Abstract
Suicide is a serious and growing public health concern yet randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that inform pharmacologic treatment remain limited. We emphasize the overall need for such trials and review the literature to highlight examples of trials that have aimed to study patients at elevated risk of suicide. We discuss key examples of existing psychotropic medication trials as well as psychotherapy intervention studies that can yield important design insights. Medications that have been studied in individuals at risk for suicide include lithium, clozapine, zolpidem, prazosin, ketamine, esketamine, and aripiprazole. While important design challenges should be considered—RCTs to study suicide are feasible and much needed. Issues such as overall trial design, patient-selection criteria, and the scales/tools used to assess suicidality are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
Pharmacotherapy randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients at risk for suicide are needed. |
Research in this patient population requires extra consideration but can be practical. |
1 Introduction
Suicide is a serious and growing public health concern with population incidence rates in the USA increasing 33% from 1999 to 2019 to approximately 14/10,000 persons annually [1]. This concern is even greater in younger populations where suicide is the second leading cause of death from ages 10–34 years [1]. Rates of suicidal ideation (SI) have also increased during the COVID-19 pandemic [2]. A wealth of literature exists pertaining to population data, demographics, and risk factors associated with suicide [3,4,5,6]. This has been used to develop innovative strategies such as the social media screening and prevention tools [7, 8]. However, research that informs choice of pharmacologic treatment—especially regarding patients most at risk for suicide—remains limited. Although there are important considerations, drug trials with suicidal patients are feasible and much needed. Pharmacology is often used in an attempt to mitigate suicide risk; however, the lack of rigorous randomized controlled trials (RCTs) may place patients under undue risk in the absence of scientifically informed decision making. The scope of this paper will be limited to adults. Other technologies such as therapeutic brain stimulation are also outside the main focus of this paper.
2 Making the Case for RCTs in Patients at Risk for Suicide
Antidepressants are frequently prescribed to patients who struggle with suicidal thoughts or behaviors; however, the direct effect of antidepressants on suicide remains unclear [9]. Moreover, patients most at risk for suicide are often excluded from RCTs. For example, a 2017 Cochrane review [10] that found vortioxetine has greater efficacy than placebo in treating depression, but all referenced trials excluded patients at elevated risk for suicide. This problem applies to many antidepressants on the market. A 2020 review found that of all the efficacy trials described on 14 FDA-approved antidepressants, 30 do not mention suicide in the inclusion or exclusion criteria, 33 specifically exclude suicidal patients (by various criteria, some using validated instruments, others by more vague means), and only 1 trial included patients at risk for suicide. This was a placebo-controlled RCT of nefazodone in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) where the inclusion criteria required patients to be hospitalized and one of the reasons for hospitalization could be the risk for suicide [11, 12]. A similar trend was observed for antipsychotics—for example in Phase 3 efficacy trials of brexpiprazole: (i) one placebo-controlled study in patients with schizophrenia made no mention of suicide in inclusion/exclusion criteria but Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) was used and the article only reports 3 patients with SI or behaviors at Week 1 (presumably 0 at baseline) [13]. (ii) A second placebo-controlled study in patients with schizophrenia made no mention of suicide in inclusion/exclusion criteria and only commented briefly that “the incidence of suicidality was low (as measured by the C-SSRS) and similar across all treatment groups” with no further details published [14]. (iii) An augmentation study in patients with MDD excluded “serious risk of suicide”, no suicidal behaviors were reported on C-SSRS and 7 patients reported worsening SI (not clear how many had SI at baseline) [15]. (iv) A second study of augmenting brexpiprazole in patients with MDD also excluded “serious risk of suicide”, no suicidal behavior was reported on C-SSRS, and baseline SI was not reported [16].
Sometimes favored treatments do not prove effective when subjected to RCTs. For example, nightmares are a well-known risk factor for suicide [17]. Prazosin is commonly used in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the goal of reducing nightmares with meta-analysis supporting a positive effect [18]. It would logically follow that prazosin may be beneficial in reducing suicide risk. However, in a study of patients with PTSD and SI, the effect was opposite that expected—prazosin was associated with worse nightmares and insomnia [19]. This study illustrates the need for rigorous RCTs involving patients most at risk of suicide as efficacy may not be as expected with non-suicidal patients.
