SPECIAL SECTION: TREATMENT FOR ADOLESCENTS WITH DEPRESSION STUDY-TADS
The Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS): Methods and Message at 12 Weeks

https://doi.org/10.1097/01.chi.0000237709.35637.c0Get rights and content

ABSTRACT

Funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, the Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS) is intended to evaluate the short-term (12 weeks) and longer-term (36 weeks) effectiveness of four treatments for adolescents with DSM-IV major depressive disorder: clinical management with fluoxetine (FLX), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), FLX and CBT combined (COMB), and clinical management with placebo (PBO). We previously reported that COMB and FLX were more effective in reducing depression than CBT or PBO after 12 weeks of acute treatment. In this special section of the Journal, separate articles extend these findings to the impact of TADS treatments on remission, speed of response, function and quality of life, predictors of outcome, and safety during the first 12 weeks of treatment. To set the stage for the special section, we briefly review the rationale, design, and methods of the TADS; describe the TADS sample to which the TADS findings generalize; using all of the currently available data, summarize the intent-to-treat outcomes across multiple endpoints at 12 weeks; and consider the public health value of the TADS findings in the context of design decisions and methodological limitations of the TADS, including some that may have advantaged the combined treatment condition. Reflecting the ordering of effect sizes at week 12-COMB (0.98) > FLX (0.68) > CBT (−0.03)-combined treatment proved superior to PBO on 15 of 16 endpoints, to CBT on 14 of 16 endpoints, and to FLX on 8 of 16 endpoints, whereas FLX was superior to CBT on 8 of 14 and to PBO on 7 of 16 measures. CBT did not differ from PBO on any measure. Despite the fact that suicidality improved markedly across all of the treatment conditions, suicidal events were twice as common in patients treated with FLX alone than with COMB or CBT alone, perhaps indicating that CBT protects against suicidal events. Thus, combined treatment appears to accelerate recovery relative to CBT and, for some outcomes, FLX alone, while minimizing the risk of suicidality relative to FLX alone. Taking benefit and risk into account, we conclude that the combination of FLX and CBT appears superior to either monotherapy as a treatment for moderate to severe major depressive disorder in adolescents.

Section snippets

METHOD

Methods used in the TADS have been extensively documented in previous publications (Curry and Wells, 2005, Ginsburg et al., 2005, Kennard et al., 2005, Kratochvil et al., 2005, Rogers et al., 2005, Rohde et al., 2005, Simons et al., 2005, Sweeney et al., 2005, TADS, 2003, TADS, 2004, TADS, 2005) and are only briefly summarized here. Methodologies specific to the articles in this special section are detailed in the respective articles.

Patients were enrolled in the TADS between the spring of 2000

PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS AND GENERALIZABILITY

The TADS sample is representative of depressed adolescents seen in clinical practice (TADS, 2005). The mean (SD) age was 14.6 (1.5) years; 45.6% of the sample were male; 73.8% were white, 12.5% African American, and 8.9% Hispanic. Although the TADS sample spans the range from mild to severe depression, most patients (96%) fell in the moderate to severe range of illness. The mean (SD) CDRS-R raw score at entry was 60 (10.4), which translates to a normed T score (standardized to a mean of 50 and

ACUTE TREATMENT BENEFITS

Acute treatment (12 weeks) outcomes revealed that combination of FLX and CBT produced the greatest improvement in symptoms of MDD as indexed on the CDRS-R (TADS, 2004). FLX alone proved effective, but not as effective as the combination of FLX and CBT. CBT alone was less effective than FLX and not significantly more effective than PBO. Compared to PBO, random regression analyses on the slope term indicated a statistically significant advantage for the COMB treatment (p =.001), which was not

ACUTE TREATMENT HARMS

Eighty-six percent of subjects completed treatment in their assigned arms, indicating that TADS treatments were both acceptable and tolerable. FLX-related adverse events occurred at rates that are consistent with previous FLX studies and were mostly mild, expected, and resolved with dose adjustment. Of note, patients assigned to COMB had a significantly lower overall adverse event burden than did patients treated with FLX (Emslie et al., 2006, TADS, 2004).

