A framework for assessment of adverse events occurring in psychedelic-assisted therapies

A multidisciplinary working group identified 54 potential adverse events that warrant systematic assessment in psychedelic-assisted therapies, finding that existing measurement tools substantially fail to cover these constructs. The group developed recommendations for when and how to assess these adverse events across preparation, dosing, integration, and follow-up phases, and demonstrated a preliminary assessment protocol. The framework addresses the need to capture post-acute dosing adverse events, accounting for both the pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy components of psychedelic-assisted therapy, as well as documented impacts on worldviews and spirituality.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Objective: Despite considerable research examining the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapies (PATs) for treating psychiatric disorders, assessment of adverse events (AEs) in PAT research has lagged. Current AE reporting standards in PAT trials are poorly calibrated to features of PAT that distinguish it from other treatments, leaving many potential AEs unassessed. Methods: A multidisciplinary working group of experts involved in PAT pooled formally and informally documented AEs observed through research experience and published literature. This information was integrated with (a) current standards and practices for AE reporting in pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy trials and (b) published findings documenting post-acute dosing impacts of psychedelics on subjective states, meaning, and psychosocial health variables, to produce a set of AE constructs important to evaluate in PAT as well as recommended methods and time frames for their assessment and monitoring. Correspondence between identified potential AEs and current standards for AE assessment was examined, including the extent of coverage of identified AE constructs by 25 existing measures used in relevant research. Results: Fifty-four potential AE terms warranting systematized assessment in PAT were identified, defined, and categorized. Existing measures demonstrated substantial gaps in their coverage of identified AE constructs. Recommendations were developed for how to assess PAT AEs (including patient, clinician, and informant reports), and when to assess over preparation, dosing session, integration, and follow-up. Application of this framework is demonstrated in a preliminary assessment protocol (available in the supplement). Conclusions: This assessment framework addresses the need to capture post-acute dosing AEs in PAT, accounting for its pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy components, as well as documented impacts of psychedelics on worldviews and spirituality.