3 Literature Review of Clinical Trials Involving Patients at Risk for Suicide
There are a few examples of medications as well as non-pharmacological interventions that have been formally studied in RCTs involving patients at risk of suicide. While this article focuses on pharmacologic trial design, non-pharmacologic RCTs can also serve as practical models as many psychotherapeutic interventions have been studied in patients at risk of suicide. This paper is a narrative review and hence did not follow the comprehensive steps as would happen in a systematic review. Nevertheless, we queried PubMed on papers with suicide or suicidal in their titles or abstracts, then filtered these to only randomized clinical trials, and then examined the abstracts to find relevant papers with a pharmacology focus.
3.1 Non-Pharmacologic RCTs
A meta-analysis of 10 RCTs of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT, of various types, outlined in Table 1) versus treatment as usual involving patients who had attempted suicide within 6 months prior to trial, found that CBT reduces the risk of a new suicide attempt (risk ratio, 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.30–0.73) [20]. Many of these trials recruited participants in emergency departments immediately after a suicide attempt. Pertinent details of sub-studies are highlighted in Table 1. A similar meta-analysis found that CBT is effective in reducing SI (standardized mean difference [SMD] = − 0.24, 95% CI − 0.41 to − 0.07 for trials reporting a continuous outcome measure and risk ratio = 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.88 for studies reporting a dichotomous outcome measure [21]. Another meta-analysis attempting to quantify suicide prevention found that the World Health Organization brief intervention and contact reduced risk of death by suicide (odds ratio [OR] = 0.20, 95% CI 0.09–0.42); however, CBT was not found to be significant (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.12–1.03) [22]. Dialectical Behavioral Therapy (DBT) has also been studied in patients at risk for suicide. One meta-analysis concluded that DBT was effective in reducing self-directed violence (weighted mean effect size, d = − 0.237, 95% CI = − 0.369 to − 0.104) and need for psychiatric crisis services (d = − 0.336, 95% CI = − 0.587 to − 0.086), but was not significant for effect on SI (d = − 0.247, 95% CI = − 0.555 to 0.060) [23]. A Cochrane review of psychotherapies for patients with borderline personality disorder found that DBT was superior to treatment as usual in reducing self-harm (SMD − 0.28, 95% CI − 0.48 to − 0.07); however, quality of evidence was rated to be low [24].
3.2 Pharmacologic RCTs
Here are examples of pharmacologic trials that planned to investigate anti-suicide effects. Key details are summarized in Table 2.
3.2.1 Lithium
Lithium is among the most well studied medications for anti-suicide effects. Meta-analysis of RCTs in patients with mood disorders shows that lithium (levels ranging from 0.3–1.5 mEq/L with treatment at a minimum of 14 weeks) was superior to placebo in reducing the number of suicides (OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.66) [25]. Meta-analysis of ecological studies has also shown that lithium in drinking water (concentrations range from 3.8 to 123 μg/L) is linked with reduced suicide in the general population (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.27–0.67; p-value <0.01) [26].
3.2.2 Clozapine
The InterSePT trial compared clozapine versus olanzapine treatment for suicidal behavior in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder at high risk of suicide and found that clozapine decreased suicide attempts and the hospitalizations needed to prevent suicide attempts (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI 0.58–0.97) [27]. Authors of this study defined inclusion criteria as either history of suicide attempt or hospitalization to prevent an attempt in the last 3 years, command hallucinations instructing self-harm within the last week, or current suicidal ideation with depressive symptoms at time of enrollment.
3.2.3 Zolpidem
The REST-IT trial compared open-label selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) plus either zolpidem controlled-release (CR) or placebo in suicidal patients with insomnia [28]. All patients had to have SI for inclusion with a Scale for Suicide Ideation (SSI) score of at least 3 but could not have active plans (C-SSRS had to be less than 4 on the ideation dimension). Evidence was somewhat mixed as a mixed-model analysis of variance of post-treatment score of the SSI showed no difference while the C-SSRS SI subscale showed that zolpidem CR reduced SI over placebo (least squares mean estimate [LSM] = \(-\) 0.26, SE = 0.12, 95% CI = − 0.50 to 0.02).
