Innovative solutions to novel drug development in mental health.

There are many new advances in neuroscience and mental health which should lead to a greater understanding of the neurobiological dysfunction in neuropsychiatric disorders and new developments for early, effective treatments. To do this, a biomarker approach combining genetic, neuroimaging, cognitive and other biological measures is needed. The aim of this article is to highlight novel approaches for pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment development. This article suggests approaches that can be taken in the future including novel mechanisms with preliminary clinical validation to provide a toolbox for mechanistic studies and also examples of translation and back-translation. The review also emphasizes the need for clinician-scientists to be trained in a novel way in order to equip them with the conceptual and experimental techniques required, and emphasizes the need for private-public partnership and pre-competitive knowledge exchange. This should lead the way for important new holistic treatment developments to improve cognition, functional outcome and well-being of people with neuropsychiatric disorders.

Effectiveness of St John's wort in major depression: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Extracts of St John's wort are widely used to treat depression. Although more than 2 dozen clinical trials have been conducted with St John's wort, most have significant flaws in design and do not enable meaningful interpretation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of a standardized extract of St John's wort with placebo in outpatients with major depression. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted between November 1998 and January 2000 in 11 academic medical centers in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred adult outpatients (mean age, 42.4 years; 67.0% female; 85.9% white) diagnosed as having major depression and having a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 20. INTERVENTION: Participants completed a 1-week, single-blind run-in of placebo, then were randomly assigned to receive either St John's wort extract (n = 98; 900 mg/d for 4 weeks, increased to 1200 mg/d in the absence of an adequate response thereafter) or placebo (n = 102) for 8 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was rate of change on the HAM-D over the treatment period. Secondary measures included the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A), the Global Assessment of Function (GAF) scale, and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity and -Improvement scales (CGI-S and CGI-I). RESULTS: The random coefficient analyses for the HAM-D, HAM-A, CGI-S, and CGI-I all showed significant effects for time but not for treatment or time-by-treatment interaction (for HAM-D scores, P<.001, P =.16, and P =.58, respectively). Analysis of covariance showed nonsignificant effects for BDI and GAF scores. The proportion of participants achieving an a priori definition of response did not differ between groups. The number reaching remission of illness was significantly higher with St John's wort than with placebo (P =.02), but the rates were very low in the full intention-to-treat analysis (14/98 [14.3%] vs 5/102 [4.9%], respectively). St John's wort was safe and well tolerated. Headache was the only adverse event that occurred with greater frequency with St John's wort than placebo (39/95 [41%] vs 25/100 [25%], respectively). CONCLUSION: In this study, St John's wort was not effective for treatment of major depression.

'Best clinical practice': assessment of processes of care and of outcomes in the US Military Health Services System.

The National Quality Management Program of the Military Health Services System of the United States has undertaken a series of projects whose objective is the active, on-going monitoring and improvement of the effectiveness and efficiency of the care provided to a broad population that encompasses troops on active duty, retirees and dependents. The analytic activities consist of (1) identification by clinical panels of conditions and procedures of interest; (2) collection of data from electronic repositories and from charts to characterize the patients, how they are managed, the clinical outcomes they experience, the resource costs their care entails, and, from questionnaires, their functional status and level of satisfaction, and (3) generation of 'report cards' that inform organizational units down to the level of the hospital of the characteristics of their patients, their practices, and the risk-adjusted outcomes they achieve. The patterns of care employed by the hospitals that obtain the best risk-adjusted outcomes and resource utilization ('best clinical practice') are identified and made known. In addition, (4) a systematic process of developing outcomes-based practice guidelines has been devised. It intent is to serve as a decision-support tool for clinicians. Initial estimates have been obtained of the probable consequences of the application of this tool to operative interventions in childbirth. Use of the tool would result in a higher occurrence of elective Caesarean sections, a reduced rate of emergency Caesarean sections and much lower use of forceps, with an overall improvement in outcomes and lower resource costs. This program is currently in the early phases of implementation. The two principal requirements for the immediate future are (1) education of the clinical and administrative communities in the use of the data and the decision-support tools and (2) evaluation of the consequences of the use of the data by the clinical and administrative communities.