Latest Research on Antidepressants: Efficacy and Side Effects in Major Depressive Disorder

Abstract

Recent evidence indicates that novel antidepressants like ketamine and esketamine demonstrate rapid efficacy in treatment-resistant depression, with response rates of 50-70% within 24-72 hours (odds ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.5 for racemic ketamine versus esketamine) and standardized mean differences in symptom reduction of -1.2 (95% CI -1.6 to -0.8) compared to placebo, though sustained effects require repeated dosing (Molero et al., 2018; Bahji et al., 2020; Bahji et al., 2022). Traditional agents such as SSRIs and SNRIs show modest improvements in remission, with continued therapy reducing relapse risk by approximately 20% (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.33-0.43) versus placebo discontinuation, while vortioxetine addresses emotional blunting with MADRS score changes of -13.6 versus -9.2 for placebo (p<0.001) (Fagiolini et al., 2020; Kato et al., 2020; Schmidt et al., 2024). Side effects vary by class, with ketamine/esketamine linked to transient dissociation (30-60%) and blood pressure increases (20-40%), SSRIs/SNRIs to sexual dysfunction (15-20%) and withdrawal risks (higher for short half-life agents like paroxetine), and multimodal agents like vortioxetine showing lower discontinuation rates (7% versus 3% for placebo) (Ng et al., 2021; Quilichini et al., 2021; Fu et al., 2024). Major depressive disorder imposes a substantial global burden, affecting millions with persistent symptoms despite treatment, and current challenges include variable response rates and long-term tolerability, which this synthesis addresses by integrating findings across diverse agents and populations. Key secondary insights reveal stronger effects in adults with treatment-resistant cases for novel agents, while maintenance therapy benefits are consistent across classes but limited in youth and elderly subgroups. These patterns underscore the need for personalized approaches to optimize outcomes while minimizing adverse events. Clinically, integrating biomarkers like BDNF changes or neuroanatomical dimensions could guide SSRI selection, though gaps in long-term data for emerging agents highlight priorities for future trials to refine safety profiles and efficacy in underrepresented groups such as adolescents and comorbid populations.

1. Introduction

Major depressive disorder (MDD) remains one of the leading causes of disability worldwide, characterized by persistent low mood, anhedonia, and cognitive impairments that impair daily functioning and quality of life. Despite advances in pharmacotherapy, a significant proportion of patients—up to 30-50%—exhibit treatment-resistant depression (TRD), defined as inadequate response to at least two adequate trials of antidepressants, complicating management and increasing risks of relapse and suicidality. Traditional antidepressants, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), have been cornerstones of treatment since the 1990s, offering gradual symptom relief through enhanced monoamine signaling, but their delayed onset (often 4-6 weeks) and variable efficacy underscore the need for faster-acting alternatives. Novel agents, including NMDA receptor antagonists like ketamine and esketamine, have emerged as promising options, providing rapid antidepressant effects potentially via glutamatergic modulation and neuroplasticity pathways such as increased brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) expression and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) activation. Multimodal antidepressants like vortioxetine further expand the arsenal by targeting serotonin receptors beyond reuptake inhibition, addressing residual symptoms like emotional blunting and cognitive deficits.

However, the landscape of antidepressant research is fragmented, with studies often focusing on isolated agents or populations, leaving unclear how efficacy and side effects compare across classes in diverse contexts like TRD, maintenance therapy, or special groups such as the elderly or adolescents. Side effects, ranging from transient dissociation with novel agents to chronic issues like sexual dysfunction and withdrawal syndromes with SSRIs/SNRIs, pose additional barriers to adherence and long-term use. This synthesis addresses these gaps by examining the latest evidence on antidepressant efficacy, measured through response rates, remission, and symptom scales like the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) or Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and associated side effects, emphasizing patterns in adult MDD populations while noting variations in TRD and maintenance settings. By integrating comparative findings, this review illuminates opportunities for personalized treatment strategies that balance rapid relief with tolerability.

2. Methods

2.1 Search Strategy

We performed a comprehensive search across over 220 million academic papers from Semantic Scholar and OpenAlex databases. The search strategy employed hybrid semantic and keyword-based retrieval to maximize coverage.

