Evidence Hub

A Randomized Trial of an N-methyl-D-aspartate Antagonist in Treatment-Resistant Major Depression

Carlos A. Zarate, Jaskaran B. Singh, Paul J. Carlson, Nancy E. Brutsché, Rezvan Ameli, David A. Luckenbaugh, Dennis S. Charney, Husseini K. Manji

Archives of General Psychiatry, 2006

17 participants · 3,803 citations

Abstract

CONTEXT: Existing therapies for major depression have a lag of onset of action of several weeks, resulting in considerable morbidity. Exploring pharmacological strategies that have rapid onset of antidepressant effects within a few days and that are sustained would have an enormous impact on patient care. Converging lines of evidence suggest the role of the glutamatergic system in the pathophysiology and treatment of mood disorders. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a rapid antidepressant effect can be achieved with an antagonist at the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor in subjects with major depression. DESIGN: A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover study from November 2004 to September 2005. SETTING: Mood Disorders Research Unit at the National Institute of Mental Health. Patients Eighteen subjects with DSM-IV major depression (treatment resistant). INTERVENTIONS: After a 2-week drug-free period, subjects were given an intravenous infusion of either ketamine hydrochloride (0.5 mg/kg) or placebo on 2 test days, a week apart. Subjects were rated at baseline and at 40, 80, 110, and 230 minutes and 1, 2, 3, and 7 days postinfusion. Main Outcome Measure Changes in scores on the primary efficacy measure, the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. RESULTS: Subjects receiving ketamine showed significant improvement in depression compared with subjects receiving placebo within 110 minutes after injection, which remained significant throughout the following week. The…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 17 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