How a Psychopharmacology Clinical Trial Site in the Seattle Area Managed Clinical Trials and Patient Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: As the COVID-19 pandemic developed in March 2020 in greater Seattle, our clinical trial site faced several ethical and clinical dilemmas. We remained open to research patients including high-risk elderly patients and adapted to changing health recommendations. METHODS: Beginning March 14, 2020 we developed an in-person evaluation for potential risk of COVID-19. Included are the first 3 weeks of screening by our physicians for potential exposure to COVID-19, common symptoms, temperature, blood oxygen saturation, and heart rate. Individuals with higher risk (n = 23) were identified and managed. RESULTS: The 825 evaluations included 37 staff, 167 patients, and 152 visitors. No one needed isolation or transfer to acute care facility, staff attendance was 95%, all 33 geriatric patients continued in phase II trials, and others decreased by 5%. CONCLUSION: We share how we incorporated COVID-19 Center for Disease Control health recommendations to a clinical trial center and addition of pulse oximetry.

Has the rising placebo response impacted antidepressant clinical trial outcome? Data from the US Food and Drug Administration 1987-2013.

More than fifteen years ago, it was noted that the failure rate of antidepressant clinical trials was high, and such negative outcomes were thought to be related to the increasing magnitude of placebo response. However, there is considerable debate regarding this phenomenon and its relationship to outcomes in more recent antidepressant clinical trials. To investigate this, we accessed the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews for sixteen antidepressants (85 trials, 115 trial arms, 23,109 patients) approved between 1987 and 2013. We calculated the magnitude of placebo and antidepressant responses, antidepressant-placebo differences, as well as the effect sizes and success rates, and compared these measures over time. Exploratory analysis investigated potential changes in trial design and conduct over time. As expected, the magnitude of placebo response has steadily grown in the past 30 years, increasing since 2000 by 6.4% (r=0.46, p<0.001). Contrary to expectations, a similar increase has occurred in the magnitude of antidepressant response (6.0%, r=0.37, p<0.001). Thus, the effect sizes (0.30 vs. 0.29, p=0.42) and the magnitude of antidepressant-placebo differences (10.5% vs. 10.3%, p=0.37) have remained statistically equivalent. Furthermore, the frequency of positive trial arms has gone up in the past 15 years (from 47.8% to 63.8%), but this difference in frequency has not reached statistical significance. Trial design features that were previously associated with a possible lower magnitude of placebo response were not implemented, and their relationship to the magnitude of placebo response could not be replicated. Of the 34 recent trials, two implemented enhanced interview techniques, but both of them were unsuccessful. The results of this study suggest that the relationship between the magnitude of placebo response and the outcome of antidepressant clinical trials is weak at best. These data further indicate that antidepressant-placebo differences are about the same for all of the sixteen antidepressants approved by the FDA in the past thirty years.