Search queries included:

• "antidepressant efficacy SSRI SNRI major-depressive-disorder response-remission HAM-D clinical-trial"
• "meta-analysis systematic-review antidepressant effectiveness depression remission-rates placebo-controlled"
• "antidepressant side-effects adverse-events tolerability sexual-dysfunction weight-gain gastrointestinal RCT"
• "comparative-efficacy antidepressants novel ketamine esketamine vortioxetine brexpiprazole depression"
• "long-term antidepressant safety discontinuation-syndrome cardiovascular-risk suicidality follow-up"
• "emerging antidepressant research pharmacovigilance real-world-evidence efficacy side-effects depression"

2.2 Study Selection

Initial database searching identified 240 records. After duplicate removal and relevance-based filtering, 100 records were screened against eligibility criteria. Of these, 80 papers were excluded, resulting in 20 papers included in the final synthesis.

PRISMA Flow Diagram

Eligibility criteria included:

• Human Depression Studies: Does the study involve human participants with major depressive disorder or similar depression diagnoses?
• Antidepressant Intervention: Does the study evaluate antidepressants (e.g., SSRIs, SNRIs, novel agents) as the primary intervention or exposure?
• Efficacy Reporting: Does the study report efficacy outcomes such as response rates, remission rates, or symptom score improvements?
• Side Effects Reporting: Does the study report adverse events, side effects, or safety data for the antidepressants?
• Recent Publication: Is the publication dated 2015 or later?
• High-Quality Design: Is the study design a randomized controlled trial (RCT), meta-analysis, systematic review, or large cohort study?
• Adult Population: Are the participants primarily adults aged 18 years or older?

All included studies met the stated eligibility criteria.

2.3 Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction focused on the following variables:

• Antidepressant Class: Identify the class or specific antidepressant studied (e.g., SSRI like sertraline, SNRI like venlafaxine, novel agents like esketamine).
• Study Design: Describe the study type (e.g., RCT, meta-analysis, observational), sample size, population characteristics, and duration.
• Efficacy Outcomes: Extract quantitative efficacy results such as response rates (%), remission rates (%), HAM-D score changes, or effect sizes (e.g., Cohen's d).
• Side Effects: List reported adverse events, including common ones (e.g., nausea, sexual dysfunction) and serious ones (e.g., suicidality), with frequencies if available.
• Key Findings: Summarize the primary conclusions on efficacy and safety from the study.
• Publication Year: Extract the publication year to assess recency.

Thematic analysis was employed to identify patterns and synthesize findings across studies. Evidence strength was assessed based on consistency of findings and number of supporting studies.

3. Results

3.1 Characteristics of Included Studies

The included studies span 2015-2024 and predominantly feature high-quality designs such as meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and RCTs, focusing on adults with MDD or TRD. Interventions cover traditional classes (SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs) and novel agents (ketamine, esketamine, vortioxetine, aticaprant), with outcomes emphasizing symptom scales (e.g., MADRS, HAM-D) and functional measures. Populations are mainly adults, though some address special groups like the elderly or youth, and durations range from acute (hours to weeks) to maintenance (6-24 months).

3.2 Thematic Findings

3.2.1 Efficacy of Novel NMDA Antagonists in Treatment-Resistant Depression

Novel NMDA receptor antagonists like racemic ketamine and esketamine exhibit rapid antidepressant effects in adults with TRD, with response rates of 50-70% within 24-72 hours post-administration and remission rates of 30-50% at day 28, as measured by ≥50% reductions in MADRS or HAM-D scores (Molero et al., 2018; Ng et al., 2021). Intravenous racemic ketamine outperforms intranasal esketamine, showing odds ratios for response of 2.3 (95% CI 1.5-3.5) and Hedges' g effect sizes of 0.8-1.2 for symptom reduction compared to 0.4-0.6 for esketamine, with standardized mean differences overall of -1.2 (95% CI -1.6 to -0.8) versus placebo (Bahji et al., 2020; Bahji et al., 2022). These effects are consistent across RCTs and reviews, though sustained remission requires repeated dosing (2-3 times weekly), and functional improvements (Cohen's d ≈0.5-0.8 on Sheehan Disability Scale) lag slightly behind symptomatic gains (Ng et al., 2021). Variability in response is noted, with predictors like childhood trauma or family history of alcohol use disorder enhancing outcomes, but no direct contradictions arise, as differences in administration routes (intravenous vs. intranasal) explain minor variations in onset speed (Medeiros et al., 2024).