3.2.4 Ketamine/Esketamine
A meta-analysis of several RCTs of single-dose intravenous ketamine found that ketamine quickly reduces SI (within 1 day up to 1 week) with moderate to large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.51–0.85) [29]. Very short periods of follow-up were intentionally picked to demonstrate the very rapid onset of effect. One study in particular studied IV ketamine versus IV midazolam in patients with a Beck SSI score of at least 4 and used a within-patient ANCOVA of changes in SSI from baseline. Findings showed that ketamine reduced SSI by 4.96 points (95% CI 2.33 to 7.59) on Day 1. A secondary analysis that used ANCOVA models to test for differential change between groups in SSI scores versus changes in the Profile of Mood States (POMS), found that there was partial mediation (33.6%) of ketamine’s effect on Day 1 through its effect in the POMS depression rating [30]. A similar trend was found in newly diagnosed cancer patients with SI where IV ketamine was more effective than IV midazolam in reducing Beck SSI (BSI: 9.53 ± 9.53 vs 16.79 ± 7.07, p = 0.0474) [31]. Two multicenter trials of esketamine in hospitalized patients with active suicidal intent compared with placebo (both groups received standard of care antidepressant with or without augmentation agent at investigators’ discretion) showed that esketamine improved Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores but did not differ from placebo regarding severity of SI [32, 33]. It remains unclear whether these results are due to insufficient power or if there is an inherent difference in the efficacy of racemic ketamine versus esketamine for suicidality (comparative meta-analysis does suggest that response and remission rates of racemic ketamine are superior to esketamine for depression) [34].
3.2.5 Prazosin
A trial of bed-time prazosin against placebo in patients with PTSD and SI found that prazosin had no statistical effect on SSI, but surprisingly worsened nightmares and insomnia [19]. All patients had to have mild-moderate SI for inclusion, which was defined as a Beck SSI score of at least 3, but C-SSRS had to be less than 5 on the ideation dimension.
3.2.6 Aripiprazole
In a study of patients aged ≥ 60 years with treatment-resistant depression, patients who failed to respond to venlafaxine were randomized to receive the addition of aripiprazole augmentation or placebo. Patients with SI at baseline were included for subgroup analysis, which showed that venlafaxine + aripiprazole augmentation resulted in greater resolution of SI – 30/91 (33.0%) participants on aripiprazole and 25/90 (27.8%) on placebo had SI at baseline, which resolved in 22/30 (73.3%) versus 11/25 (44.0%) (Wald χ2 [1] =5.2, p = 0.02) [35]. The patients with SI were a smaller subset of the original study population so subgroup analysis may be less precise.
4 Design Considerations for Future Trials
4.1 Inclusion Criteria and Randomization Strategies
Suicide risk assessment is limited by reliance on clinical and demographic features such as male gender, Caucasian ethnicity, advanced age, living alone, depressive, and psychotic illness, medical illness, substance abuse, impulsivity, and insomnia [36,37,38,39]. Suicide is a complex phenomenon to be understood in the context of a socioecological model that includes psychological stress, discrimination, poor quality housing, unemployment, lower level of parental education, community or domestic violence, childhood adversity, and access to lethal means. There are various degrees of risk for suicide—some more severe than others. Even at a relatively low-moderate risk, the inclusion of patients with current passive SI or history of suicide attempt would increase generalizability over many existing pharmacologic RCTs. Existing psychometric instruments for the measurement of suicide risk vary in complexity, e.g., from the single suicide items of the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) to the self-rated Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (SSI), to the observer administered C-SSRS. We have argued that the SI subscale of the C-SSRS is perhaps the most intuitive for identifying unacceptably high risk for the purpose of participation in a clinical trial, with a scores of 4 or 5 indicating unacceptable risk [40]. Psychotherapy RCTs have shown that it is feasible to conduct studies with patients at relatively high risk of suicide such as immediately post-suicide attempt on recruitment from an emergency department [41,42,43,44]. The InterSePT trial also included relatively high-risk individuals with command auditory hallucinations instructing self-harm [27]. Even patients at imminent risk of suicide—e.g. those with active SI with specified plan—have been studied in RCT of ketamine [33]. Patients who have been discharged from a psychiatric hospitalization are also at increased risk [45] and warrant study. Accepting various levels of risk may be useful in increasing sample size; however, greater variance within the study population may also introduce confounding factors and detrimentally affect power. Rather than exclusively sampling patients with SI, another strategy is to perform subset analysis on patients at risk for suicide present amongst a larger sample of participants, for example the aripiprazole augmentation trial [35]. Adaptive designs are a potentially attractive solution towards maximizing benefit to the study participants while increasing the likelihood of proving the stated hypotheses. An adaptive randomization design is one example and could include planning interim analyses for the purpose of early detection of the best treatment arm within a RCT, and then increasing the proportion of randomized participants into the most promising treatment arm. However, this strategy can potentially undermine the basic statistical assumptions in the sample size and also undermine the original statistical plan at the end of the study [46].
