Evidence Hub

Mitochondrial modulators for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Kishi T, Sakuma K, Iwata N

Translational psychiatry, 2022

629 participants · 8 citations

Abstract

It remains unclear whether mitochondrial modulators (MMs) are beneficial in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders. Thus, in an attempt to answer this clinical question, we performed a systematic review and a random-effects meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms as measured using standardized rating scales. Other outcomes were response to treatment; improvement in anxiety-related scales scores, depression-related scale scores, Clinical Global Impression Severity Scale (CGI-S) scores, and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) scores; all-cause discontinuation; and individual adverse events. We calculated the standardized mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. We reviewed 17 studies (n = 629, 72.62% female; duration = 2-20 weeks; mean age = 30.47 years) of MMs: eicosapentaenoic acid (K = 1), folic acid (K = 1), lithium (K = 1), N-acetylcysteine (K = 10), inositol (K = 3), and silymarin (K = 1). MMs outperformed placebo in overall improvement in symptoms (p < 0.01) and in improving anxiety-related scale scores (p = 0.05). Subgroup analysis of individual MMs revealed that although overall symptoms were better improved by N-acetylcysteine (p < 0.01) and lithium (p = 0.04), no MMs outperformed placebo in terms of improving anxiety-related scale scores. Neither pooled nor individual MMs outperformed placebo in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 629 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free