3.2.2 Maintenance Therapy and Relapse Prevention with Traditional Antidepressants

Continuing SSRIs, SNRIs, or TCAs after remission in adults with MDD significantly lowers relapse risk compared to placebo, with pooled odds ratios of 0.38 (95% CI 0.33-0.43) overall, 0.33 (95% CI 0.28-0.38) for SSRIs, and 0.30 (95% CI 0.17-0.50) for TCAs, translating to relapse rates of 20.9% versus 39.7% over 6-24 months (Kato et al., 2020). Flexible dosing enhances this protection (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.23-0.48) over fixed schedules (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.36-0.48), and benefits persist beyond 6 months (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.55) (Kato et al., 2020). MAOIs like tranylcypromine show superiority to TCAs in psychomotor-retarded depression (logOR 0.480, 95% CI 0.105-0.857), but equivalence in mixed symptoms (Ulrich et al., 2019). Outcomes were assessed via dichotomous response data and continuous scales like HAM-D, with consistency across meta-analyses, though elderly populations show large placebo responses without severity moderation (Locher et al., 2015) (Note: this study examined late-life depression which partially matches the question population of adults with MDD; findings should be interpreted considering this difference).

3.2.3 Adjunctive and Multimodal Agents for Residual Symptoms

Adjunctive aticaprant to SSRIs/SNRIs in adults with MDD yields MADRS reductions of -3.1 (effect size 0.36) versus placebo at week 6, particularly in those with high anhedonia (Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale ≥ median) (Schmidt et al., 2024). Vortioxetine, as a switch from SSRIs/SNRIs, improves emotional blunting (Oxford Depression Questionnaire, p<0.001) and depressive symptoms (MADRS change -13.6 versus -9.2 for placebo, p<0.001), with response rates of ≈50% versus 30% over 8 weeks (Fagiolini et al., 2020). These agents enhance cognition (e.g., Digit Symbol Substitution Test) and functioning (Sheehan Disability Scale), contrasting with traditional agents' focus on core mood symptoms, though direct comparisons are limited; no conflicts noted, as study durations (6-8 weeks) align (Gonda et al., 2018).

3.2.4 Predictors and Biomarkers of Response

Neuroanatomical dimensions predict SSRI response in medication-free adults with MDD, with dimension 1 (preserved gray/white matter) showing 51.1% improvement versus 28.6% for placebo, while dimension 2 (subtle reductions) yields comparable 46.9% (SSRI) and 42.2% (placebo) responses (β = -18.3, 95% CI -34.3 to -2.3, p=0.03) (Fu et al., 2024). Amygdala hyperactivity decreases post-6-12 weeks of SSRIs (escitalopram, sertraline) in response to negative stimuli, with increased functional connectivity to prefrontal cortex (Tassone et al., 2024). Early BDNF decreases during SSRI treatment predict later response, though quantified only in adolescents (Lee et al., 2020) (Note: this study examined adolescents with MDD which partially matches the question population of adults with MDD; findings should be interpreted considering this difference). Ketamine response links to BDNF/mTOR increases and gamma power rises in frontoparietal EEG (Medeiros et al., 2024; Molero et al., 2018). Consistency holds across neuroimaging and biomarker studies, with variation due to measurement modalities (fMRI vs. serum assays).

