

Results

Fifty-one percent of patients reported have a cardiovascular or endocrine comorbidity. Although not found for depressive symptoms or quality of life, a significant interaction between medical comorbidity and change scores was consistently found for all functional outcomes. This indicated an advantage of NAC over placebo in those with a clinical comorbidity.

Conclusion

Systemic illness moderated only the effect of NAC on functioning, not on depression. Demonstrating an improvement in functional outcomes with an agent that modulates redox and inflammatory pathways, this study lends empirical support to the idea that medical and psychiatric comorbidity are additive in contributing to allostatic states. One intriguing possibility is that comorbid clinical illness could be a marker for more severe oxidative stress states – and thus guide antioxidant use – in BD.     

The role of comorbid major depressive disorder in the clinical presentation of adult ADHD

Most adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not recognized and remain untreated, although a large fraction of these individuals are diagnosed and treated for other comorbid mental disorders, such as major depressive disorder (MDD). The fact that MDD is one of the most commonly occurring mental disorders with high comorbidity with adult ADHD raises the question whether such comorbidity is associated with differences in the clinical picture of ADHD. Three hundred and twenty adult ADHD outpatients were evaluated. Diagnoses followed DSM-IV criteria. Interviews to evaluate ADHD and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) were performed based on the Portuguese version of K-SADS-E. Psychiatric comorbidities were investigated using SCID-IV and MINI. Regression models were applied to test MDD association with clinical and demographic outcomes. Subjects presenting ADHD and MDD had a higher frequency of generalized anxiety disorder and social phobia and a lower frequency of substance dependence, grade repetition and school suspensions, when compared to subjects with ADHD without MDD. Furthermore, adults presenting ADHD and MDD reported higher demand for psychotherapy and pharmacological treatment prior to enrollment in the study when compared to ADHD subjects free of MDD. However, contrary to what could be expected based on these data, the presence of MDD was not associated with an earlier ADHD diagnosis. These results point to the need for research and medical education into an earlier and more efficient ADHD diagnosis in patients who search for mental health care.     

AD and its comorbidities: An obstacle to develop a clinically efficient treatment?

Whilst the development of new drugs designed for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease (AD) has been widely publicised, we do not yet have treatments that are proven to slow the progression of AD. The decision taken by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to grant a licence for the use of aducanumab, based on the premise that β-amyloid removal would result in downstream benefits rather than demonstration of cognitive efficacy per se contrasts with that made by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), who declined to grant a licence, citing lack of evidence of clinical improvement, and a failure to demonstrate that the treatment was sufficiently safe. Multiple factors have complicated the search for new and effective treatments for the management of AD. It is a complex neurodegenerative condition in which multiple comorbidities are common in the affected population. However, such conditions are commonly exclusion criteria in clinical trials for new treatments. Here we discuss how some of these comorbidities impact the development of clinically efficient treatments for AD. Firstly, we will examine what is meant by AD, and how definitions of this condition have changed and continue to evolve. Secondly, we describe some of the most important comorbid conditions accompanying and in some cases mimicking AD. Finally, we will examine how the inclusion, or exclusion, of these conditions from AD research may have had an effect on treatment trials, the implications of co-morbidities on “real-life” use of novel therapeutics especially when these have been trialled in patients with relatively pure disease, and how clinical trials may need to adapt to account for comorbidities in the future.     

Redefining affective disorders: relevance for drug development

The evaluation of new drug entities with specific modes of action may be hampered by rigid diagnostic classification systems and patient selection processes that do not focus on the anticipated symptomatic, behavioral, and functional outcomes to be achieved. Patients enrolled in central nervous system (CNS) clinical trials may present with a heterogeneous group of symptoms representing several syndromes or subtypes, subsumed under the same diagnosis in the DSM-IV classification system. As a result, enrolled patients may not have the valid illness characteristics of interest to the particular study. We propose that clinical drug development needs to focus on the primary nosological entity likely to be affected by a new drug entity's mode of action. Ideally, a valid patient will have the acute primary symptoms that the novel drug is supposed to influence. In this article, we propose operational criteria to delineate a more symptom-specific and ecologically valid approach to the identification of the valid patient for clinical trials.     

Pharmacogenetics in psychiatry: translating research into clinical practice

Pharmacogenetic/pharmacogenomic (PGx) approaches to psychopharmacology aim to identify clinically meaningful predictors of drug efficacy and/or side-effect burden. To date, however, PGx studies in psychiatry have not yielded compelling results, and clinical utilization of PGx testing in psychiatry is extremely limited. In this review, the authors provide a brief overview on the status of PGx studies in psychiatry, review the commercialization process for PGx tests and then discuss methodological considerations that may enhance the potential for clinically applicable PGx tests in psychiatry. The authors focus on design considerations that include increased ascertainment of subjects in the earliest phases of illness, discuss the advantages of drug-induced adverse events as phenotypes for examination and emphasize the importance of maximizing adherence to treatment in pharmacogenetic studies. Finally, the authors discuss unique aspects of pharmacogenetic studies that may distinguish them from studies of other complex traits. Taken together, these data provide insights into the design and methodological considerations that may enhance the potential for clinical utility of PGx studies.     

