Systematic evaluation of the ‘efficacy-effectiveness gap’ in the treatment of depression with venlafaxine and duloxetine

Abstract

Objective: Evidence of larger drug effects in highly standardized studies (efficacy) compared to clinical routine (effectiveness) is discussed as efficacy-effectiveness gap. This study aimed to quantify effect size differences of RCTs and non-RCTs in the treatment of depression with venlafaxine and duloxetine and to identify effect modifying predictors. Methods: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, including all prospective trials, which evaluated the treatment effects of duloxetine or venlafaxine in patients with depression. The primary outcome was the pre-post effect size after acute therapy, which were compared between RCTs and non-RCTs. Moreover, an exploratory analysis of predictors in a mixed meta-regression model within an information-theoretic approach was performed. Results: 171 RCTs and 74 non-RCTs were included. The pre-post effect size differed significantly between RCTs and non-RCTs (−3.04 vs. −2.62, Δ = 0.41, p = 0.012, high heterogeneity). Study characteristics were very similar between RCTs and non-RCTs. Most important variables to predict effect sizes were ‘depression severity’, ‘dose’ and ‘number of participants’. Conclusion: Despite differences in effect sizes between RCTs and non-RCTs, study design is not clearly an important predictor for the effect sizes. Our results question the common assumption that non-RCTs are generally better suited to describe a drug’s effectiveness in clinical practice than RCTs. Future studies and their reporting should put more emphasis on the description of external validity, in order to allow better assessments of clinical relevance.