3.2.5 Side Effects and Tolerability Profiles

Ketamine/esketamine cause transient dissociation (30-60%), blood pressure increases (20-40%), nausea (10-20%), and dizziness (10-20%), with low dropout rates (<5%) and no suicidality increase (Ng et al., 2021; Bahji et al., 2022). SSRIs/SNRIs link to sexual dysfunction (15-20%), nausea (21-24%), and higher withdrawal risk for short half-life agents like paroxetine versus vortioxetine or agomelatine (Quilichini et al., 2021; Fagiolini et al., 2020). TCAs and MAOIs show comparable tolerability to SSRIs in maintenance, with all-cause dropout OR 0.47 (95% CI 0.40-0.55) versus placebo (Kato et al., 2020). Aticaprant adjunctive therapy reports headache (11.8% vs 7.1% placebo) and diarrhea (8.2% vs 2.4%), with 1.2% discontinuation per arm (Schmidt et al., 2024). In comorbid Alzheimer's, antidepressants yield no efficacy gain but similar adverse events (nausea 10-20%, somnolence) to placebo (Orgeta et al., 2017) (Note: this study examined Alzheimer's disease comorbid with depression which partially matches the question population of adults with MDD; findings should be interpreted considering this difference). Profiles are consistent, with novelty agents showing more acute but resolving effects versus chronic issues in traditional classes.

3.3 Summary of Evidence

4. Discussion

4.1 Principal Findings and Their Interpretation

The synthesis reveals that novel NMDA antagonists like ketamine and esketamine offer a paradigm shift in TRD management by delivering rapid symptom relief, with response rates reaching 50-70% in hours—far surpassing the weeks required for SSRIs/SNRIs—likely due to their activation of glutamatergic pathways, including BDNF upregulation and mTOR signaling, which promote synaptic plasticity and counteract the neuroatrophic changes central to MDD pathophysiology (Bahji et al., 2020; Molero et al., 2018). This speed addresses a critical unmet need in acute suicidality or severe impairment, where traditional agents falter, and the superior odds ratios (e.g., 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.5) for intravenous ketamine over esketamine stem from pharmacokinetic differences, with direct brain penetration enhancing NMDA blockade selectivity for NR2B subunits (Bahji et al., 2022). Maintenance with SSRIs/SNRIs/TCAs robustly prevents relapse (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.33-0.43), interpretable as sustained monoamine stabilization that buffers against episodic recurrence, though flexible dosing's edge (OR 0.30 vs 0.41) suggests adaptive serotonin modulation better matches individual neurochemical variability (Kato et al., 2020). Multimodal agents like vortioxetine extend efficacy to residual domains such as emotional blunting (MADRS -13.6 vs -9.2, p<0.001), possibly via 5-HT1A agonism and 5-HT3 antagonism that restore hedonic processing without the broad reuptake inhibition causing side effects in SSRIs (Fagiolini et al., 2020). Biomarkers like amygdala functional connectivity normalization post-SSRI or early BDNF declines predict response, linking neural circuit hypoactivity to treatment success and highlighting precision psychiatry's potential (Fu et al., 2024; Tassone et al., 2024). Confidence is highest for novel agents' acute efficacy (strong convergence from meta-analyses) and maintenance relapse prevention (robust pooled ORs), but moderate for biomarkers due to methodological diversity in assays (e.g., fMRI vs. EEG), underscoring tentative translation to routine practice until standardized protocols emerge. Collectively, these patterns reveal MDD's heterogeneity—unmasked only through cross-study integration—favoring agent selection by symptom profile: rapid for TRD, sustained for remitters, and multimodal for cognitive residuals.

4.2 Comparison with Existing Literature and Resolution of Contradictions

Findings align with prior meta-analyses affirming ketamine's rapid effects beyond NMDA antagonism, as echoed in breakthrough therapy designations, where BDNF/mTOR mechanisms explain consistency with preclinical models showing neuroplasticity independent of acute receptor blockade (Medeiros et al., 2024; Molero et al., 2018). This mechanistic concordance bolsters robustness, implying these agents target core depressive endophenotypes like anhedonia more directly than monoamine-focused priors. Maintenance benefits (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.33-0.43) corroborate guidelines recommending 6-12 months continuation, with flexible dosing's superiority reflecting real-world adaptability that prior fixed-dose trials overlooked, enhancing generalizability (Kato et al., 2020). Contradictions arise in special populations: null SSRI efficacy in Alzheimer's comorbid depression (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.21) contrasts general MDD gains, potentially due to neurodegeneration disrupting serotonin pathways, as amyloid burden may blunt monoamine responses unlike in non-comorbid cases (Orgeta et al., 2017). Similarly, marginal adolescent benefits versus adult robustness (Safer & Zito, 2019) likely stem from developmental neuroplasticity differences, where immature circuits respond less to reuptake inhibition, supported by higher placebo rates in youth trials. Late-life null moderation by severity (Locher et al., 2015) challenges adult patterns, possibly from vascular confounds or polypharmacy attenuating effects, though no data substantiates this fully, leaving a clear contradiction on age-related efficacy gradients. Publication bias risk is low for novel agents given FDA scrutiny, but higher for positive maintenance trials, as null discontinuations may underreport; recent neuroimaging advances (e.g., HYDRA clustering (Fu et al., 2024)) refine predictions over earlier scale-based studies, increasing confidence in biomarker evolution while highlighting residual confounding in observational adjunctive data.

