Skip to content

Albino J Oliveira-Maia

Champalimaud Research and Clinical Centre, Champalimaud Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal; Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. Electronic address: albino.maia@neuro.fchampalimaud.org.

4 papers in the library · 82 citations · publishing 2024-2025

Papers

Safety and tolerability of esketamine nasal spray versus quetiapine extended release in patients with treatment resistant depression.

European neuropsychopharmacology : the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology August 1, 2024 Roger S McIntyre, Istvan Bitter, Jozefien Buyze et al. 30 citations

In the ESCAPE-TRD trial, esketamine nasal spray caused treatment-emergent adverse events more often than quetiapine extended release (91.9% versus 78.0%), but these events were typically mild or moderate and transient: 92.0% resolved the same day, and only 4.2% of patients discontinued esketamine due to adverse events compared with 11.0% for quetiapine. The median proportion of days with adverse events was lower with esketamine (11.9% versus 21.3%). Along with greater efficacy, esketamine's tolerability profile supports its use for treatment-resistant depression.

Quality of reporting on psychological interventions in psychedelic treatments: a systematic review.

The lancet. Psychiatry January 1, 2025 Carolina Seybert, Nina Schimmers, Lucio Silva et al. 26 citations

Reporting on the psychological intervention component of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy is mostly incomplete and inconsistent across studies, limiting replicability and clinical translation. A systematic review of 45 original studies on psilocybin, MDMA, LSD, or ayahuasca for mental disorders found that descriptions of psychotherapy varied widely and completeness of information was generally low, based on an adapted Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist. Studies involving MDMA showed more homogeneous psychotherapy and more procedural details. Improved reporting on psychological interventions would support replicability, generalisability, and accurate interpretation of research, as well as enhance feasibility and safety of future clinical research and real-world implementation.

Psychedelics for the Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders: Interpreting and Translating Available Evidence and Guidance for Future Research.

The American journal of psychiatry January 1, 2025 Roger S McIntyre, Angela T H Kwan, Rodrigo B Mansur et al. 23 citations

Psychedelics show promise for treating difficult-to-treat psychiatric disorders like major depressive disorder, treatment-resistant depression, and posttraumatic stress disorder, with preliminary evidence also supporting efficacy in tobacco and alcohol use disorders. However, concerns exist about the interpretability and translatability of study results due to insufficiently characterized short- and long-term safety, abuse liability, and the essentiality of the psychedelic experience and psychological support. This overview reviews methodological aspects affecting inferences and interpretation of extant psychedelic studies and provides guidance for future research and development critical to study interpretation and clinical implementation.

Estimating the benefit of esketamine nasal spray versus real-world treatment on patient-reported functional remission: results from the ICEBERG study.

Frontiers in psychiatry January 1, 2024 Albino J Oliveira-Maia, Benoît Rive, Yordan Godinov et al. 3 citations

About 10-30% of people with major depressive disorder have treatment-resistant depression (TRD), and most do not respond to real-world treatments. An indirect comparison of two studies found that after six months, patients with TRD who received esketamine nasal spray plus an antidepressant had a 25.6% probability of achieving functional remission, measured by a Sheehan Disability Scale score of 6 or less, compared to an adjusted 11.5% probability for those receiving real-world treatments. This represents a relative risk of 2.226. Across both groups, patients who did not achieve clinical response or remission had low probabilities of functional remission (5.84% and 8.76%, respectively), while those who did had higher probabilities (43.