Single-dose psilocybin for a treatment-resistant episode of major depression: Impact on patient-reported depression severity, anxiety, function, and quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: COMP360 is a proprietary, synthetic formulation of psilocybin being developed for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), a burdensome, life-threatening illness with high global impact. Here, we expand upon the previous report of primary outcomes from a phase 2 study of COMP360 in individuals with TRD-the largest randomised controlled clinical trial of psilocybin-to discuss findings of the exploratory efficacy endpoints. METHODS: In this phase 2, double-blind trial, 233 participants with TRD were randomised to receive a single dose of psilocybin 25 mg, 10 mg, or 1 mg (control), administered alongside psychological support from trained therapists. Efficacy measures assessed patient-reported depression severity, anxiety, positive and negative affect, functioning and associated disability, quality of life, and cognitive function. RESULTS: At Week 3, psilocybin 25 mg, compared with 1 mg, was associated with greater improvements from Baseline total scores in all measures. The 10 mg dose produced smaller effects across these measures. LIMITATIONS: Interpretation of this trial is limited by the absence of an active comparator and the possibility of functional unblinding in participants who received a low dose of psilocybin. CONCLUSIONS: Three weeks after dosing, psilocybin 25 mg and, to a lesser degree, 10 mg improved measures of patient-reported depression severity, anxiety, affect, and functioning. These results extend the primary findings from the largest randomised clinical trial of psilocybin for TRD to examine other outcomes that are of importance to patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".