Posted by linkadge on July 12, 2006, at 16:06:40
In reply to Re: couldn't have said it better myself » linkadge, posted by SLS on July 12, 2006, at 5:49:52
>It makes no sense to waste thousands of lives >in the STAR*D protocol to test algorithms for >drugs that have already been separated from >placebo in previous trials.
Like I said above, even the 'approved' group of antidepressants may only be better than placebo in 1 out of 10 trials, but because of the way the system works, a drug company can retain all information about failed drug trials. So, to continue to compare these drugs to placebo is absolutely necessary to get the whole picture.
For instance, had a placebo not been used in the SJW, sertaline, placebo trial, we wouldn't have seen that sertraline (a drug that has already supposedly 'separated' itself from placebo) actually performed worse than placebo.
Another reason why it is important to use a placebo to try and guage just how many people might be experiencing placebo effect is because placebo effect will likely not last as long as a real drug effect. So if a good portion of those 50% that ended up responding were actually experiencing placebo effect, then that information could be of major relavance to the patient's long term outcome.
Ie change the study title to, "50% of people can find relief by the third antidepressant but 45% can find relief by the third placebo".All of a sudden, that placebo tells us a whole lot more. To throw away that placebo, is only to fool yourself really.
Linkadge
poster:linkadge
thread:662854
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060709/msgs/666413.html