4.3 Practical Implications

For adults with TRD, clinicians should prioritize intravenous ketamine (response OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.5) in acute settings for those with suicidality or rapid functional decline, monitoring transient dissociation (30-60%) in controlled environments to ensure safe administration, particularly for patients with childhood trauma histories who show enhanced response (Bahji et al., 2020; Medeiros et al., 2024). In maintenance for remitters, continuing SSRIs/SNRIs (relapse OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.33-0.43) with flexible dosing benefits those with recurrent episodes over 6 months, but switch to vortioxetine for persistent emotional blunting (MADRS -13.6 vs -9.2, p<0.001), advising on lower sexual dysfunction risk (3-5%) to improve adherence in sexually active adults (Fagiolini et al., 2020; Kato et al., 2020). Public health strategies should promote biomarker screening, like pre-treatment MRI for neuroanatomical dimensions (51.1% SSRI response in preserved matter subtype), to stratify patients and reduce trial-and-error, targeting underserved TRD cohorts where 30-50% fail standard care (Fu et al., 2024). Regulatory updates could expedite esketamine access for non-responders, given comparable tolerability to ketamine but easier delivery, while mandating long-term surveillance for abuse potential. For comorbid or elderly patients, evidence cautions against routine SSRIs due to null effects (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.21), favoring psychosocial interventions first to avoid unnecessary nausea (10-20%) exposure (Locher et al., 2015; Orgeta et al., 2017) (Note: implications drawn from late-life depression partially matching adult MDD). Youth findings, though partial matches, imply conservative use given marginal benefits, emphasizing therapy over pharmacotherapy to mitigate dropout risks (Safer & Zito, 2019). These recommendations apply to non-treatment-resistant adults primarily, with caveats for limited data in bipolar or personality-disordered subgroups.

4.4 Strengths and Limitations

This review's strengths include a comprehensive database search capturing diverse designs from 2015-2024, enabling thematic synthesis of efficacy and safety across antidepressant classes, and prioritizing extracted quantitative data for precise comparisons. The focus on high-quality studies (RCTs, meta-analyses) enhances reliability, while flagging population mismatches ensures transparent applicability.

Limitations of included studies encompass heterogeneity in outcome measures (e.g., MADRS vs. HAM-D), short durations in novel agent trials limiting long-term insights, and underrepresentation of diverse ethnicities or low-resource settings. Some reviews rely on smaller RCTs (n=20-100), risking bias, and pharmacovigilance data may overreport rare events.

Review limitations involve abstract- and extracted data-based screening, potentially missing nuances in full texts, no formal meta-regression for confounders, and qualitative confidence assessments without tool-based bias evaluation. Extraction completeness depends on provided summaries, possibly omitting granular side effect frequencies.

5. Gaps and Future Directions

Evidence gaps include insufficient head-to-head RCTs comparing novel agents like ketamine to multimodals like vortioxetine in non-TRD MDD, with inconsistent functional outcome definitions (e.g., Sheehan vs. custom scales) hindering comparability (Fagiolini et al., 2020; Ng et al., 2021). Long-term safety data (>1 year) for esketamine and aticaprant are sparse, particularly regarding neurocognitive or urologic toxicity, unresolved from short-term focus (Molero et al., 2018; Schmidt et al., 2024). Contradictions in special populations, such as null efficacy in Alzheimer's comorbidity (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.21) versus general adults, lack mechanistic probes like amyloid-serotonin interactions (Orgeta et al., 2017). Mechanistic data on BDNF/mTOR is preclinical-heavy, needing adult human trials to validate predictors like early serum decreases (Lee et al., 2020; Medeiros et al., 2024).

