MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086632359 · doi:10.1001/jama.297.4.411

Antidepressants in Coronary Heart Disease

2007· letter· en· W2086632359 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander H. Glassman, J. Thomas Bigger

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2007
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary heart diseaseCardiologyCoronary diseaseInternal medicineDiseaseIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IN THIS ISSUE OF JAMA, LESPERANCE ET AL 1 REPORT THE results of the Canadian Cardiac Randomized Evaluation of Antidepressant and Psychotherapy Efficacy (CREATE) trial, a blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial testing the efficacy of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) citalopram and interpersonal psychotherapy in 284 patients with major depressive disorder. The efficacy of citalopram and interpersonal psychotherapy in the treatment of major depression in patients primarily free of coronary heart disease (CHD) is well documented. The clinical importance of CREATE is that it involved patients with comorbid CHD. Depression is a painful, functionally impairing, and frequently recurrent condition that in patients with either coronary or cerebral vascular disease also significantly increases the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A recent report found 17 studies indicating that depression following a coronary event was associated with a 3-fold increase in cardiac mortality. Despite the ominous implications of depression occurring in patients with CHD, there is limited information to guide its treatment and questions have even been raised about whether treatment is needed. Some physicians consider major depressive disorder that is detected after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) episode as an understandable reaction to stress that will remit when the coronary condition stabilizes. However, recent studies show that most major depressive disorders observed after ACS began long before the coronary event, which therefore could not have provoked the depression. In 1993, Frasure-Smith et al first raised the question of whether treating depression after ACS would reduce cardiac morbidity and mortality. At that time, neither safety nor efficacy data were available for any antidepressant during the post-ACS period. The Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial (SADHART) tested the safety and antidepressant efficacy of sertraline in patients with ACS as a step to test mortality reduction. SADHART found no adverse cardiovascular effects associated with sertraline treatment and reported that depressive symptoms improved in patients whose depression was severe or began before the coronary event or those who had a history of prior episodes. Among patients whose depressive episode was mild or first began after their coronary event, placebo response rates were high with no significant drug-placebo difference. SADHART, with 369 patients, was not powered to determine whether sertraline reduced death or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI). The Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease (ENRICHD) trial, which randomized 1834 depressed, post-MI patients, was adequately powered to test whether cognitive behavioral therapy would reduce death compared with usual care. Treatment with cognitive behavioral therapy reduced depression modestly but not death or recurrent MI. For ethical reasons, patients enrolling with more severe depression or failing to respond to cognitive behavioral therapy were offered an antidepressant drug. Approximately 20% received an SSRI, usually sertraline. Patients treated with an SSRI, whether assigned to receive cognitive behavioral therapy or usual care, had a 42% reduction in death or recurrent MI compared with the 1388 depressed patients not receiving an antidepressant. Although not based on randomized treatment, this difference was highly statistically significant. The CREATE trial documents the antidepressant efficacy of a second SSRI, citalopram, in a comorbid CHD population. Although CREATE, ENRICHD, and SADHART all enrolled patients meeting criteria for major depressive disorder, half the participants in ENRICHD and SADHART had less severe depression than that required for enrollment in CREATE. The majority of patients participating in SADHART and ENRICHD began treatment in the first month after experiencing ACS when risk of cardiovascular events is high. In contrast, patients in the CREATE trial began treatment on average more than 18 months after their index event. Despite these differences, SADHART and CREATE found similar drug-response characteristics. CREATE limited enrollment to patients with moderate to severe depression and found citalopram had a response rate of 31% greater than

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.005

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207