Skip to content

Mark Opler

WCG Clinical Endpoint Solutions, Princeton, NJ, United States.

2 papers in the library · 10 citations · publishing 2023-2024

Papers

Recommendations for selection and adaptation of rating scales for clinical studies of rapid-acting antidepressants.

Frontiers in psychiatry January 1, 2023 Christian Yavorsky, Elizabeth Ballard, Mark Opler et al. 7 citations

Rapid acting antidepressants (RAADs), including ketamine and its derivatives along with GABA receptor modulators, can produce mood improvements within hours or days rather than weeks. There is also renewed interest in psychedelic compounds affecting multiple receptor sites. However, the rating instruments used to measure antidepressant response, such as the Hamilton and Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scales, were designed decades ago for older drugs and assess symptoms over a seven-day timeframe. This review describes adaptations made to these existing scales for use with RAADs, including modifications for items like sleep and appetite that cannot be assessed in short time frames, and examines additional domains such as daily activities, side effects, suicidal ideation, and role functioning. Recommendations for future studies and implementation challenges are discussed.

A qualitative investigation of the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale: discrepancies in rater perceptions and data trends in remote assessments of rapid-acting antidepressants in treatment resistant depression.

Frontiers in psychiatry January 1, 2024 Gianna Capodilupo, Raymond Blattner, Anita Must et al. 3 citations

In clinical trials of rapid-acting antidepressants for treatment-resistant depression, the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is commonly used to track symptom changes. This study analyzed item-level score changes across 733 subjects over 10 visits and compared them with a survey of 75 raters on which items they found most helpful for assessing change. The items 'Reduced sleep', 'Apparent sadness', and 'Pessimistic thoughts' showed the greatest average score change per visit, while raters ranked 'Reported sadness', 'Lassitude', and 'Apparent sadness' as most helpful. This discrepancy may stem from difficulty assessing certain items, the novel treatment's effects, or raters' familiarity with traditional antidepressants.