While there have been advances in public acceptance of mental health problems—suicide remains a stigmatized topic [47, 48]. This stigma carries over to research as patients with SI may be thought of as unreliable candidates—a myth that is readily disproven by adherence rates in existing trials, for example, participants in the ReST-IT trial attended 90% of scheduled visits and were highly adherent with taking 91% of prescribed study drug and 94% of prescribed SSRIs [28].
4.2 Control Group
Placebo-only comparators may not be ethically sound as non-treatment could place patients at undue risk of harm. A common solution is to pair placebo with treatment as usual that is otherwise the standard of care: for example, both groups receive a reasonable first-line treatment and either study medication or placebo control is added on—such as the REST-IT trial where zolpidem or placebo was added to an antidepressant [28]. In RCTs of non-pharmacologic interventions, treatment as usual by independent clinicians is a common control group [20]. Structured psychotherapy paired with placebo may be a reasonable control for medication trials. Frequency of interactions between patients and research staff (whether with case managers, assessors, therapists, or prescribers) is also an important factor to control between groups.
4.3 Home Medications
Some RCTs require patients to stop taking home medications prior to study. While there are legitimate concerns of additional variance and drug interaction safety; investigators interested in studying suicide must also contend with the risk of decompensation following discontinuation. In a retrospective case-control study of over 50,000 patients pulled from a claims database of managed care enrollees, discontinuation of antidepressants had a statistically significant risk for suicide attempt (OR = 1.61, p < 0.05) but less risk than other factors such as antidepressant initiation (OR = 3.42, p < 0.05) [49]. The risk of medication discontinuation may be greater in patients with severe mental illness—as case series of patients with schizophrenia have highlighted completed suicide following discontinuation of clozapine because of side effects [50].
4.4 Endpoints
While the ultimate goal is suicide prevention—using suicide deaths as a primary outcome measure may be unrealistic for RCTs. Due to the relatively low rate of suicide deaths and an ethical obligation to employ monitoring and intervention strategies during investigation—sufficiently powered studies would require massive sample sizes (for example the InterSePT trial estimated N = 20,000 patients to detect a 20% relative risk reduction in suicide deaths, while a sample size in the order of several thousand was sufficient to detect a difference in suicide attempts [27]. Reducing suicidal behavior is the desired goal and reducing SI is less than ideal. There is a practical need to rely on more common proxy outcome measures that precede suicide such as SI, suicidal behaviors, suicide attempts, hospitalization, or increased monitoring to prevent suicide. Another strategy is a ‘composite suicide risk event’ measure that aggregates various components of the above. Even in well-studied agents such as lithium, individual trials have had difficulties in achieving sufficient power [51, 52]. Ideally, endpoints should be measured within 1–2 weeks after initiation of the experimental intervention to detect early improvement in SI or suicidal behavior for those treatments that may have rapid onset of therapeutic effect, and also employ longer-term measurement to capture less-common endpoints such as suicide attempts.
4.5 Instruments to Measure Suicide Risk
Well-validated observer-rated instruments for SI and behaviors that are commonly used in research include the C-SSRS [53,54,55]. Well validated self-rated scales include the Beck SSI [56], and the self-rated version of the MADRS-S, which does generally agree with its observer-rated counterpart [57]. In a head-to-head comparison of the SSI, C-SSRS, and HRSD conducted as a secondary analysis of a RCT all three instruments were highly correlated (rs > 0.60, ps < 0.001) and performed well in detecting high levels of SI but were equally limited in distinguishing low from very low levels [40]. The Collaborative assessment and management of suicidality (CAMS) [58] is another interesting option that instructs patient and observer to work together in evaluation of suicide risk factors and co-author a crisis response plan [59].
