Systematic Review on the Mechanisms of Action of Psilocybin in the Treatment of Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite emerging evidence suggesting the efficacy of psilocybin in the treatment of mood disorders such as depression, the exact mechanisms by which psilocybin is able to elicit these antidepressant effects remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: As the use of psilocybin as a treatment modality for depression has garnered increasing interest, this study aims to summarize the existing evidence of the mechanism of action with which psilocybin alleviates depressive symptoms, focusing specifically on the neurobiological effects of psilocybin in human subjects. METHODS: Four databases (Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, psychINFO, and Web of Science) were searched using a combination of MeSH terms and free text keywords in September 2021. The original search included both human and animal studies and must have included testing of the mechanism of action of psilocybin. Only antidepressant effects were considered, with no other mood disorders or psychiatric diagnoses included. Two independent researchers screened at every stage of the review, with a third researcher resolving any conflicts. Though a full systematic review outlining the current literature on the complete mechanisms of action of psilocybin on depression was conducted, this abstract will focus specifically on the nine papers that included human subjects, disregarding the five animal models. PROSPERO registration number: 282710. RESULTS: After removing duplicates, the search identified 2193 papers and forty-nine were selected for full text review. Out of nine papers outlining the mechanisms of action of psilocybin use in human subjects, three papers investigated psilocybin’s effect on serotonin or glutamate receptor activity, two found an increase in synaptogenesis in regions such as the medial frontal cortex and hippocampus. Four found variation in blood flow to the amygdala, two found altered blood flow to the prefrontal cortex, and one found a reduction in delta power during sleep. Four papers found changes in functional connectivity or neurotransmission, most commonly in the hippocampus or prefrontal cortex. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the exact mechanism of psilocybin’s potential antidepressant effect remains unclear. Multiple pathways may be involved, including alterations in serotonin and glutamate receptor activity, as well as shifts in amygdala activity, neurogenesis, and functional connectivity in various brain regions. The relative lack of studies, and the variety of neurobiological modalities and endpoints used challenged the consolidation of data into consensus findings. Further studies are needed to better characterize psilocybin’s mechanism of action and to better understand the clinical effects of the use of psilocybin in the treatment of depression. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST: None Declared
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 | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".