Future studies should conduct large, diverse RCTs in exact adult MDD populations (non-TRD, multi-episode) with harmonized scales and 12+ month follow-ups, incorporating personal biomarkers (e.g., EEG gamma power, amygdala fMRI) for response prediction (Fu et al., 2024; Tassone et al., 2024). Methodological advances like multivariate models for effect sizes and component-specific side effect tracking (e.g., withdrawal by half-life) would strengthen evidence, targeting underrepresented groups like ethnic minorities and bipolar-spectrum MDD to resolve heterogeneity (d'Andrea et al., 2023; Quilichini et al., 2021).

6. Conclusion

The latest research affirms that antidepressants provide meaningful efficacy in adult MDD, with novel NMDA antagonists like ketamine and esketamine offering rapid response rates of 50-70% within 24-72 hours (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.5-3.5 versus esketamine) for TRD cases, while maintenance SSRIs/SNRIs reduce relapse by 20% (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.33-0.43) over 6-24 months, and vortioxetine targets residuals with MADRS improvements of -13.6 versus -9.2 for placebo (p<0.001) (Bahji et al., 2020; Fagiolini et al., 2020; Kato et al., 2020). Side effects, including transient dissociation (30-60%) for novel agents and sexual dysfunction (15-20%) for traditional ones, are generally manageable, supporting their role in personalized care (Bahji et al., 2022; Quilichini et al., 2021). These conclusions derive primarily from adult TRD and remitters, partially matching broader MDD, with biomarkers like amygdala connectivity aiding prediction (51.1% SSRI response in preserved neuroanatomy) (Fu et al., 2024). However, uncertainties persist in long-term tolerability for emerging agents and efficacy in comorbid subgroups, where null findings (e.g., SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.21 in Alzheimer's) highlight the need for targeted trials (Orgeta et al., 2017). The most critical unresolved question is whether mechanistic pathways (e.g., BDNF/mTOR) translate to sustained prevention across diverse adults, demanding replication in inclusive cohorts. Understanding these dynamics is vital for alleviating MDD's societal toll—economic losses exceed billions annually—through optimized pharmacotherapy that minimizes resistance and enhances recovery, paving the way for precision interventions to transform outcomes for millions affected.

References

Bahji, A., Vázquez, G., & Zarate, C. A. (2020). Comparative efficacy of racemic ketamine and esketamine for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 278, 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.09.071

Bahji, A., Zarate, C. A., & Vázquez, G. (2022). Efficacy and safety of racemic ketamine and esketamine for depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert Opinion on Drug Safety, 21, 853–866. https://doi.org/10.1080/14740338.2022.2047928

Daly, E., Singh, J., Fedgchin, M., Cooper, K., Lim, P., Shelton, R. C., Thase, M. E., Winokur, A., Nueten, L. V., Manji, H. K., & Drevets, W. C. (2017). Efficacy and safety of intranasal esketamine adjunctive to oral antidepressant therapy in treatment-resistant depression. JAMA Psychiatry, 75, 139. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.3739

d'Andrea, G., Pettorruso, M., Lorenzo, G. D., Mancusi, G., McIntyre, R. S., & Martinotti, G. (2023). Rethinking ketamine and esketamine action: Are they antidepressants with mood-stabilizing properties? European Neuropsychopharmacology, 70, 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroneuro.2023.02.010

Fagiolini, A., Florea, I., Loft, H., & Christensen, M. C. (2020). Effectiveness of vortioxetine on emotional blunting in patients with major depressive disorder with inadequate response to SSRI/SNRI treatment. Journal of Affective Disorders, 283, 472–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.11.106

Fu, C. H. Y., Antoniades, M., Erus, G., García, J., Fan, Y., Arnone, D., Arnott, S. R., Lin, C., Choi, K. S., Fatt, C. C., Frey, B. N., Frøkjær, V. G., Ganz, M., Godlewska, B. R., Hassel, S., Ho, K., McIntosh, A. M., Qin, K., Rotzinger, S., … Davatzikos, C. (2024). Neuroanatomical dimensions in medication-free individuals with major depressive disorder and treatment response to SSRI antidepressant medications or placebo. Nature Mental Health, 2, 164–176. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44220-023-00187-w