4.6 Risk Mitigation
Appropriate monitoring and intervention plans should be put in place to maximize safety. Safety protocols need to be tailored to appropriate risk level and may vary by treatment setting—emergency department versus locked inpatient versus outpatient. In the case of outpatient follow-up, a common strategy is to employ case management, which has been shown to reduce suicide attempts [60, 61] and deaths [61]. Follow-up timeframes should be tailored to level of risk along with a plan to increase monitoring frequency when needed. Participants may also be required to provide authorization to contact friends/family in case of missed check-ins or other acute safety concerns. Safety and crisis response plans should be made in collaboration with staff, patient, and their support networks. Patients and staff should be educated on emergency protocol including involuntary hospitalization. It should also be considered what events are considered exit conditions—i.e., will patients be welcomed back into the study after crisis intervention, hospitalization, or suicide attempt? There is at least one example of a psychotherapy trial where patients continued enrollment after mid-trial hospitalization [41]. Prior to trial inclusion and at checkpoints during the investigation, patients should be informed of alternative treatments. A discussion of reasonable alternatives should include highly effective and rapid-acting interventions such as ketamine or electroconvulsive therapy [62]. The safety of potential candidates that fall short of inclusion should also be accounted for with appropriate referrals to care. A comprehensive overview of safety considerations can be found through the National Institute of Mental Health considerations for researchers investigating suicide (NIMH). A safety methodology is also available which shows how the ReST-IT trial satisfied NIMH guidelines [63, 64].
5 Conclusion
Patients at risk of suicide are underrepresented in existing RCTs. While important design challenges need to be considered—trials to study suicide are feasible. Trials of pharmacological and psychological interventions serve as practical examples of potential solutions. We have outlined some proposed solutions, but exact methodology will need to be tailored for specific patient populations, interventions, and treatment settings.
References
CDC. (2021, August 30, 2021). Facts About Suicide. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/suicide/facts/index.html
Farooq S, Tunmore J, Wajid AM, Ayub M. Suicide, self-harm and suicidal ideation during COVID-19: a systematic review. Psychiatry Res. 2021;306: 114228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2021.114228.
Beghi M, Butera E, Cerri CG, Cornaggia CM, Febbo F, Mollica A, et al. Suicidal behaviour in older age: a systematic review of risk factors associated to suicide attempts and completed suicides. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;127:193–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.04.011.
Franklin JC, Ribeiro JD, Fox KR, Bentley KH, Kleiman EM, Huang X, et al. Risk factors for suicidal thoughts and behaviors: a meta-analysis of 50 years of research. Psychol Bull. 2017;143(2):187–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000084.
Hawton K, Casanas ICC, Haw C, Saunders K. Risk factors for suicide in individuals with depression: a systematic review. J Affect Disord. 2013;147(1–3):17–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2013.01.004.
Park CHK, Lee JW, Lee SY, Moon J, Jeon DW, Shim SH, et al. Suicide risk factors across suicidal ideators, single suicide attempters, and multiple suicide attempters. J Psychiatr Res. 2020;131:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.08.018.
Pourman A, Roberson J, Caggiula A, Monsalve N, Rahimi M, Torres-Llenza V. Social media and suicide: a review of technology-based epidemiology and risk assessment. Telemed J E Health. 2019;25(10):880–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2018.0203.
Robinson J, Cox G, Bailey E, Hetrick S, Rodrigues M, Fisher S, et al. Social media and suicide prevention: a systematic review. Early Interv Psychiatry. 2016;10(2):103–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12229.
Nischal A, Tripathi A, Nischal A, Trived JK. Suicide and antidepressants: what current evidence indicates. Mens Sana Monogr. 2012;10(1):33–44. https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-1229.87287.
Koesters M, Ostuzz G, Guaiana G, Breilmann J, Barbui C. Vortioxetine for depression in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7:11520. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011520.pub2.
Feighner J, Targum SD, Bennett ME, Roberts DL, Kensler TT, D’Amico MF, Hardy SA. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of nefazodone in the treatment of patients hospitalized for major depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(5):246–53. https://doi.org/10.4088/jcp.v59n0508.
Iltis AS, McCall WV, Deria R. Suicidality, depression, and the FDA: health inequities and the ethical conduct of research. J Clin Psychiatry. 2020. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.19m13050.
Correll CU, Skuban A, Ouyang J, Hobart M, Pfiste S, McQuade RD, et al. Efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole for the treatment of acute schizophrenia: a 6-week randomized, double-blind Placebo-Controlled Trial. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172(9):870–80. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.14101275.
Kane JM, Skuban A, Ouyang J, Hobart M, Pfister S, McQuade RD, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled phase 3 trial of fixed-dose brexpiprazole for the treatment of adults with acute schizophrenia. Schizophr Res. 2015;164(1):127–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2015.01.038.
Thase ME, Youakim JM, Skuban A, Hobart M, Augustine C, Zhang P, et al. Efficacy and safety of adjunctive brexpiprazole 2 mg in major depressive disorder: a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with inadequate response to antidepressants. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(9):1224–31. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.14m09688.
