International pooled patient-level meta-analysis of ketamine infusion for depression: In search of clinical moderators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depression is disabling and highly prevalent. Intravenous (IV) ketamine displays rapid-onset antidepressant properties, but little is known regarding which patients are most likely to benefit, limiting personalized prescriptions. We identified randomized controlled trials of IV ketamine that recruited individuals with a relevant psychiatric diagnosis (e.g., unipolar or bipolar depression; post-traumatic stress disorder), included one or more control arms, did not provide any other study-administered treatment in conjunction with ketamine (although clinically prescribed concurrent treatments were allowable), and assessed outcome using either the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale or the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17). Individual patient-level data for at least one outcome was obtained from 17 of 25 eligible trials [pooled n = 809]. Rates of participant-level data availability across 33 moderators that were solicited from these 17 studies ranged from 10.8% to 100% (median = 55.6%). After data harmonization, moderators available in at least 40% of the dataset were tested sequentially, as well as with a data-driven, combined moderator approach. Robust main effects of ketamine on acute [~24-hours; β*(95% CI) = 0.58 (0.44, 0.72); p < 0.0001] and post-acute [~7 days; β*(95% CI) = 0.38 (0.23, 0.54); p < 0.0001] depression severity were observed. Two study-level moderators emerged as significant: ketamine effects (relative to placebo) were larger in studies that required a higher degree of previous treatment resistance to federal regulatory agency-approved antidepressant medications (≥2 failed trials) for study entry; and in studies that used a crossover design. A comprehensive data-driven search for combined moderators identified statistically significant, but modest and clinically uninformative, effects (effect size r ≤ 0.29, a small-medium effect). Ketamine robustly reduces depressive symptoms in a heterogeneous range of patients, with benefit relative to placebo even greater in patients more resistant to prior medications. In this largest effort to date to apply precision medicine approaches to ketamine treatment, no clinical or demographic patient-level features were detected that could be used to guide ketamine treatment decisions.Review Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42021235630.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.037 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.066 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".