Using longitudinal data from a clinical trial in depression to assess the reliability of its outcome scales

Longitudinal studies are permeating clinical trials in psychiatry. Additionally, in the same field, rating scales are frequently used to evaluate the status of the patients and the efficacy of new therapeutic procedures. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to study the psychometric properties of these instruments within a longitudinal framework. In the area of depression, the Hamilton depression rating scale (HAMD) is regularly used for antidepressant treatment evaluation. However, the use of HAMD has not been exempted from criticism what has lead to the development of new scales that are expected to be more sensitive for change, such as the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale (MADRS). In general, the reliability of these scales has been extensively studied by using classical methods for reliability estimation, developed for specifically designed reliability studies. Unfortunately, the settings customarily considered in these reliability studies are usually far from the practical conditions in which these scales are applied in clinical trials and practice. In the present paper, we assess the reliability of these instruments in a more realistic scenario thereby using longitudinal data coming from clinical studies. Nowadays, newly developed methodology based on an extended concept of reliability, allows us to use longitudinal data for reliability estimation. This new approach not only enables to avoid bias by offering a better control of disturbing factors but it also produces more precise estimates by taking advantage of the large sample taking sizes available in clinical trials. Further, it offers practical guidelines for an optimal use of a rating scale in order to achieve a particular level of reliability. The merits of this new approach are illustrated by applying it on two clinical trials in depression to assess the reliability of the three outcome scales, HAMD, MADRS, and the Hamilton anxiety rating scale (HAMA).     

Ethological research in clinical psychiatry: the study of nonverbal behavior during interviews

Ethology is relevant to clinical psychiatry for two different reasons. First, ethology may contribute significantly to the development of more accurate and valid methods for measuring the behavior of persons with mental disorders. Second, ethology, as the evolutionary study of behavior, may provide psychiatry with a theoretical framework for integrating a functional perspective into the definition and clinical assessment of mental disorders. This article describes an ethological method for studying the nonverbal behavior of persons with mental disorders during clinical interviews and reviews the results derived from the application of this method in studies of patients who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or depression. These findings and others that are emerging from current ethological research in psychiatry indicate that the ethological approach is not limited simply to a mere translation into quantitative and objective data of what clinicians already know on the basis of their judgment or the use of rating scales. Rather, it produces new insights on controversial aspects of psychiatric disorders. Although the impact of ethology on clinical psychiatry is still limited, recent developments in the fields of ethological and Darwinian psychiatry can revitalize the interest of clinical psychiatrists for ethology.     

Comorbidity of substance use and other psychiatric disorders--theoretical foundation and evidence based therapy

The coincidence of two or more psychiatric disorders in the same person (comorbidity or dual diagnosis) is no rare exception. It is rather common and therapeutically highly relevant. Comorbid patients exhibit frequently severe manifestations of the disorder(s) and they require intensive treatment to meet their special needs and the interdependencies of their disorders. The present overview deals with the theoretical foundations of comorbidity of substance use and other psychiatric disorders. We present data on the prevalence of different comorbidities and discuss the models, which have been proposed to explain how substance use and other disorders relate with each other. Furthermore, we describe the clinical characteristics and long-term course of comorbid patients, as well as some general therapeutic principles including the advantages of integrated therapeutic programmes. In addition, we carried out a systematic literature search on specific pharmaco- and psychotherapies for common comorbidities using the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycInfo (up to December 2007), and assessed the methodological quality of the identified trials. Based on this search we present the empirical evidence for the effectiveness of specific treatments and make therapeutic recommendations which are graded according to the strength of existing evidence. In conclusion, integrated treatment programs are more effective, provided they take into account the multiple deficits of comorbid patients, adjust and adapt the different therapeutic components to each other, and set realistic goals. The next step should be a broader application of integrated treatment programs and their adoption as standard treatment within the national health systems.     

Prevalence study of the randomized controlled trials in the Journal of Intellectual Disability Research: 1957–1994

Systematic reviews of care are increasingly potent guides to clinical practice, and it is important that all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are identified by those within the speciality of learning disability who produce such works. All RCTs in the Journal of Intellectual Disability Research and its predecessor were identified by hand-searching (1957–1994), and the frequency, origin, intervention and quality of reporting of randomization were described. Electronic searches for the trials were undertaken for the years 1974–1994, and the quality of indexing was inspected and tested. These electronic searches were then compared to a ‘gold standard’ search. Fifty-six RCTs were identified. None contained the word ‘randomized’ in the title and only nine mentioned it in the abstract. Out of the 37 RCTs published between 1974 and 1994, 36 are in PsycLIT and 37 in MEDLINE. One MEDLINE record contained the wrong abstract. The methodological phrases used in the electronic records were poor, and thus, the precision of electronic searches, using both databases, was low. This international journal contains many relevant RCTs from around the world, involving several types of interventions. Unfortunately, these trials cannot be readily accessed electronically using methodological phrases designed to find RCTs. Improved quality of indexing would facilitate identification of RCTs and their dissemination.     

Factors contributing to failed trials of new agents: can technology prevent some problems?

For psychiatry to contribute to the development of the next generation of antidepressant pharmacotherapies, effective use of clinical trial methods is as critical as innovation in neurochemical research. Results from clinical trials on the efficacy of a new drug can be obscured by methodological problems. Accurate diagnosis and precise measurement of the clinical symptoms during conduct of the clinical trials are crucial to obtaining interpretable outcomes. As tools that reliably diagnose disorders and assess symptoms become available, computer administration of rating instruments may improve the accuracy of clinical trial results. This article describes methodological factors that can confound study outcomes and discusses the potential for interactive voice response (IVR) technology to address some of these problems.