Thase ME, Youakim JM, Skuban A, Hobart M, Zhang P, McQuade RD, et al. Adjunctive brexpiprazole 1 and 3 mg for patients with major depressive disorder following inadequate response to antidepressants: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(9):1232–40. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.14m09689.
Nadorff MR, Pearson MD, Golding S. Explaining the relation between nightmares and suicide. J Clin Sleep Med. 2016;12(3):289–90. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.5564.
Yücel DE, van Emmerik AAP, Souama C, Lancee J. Comparative efficacy of imagery rehearsal therapy and prazosin in the treatment of trauma-related nightmares in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Sleep Med Rev. 2020;50: 101248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2019.101248.
McCall WV, Pillai A, Case D, McCloud L, Nolla T, Branch F, et al. A pilot, randomized clinical trial of bedtime doses of prazosin versus placebo in suicidal posttraumatic stress disorder patients with nightmares. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2018;38(6):618–21. https://doi.org/10.1097/jcp.0000000000000968.
Gotzsche PC, Gotzsche PK. Cognitive behavioural therapy halves the risk of repeated suicide attempts: systematic review. J R Soc Med. 2017;110(10):404–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/0141076817731904.
Leavey K, Hawkins R. Is cognitive behavioural therapy effective in reducing suicidal ideation and behaviour when delivered face-to-face or via e-health? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cogn Behav Ther. 2017;46(5):353–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2017.1332095.
Riblet NBV, Shiner B, Young-Xu Y, Watts BV. Strategies to prevent death by suicide: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Br J Psychiatry. 2017;210(6):396–402. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.116.187799.
DeCou CR, Comtois KA, Landes SJ. Dialectical behavior therapy is effective for the treatment of suicidal behavior: a meta-analysis. Behav Ther. 2019;50(1):60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2018.03.009.
Storebø OJ, Stoffers-Winterling JM, Völlm BA, Kongerslev MT, Mattivi JT, Jørgensen MS, et al. Psychological therapies for people with borderline personality disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;5(5):12955. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012955.pub2.
Cipriani A, Hawton K, Stockton S, Geddes JR. Lithium in the prevention of suicide in mood disorders: updated systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;346:3646. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f3646.
Barjasteh-Askari F, Davoudi M, Amini H, Ghorbani M, Yaseri M, Yunesian M, et al. Relationship between suicide mortality and lithium in drinking water: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2020;264:234–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.12.027.
Meltzer HY, Alphs L, Green AI, Altamura AC, Anand R, Bertoldi A, et al. Clozapine treatment for suicidality in schizophrenia: International Suicide Prevention Trial (InterSePT). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60(1):82–91. https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.60.1.82.
McCall WV, Benca RM, Rosenquist PB, Youssef NA, McCloud L, Newman JC, et al. Reducing suicidal ideation through insomnia treatment (REST-IT): a randomized clinical trial. Am J Psychiatry. 2019;176(11):957–65. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.19030267.
Wilkinson ST, Ballard ED, Bloch MH, Mathew SJ, Murrough JW, Feder A, et al. The effect of a single dose of intravenous ketamine on suicidal ideation: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Am J Psychiatry. 2018;175(2):150–8. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17040472.
Grunebaum MF, Galfalvy HC, Choo T-H, Keilp JG, Moitra VK, Parris MS, et al. Ketamine for rapid reduction of suicidal thoughts in major depression: a midazolam-controlled randomized clinical trial. Am J Psychiatry. 2018;175(4):327–35. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17060647.
Fan W, Yang H, Sun Y, Zhang J, Li G, Zheng Y, Liu Y. Ketamine rapidly relieves acute suicidal ideation in cancer patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Oncotarget. 2017;8(2):2356–60. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13743.
Fu DJ, Ionescu DF, Li X, Lane R, Lim P, Sanacora G, et al. Esketamine nasal spray for rapid reduction of major depressive disorder symptoms in patients who have active suicidal ideation with intent: double-blind, randomized study (ASPIRE I). J Clin Psychiatry. 2020. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.19m13191.
Ionescu DF, Fu DJ, Qiu X, Lane R, Lim P, Kasper S, et al. Esketamine nasal spray for rapid reduction of depressive symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder who have active suicide ideation with intent: results of a phase 3, double-blind, randomized study (ASPIRE II). Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2021;24(1):22–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyaa068.