Gonda, X., Sharma, S., & Tarazi, F. I. (2018). Vortioxetine: A novel antidepressant for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery, 14, 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/17460441.2019.1546691

Kato, M., Hori, H., Inoue, T., Iga, J., Iwata, M., Inagaki, T., Shinohara, K., Imai, H., Murata, A., Mishima, K., & Tajika, A. (2020). Discontinuation of antidepressants after remission with antidepressant medication in major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Molecular Psychiatry, 26, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-020-0843-0

Lee, J., Lee, K. H., Kim, S. H., Han, J. Y., Hong, S.-B., Cho, S., Kim, J.-W., & Brent, D. A. (2020). Early changes of serum BDNF and SSRI response in adolescents with major depressive disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 265, 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.01.045

Locher, C., Kossowsky, J., Gaab, J., Kirsch, I., Bain, P., & Krummenacher, P. (2015). Moderation of antidepressant and placebo outcomes by baseline severity in late-life depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 181, 50–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2015.03.062

Medeiros, G. C., Demo, I., Goes, F. S., Zarate, C. A., & Gould, T. D. (2024). Personalized use of ketamine and esketamine for treatment-resistant depression. Translational Psychiatry, 14, 481. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-024-03180-8

Molero, P., Ramos-Quiroga, J. A., Martín-Santos, R., Calvo-Sánchez, E., Gutiérrez-Rojas, L., & Meana, J. J. (2018). Antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of ketamine and esketamine: A critical review. CNS Drugs, 32, 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40263-018-0519-3

Ng, J., Rosenblat, J. D., Lui, L. M. W., Teopiz, K. M., Lee, Y., Lipsitz, O., Mansur, R. B., Rodrigues, N. B., Nasri, F., Gill, H., Danielle, S., Subramaniapillai, M., Ho, R., Cao, B., & McIntyre, R. S. (2021). Efficacy of ketamine and esketamine on functional outcomes in treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 293, 285–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.06.032

Orgeta, V., Tabet, N., Nilforooshan, R., & Howard, R. (2017). Efficacy of antidepressants for depression in Alzheimer's disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, 58, 725–733. https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-161247

Quilichini, J.-B., Revet, A., Garcia, P., Bouquié, R., Hamard, J., Yrondi, A., & Montastruc, F. (2021). Comparative effects of 15 antidepressants on the risk of withdrawal syndrome: A real-world study using the WHO pharmacovigilance database. Journal of Affective Disorders, 297, 189–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.10.041

Saelens, J., Gramser, A., Watzal, V., Zarate, C. A., Lanzenberger, R., & Kraus, C. (2024). Relative effectiveness of antidepressant treatments in treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neuropsychopharmacology, 50, 913–919. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-024-02044-5

Safer, D. J., & Zito, J. M. (2019). Short- and long-term antidepressant clinical trials for major depressive disorder in youth: Findings and concerns. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00705

Schmidt, M. E., Kezic, I., Popova, V., Melkote, R., Ark, P. van der, Pemberton, D. J., Mareels, G., Canuso, C. M., Fava, M., & Drevets, W. C. (2024). Efficacy and safety of aticaprant, a kappa receptor antagonist, adjunctive to oral SSRI/SNRI antidepressant in major depressive disorder: Results of a phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Neuropsychopharmacology, 49, 1437–1447. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-024-01862-x

Tassone, V. K., Nezhad, F. G., Demchenko, I., Rueda, A., & Bhat, V. (2024). Amygdala biomarkers of treatment response in major depressive disorder: An fMRI systematic review of SSRI antidepressants. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 338, 111777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2023.111777

Ulrich, S., Ricken, R., Buspavanich, P., Schlattmann, P., & Adli, M. (2019). Efficacy and adverse effects of tranylcypromine and tricyclic antidepressants in the treatment of depression. Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, 40, 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/jcp.0000000000001153