Bahji A, Vazquez GH, Zarate CA. Comparative efficacy of racemic ketamine and esketamine for depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2021;278:542–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.09.071.
Lenze EJ, Mulsant BH, Blumberger DM, Karp JF, Newcomer JW, Anderson SJ, et al. Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of augmentation pharmacotherapy with aripiprazole for treatment-resistant depression in late life: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;386(10011):2404–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00308-6.
Ivey-Stephenson AZ, Crosby AE, Jack SPD, Haileyesus T, Kresnow-Sedacca M. Suicide trends among and within urbanization levels by sex, race/ethnicity, age group, and mechanism of death—United States, 2001–2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017;66(18):1–9.
Knipe D, Padmanathan P, Newton-Howes G, Chan LF, Kapur N. Suicide and self-harm. Lancet. 2022;399(10338):1903–16.
Betz ME, Knoepke CE, Siry B, et al. “Lock to Live”: development of a firearm storage decision aid to enhance lethal means counselling and prevent suicide. Inj Prev. 2019;25(Suppl 1):i18–24.
Fazel S, Runeson B. Suicide. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(3):266–74.
McCall WV, Porter B, Pate AR, Bolstad CJ, Drapeau CW, Krystal AD, et al. Examining suicide assessment measures for research use: using item response theory to optimize psychometric assessment for research on suicidal ideation in major depressive disorder. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2021;51(6):1086–94. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12791.
Brown GK, Ten Have T, Henriques GR, Xie SX, Hollander JE, Beck AT. Cognitive therapy for the prevention of suicide attempts: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;294(5):563–70. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.294.5.563.
Dubois L, Walter M, Bleton L, Genest P, Lemonnier E, Lachevre G. Evaluation of a comparative and prospective protocol for suicidal youth: analysis of psychiatric diagnosis, therapeutic compliance and rate of recurrence over one year (preliminary results). Ann Med Psychol. 1999;157:557–61.
Gibbons JS, Butler J, Urwin P, Gibbons JL. Evaluation of a social work service for self-poisoning patients. Br J Psychiatry. 1978;133:111–8. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.133.2.111.
Guthrie E, Kapur N, Mackway-Jones K, Chew-Graham C, Moorey J, Mendel E, et al. Randomised controlled trial of brief psychological intervention after deliberate self poisoning. BMJ. 2001;323(7305):135–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7305.135.
Chung DT, Ryan CJ, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Singh SP, Stanton C, Large MM. Suicide rates after discharge from psychiatric facilities: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiat. 2017;74(7):694–702. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.1044.
Chow SC. Adaptive clinical trial design. Annu Rev Med. 2014;65:405–15.
Corrigan PW, Sheehan L, Al-Khouja MA. Making sense of the public stigma of suicide. Crisis. 2017;38(5):351–9. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000456.
Mayer L, Rüsch N, Frey LM, Nadorff MR, Drapeau CW, Sheehan L, et al. Anticipated suicide stigma, secrecy, and suicidality among suicide attempt survivors. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2020;50(3):706–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12617.
Valuck RJ, Orton HD, Libby AM. Antidepressant discontinuation and risk of suicide attempt: a retrospective, nested case-control study. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70(8):1069–77. https://doi.org/10.4088/JCP.08m04943.
Patchan KM, Richardson C, Vyas G, Kelly DL. The risk of suicide after clozapine discontinuation: cause for concern. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 2015;27(4):253–6.
Girlanda F, Cipriani A, Agrimi E, Appino MG, Barichello A, Beneduce R, et al. Effectiveness of lithium in subjects with treatment-resistant depression and suicide risk: results and lessons of an underpowered randomised clinical trial. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:731. https://doi.org/10.1186/1756-0500-7-731.
Oquendo MA, Galfalvy HC, Currier D, Grunebaum MF, Sher L, Sullivan GM, et al. Treatment of suicide attempters with bipolar disorder: a randomized clinical trial comparing lithium and valproate in the prevention of suicidal behavior. Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(10):1050–6. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11010163.
Posner K, Brown GK, Stanley B, Brent DA, Yershova KV, Oquendo MA, et al. The Columbia-suicide severity rating scale: initial validity and internal consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. Am J Psychiatry. 2011;168(12):1266–77. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10111704.
Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1960;23(1):56–62. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.23.1.56.
Montgomery SA, Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382–9. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.134.4.382.
Beck AT, Kovacs M, Weissman A. Assessment of suicidal intention: the scale for suicide ideation. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1979;47(2):343–52. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-006x.47.2.343.
Cunningham JL, Wernroth L, von Knorring L, Berglund L, Ekselius L. Agreement between physicians’ and patients’ ratings on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. J Affect Disord. 2011;135(1–3):148–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.07.005.
Comtois KA, Jobes DA, O’Connor S, Atkins DC, Janis K, Chessen C, et al. Collaborative assessment and management of suicidality (CAMS): feasibility trial for next-day appointment services. Depress Anxiety. 2011;28(11):963–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20895.
Swift JK, Trusty WT, Penix EA. The effectiveness of the collaborative assessment and management of suicidality (CAMS) compared to alternative treatment conditions: a meta-analysis. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2021;51(5):882–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/sltb.12765.
Kawanishi C, Aruga T, Ishizuka N, Yonemoto N, Otsuka K, Kamijo Y, et al. Assertive case management versus enhanced usual care for people with mental health problems who had attempted suicide and were admitted to hospital emergency departments in Japan (ACTION-J): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014;1(3):193–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2215-0366(14)70259-7.
Kim MH, Lee J, Noh H, Hong JP, Kim H, Cha YS, et al. Effectiveness of a flexible and continuous case management program for suicide attempters. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072599.
Fink M, Kellner CH, McCall WV. The role of ECT in suicide prevention. J ECT. 2014;30(1):5–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/YCT.0b013e3182a6ad0d.
NIMH. Conducting Research with Participants at Elevated Risk for Suicide: Considerations for Researchers. Retrieved from https://www.nimh.nih.gov/funding/clinical-research/conducting-research-with-participants-at-elevated-risk-for-suicide-considerations-for-researchers
McCall WV, Benca RM, Rosenquist PB, Riley MA, Hodges C, Gubosh B, et al. A multi-site randomized clinical trial to reduce suicidal ideation in suicidal adult outpatients with major depressive disorder: development of a methodology to enhance safety. Clin Trials. 2015;12(3):189–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774515573958.
Gysin-Maillart A, Schwab S, Soravia L, Megert M, Michel K. A Novel brief therapy for patients who attempt suicide: a 24-months follow-up randomized controlled study of the attempted suicide short intervention program (ASSIP). PLoS Med. 2016;13(3): e1001968. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001968.
Husain N, Afsar S, Ara J, Fayyaz H, Rahman RU, Tomenson B, et al. Brief psychological intervention after self-harm: randomised controlled trial from Pakistan. Br J Psychiatry. 2014;204(6):462–70. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.113.138370.
Rudd MD, Bryan CJ, Wertenberger EG, Peterson AL, Young-McCaughan S, Mintz J, et al. Brief cognitive-behavioral therapy effects on post-treatment suicide attempts in a military sample: results of a randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Am J Psychiatry. 2015;172(5):441–9. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2014.14070843.
Salkovskis PM, Atha C, Storer D. Cognitive-behavioural problem solving in the treatment of patients who repeatedly attempt suicide. A controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 1990;157:871–6. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.157.6.871.
Stewart CD, Quinn A, Plever S, Emmerson B. Comparing cognitive behavior therapy, problem solving therapy, and treatment as usual in a high risk population. Suicide Life Threat Behav. 2009;39(5):538–47. https://doi.org/10.1521/suli.2009.39.5.538.
Wei S, Liu L, Bi B, Li H, Hou J, Tan S, et al. An intervention and follow-up study following a suicide attempt in the emergency departments of four general hospitals in Shenyang, China. Crisis. 2013;34(2):107–15. https://doi.org/10.1027/0227-5910/a000181.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Authors' contributions
We confirm that all authors meet the four ICMJE criteria for authorship. We also confirm that all authors have read and approved the final submitted manuscript and agree to be accountable for the work.
Funding
No funding was provided for publication of this article.
Conflicts of interest
In the past 12 months, Dr. McCall has received research support from Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute; has been a consultant for Anthem Insurance, Janssen, and Idorsia; and has received royalties from Wolters Kluwer. Dr. Yao has no competing interests.
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Availability of data and material
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yao, Z., McCall, W.V. Designing Clinical Trials to Assess the Impact of Pharmacological Treatment for Suicidal Ideation/Behavior: Issues and Potential Solutions. Pharm Med 37, 221–232 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-023-00467-x
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40290-023-00467-x