Almost 30% of TADS participants had

DESIGN DECISIONS, OUTCOMES, AND LIMITATIONS OF THE TADS

Although TADS is generally considered the most sophisticated clinical trial ever conducted in youth with internalizing disorders (Apter et al., 2005, Carroll, 2005, Glass, 2004, Jensen, 2005), TADS has not avoided critical commentary. In light of the primary outcomes and findings of this special section, we take this opportunity to address the most prominent of these concerns: (1) the lack of a CBT + PBO group, (2) the inability to fully mask the two CBT-containing conditions, (3) construction

CONCLUSION

TADS was designed to answer clinically important questions concerning the short- and longer-term benefit(s) of clinical care with CBT, FLX, and their combination. Along with the intention-to-treat outcomes, the articles in this special section demonstrate that combined treatment accelerates recovery relative to CBT and, for some outcomes, FLX alone, while minimizing the risk of suicidality relative to FLX alone. Taking benefit and risk into account, we conclude that the combination of FLX and

REFERENCES (58)

  • CJ Kratochvil et al.

    A multisite psychotherapy and medication trial for depressed adolescents: background and benefits

    Cogn Behav Pract

    (2005)
  • J March et al.

    AACAP 2002 research forum: placebo and alternatives to placebo in randomized controlled trials in pediatric psychopharmacology

    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry

    (2004)
  • R Peto et al.

    Large-scale randomized evidence: large, simple trials and overviews of trials

    J Clin Epidemiol

    (1995)
  • MA Reinecke et al.

    Cognitive-behavioral therapy of depression and depressive symptoms during adolescence: a review and meta-analysis

    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry

    (1998)
  • GM Rogers et al.

    Case formulation in TADS CBT

    Cogn Behav Pract

    (2005)
  • P Rohde et al.

    Characteristics and components of the TADS CBT Approach

    Cogn Behav Pract

    (2005)
  • AD Simons et al.

    Relapse and recurrence prevention in the treatment for adolescents with depression study

    Cogn Behav Pract

    (2005)
  • M Sweeney et al.

    African-American and Latino families in TADS: recruitment and treatment considerations

    Cogn Behav Pract

    (2005)
  • B Vitiello et al.

    Functioning and quality of life in the Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS)

    J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry

    (2006)
  • RN Anderson et al.

    Deaths: leading causes for 2001

    Natl Vital Stat Rep

    (2003)
  • A Angold et al.

    Perceived parental burden and service use for child and adolescent psychiatric disorders

    Am J Public Health

    (1998)
  • D Antonuccio et al.

    Fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and their combination for adolescents with depression: Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS) randomized controlled trial: comment

    JAMA

    (2005)
  • A Apter et al.

    Turning darkness into light: a new landmark study on the treatment of adolescent depression. Comments on the TADS study

    Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry

    (2005)
  • LE Arnold et al.

    National Institute of Mental Health Collaborative Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD (the MTA). Design challenges and choices

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1997)
  • MH Boyle et al.

    Lessons from large trials: the MTA study as a model for evaluating the treatment of childhood psychiatric disorder

    Can J Psychiatry

    (1999)
  • DA Brent et al.

    A clinical psychotherapy trial for adolescent depression comparing cognitive, family, and supportive therapy

    Arch Gen Psychiatry

    (1997)
  • H Brown et al.

    Applied Mixed Models in Medicine

    (1999)
  • BJ Carroll

    Fluoxetine, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and their combination for adolescents with depression: Treatment for Adolescents With Depression Study (TADS) randomized controlled trial: comment

    JAMA

    (2005)
  • C Essau et al.

    Epidemiology of depressive disorders

  • Cited by (99)

    • A Review of the Evidence Base for Psychosocial Interventions for the Treatment of Emotion Dysregulation in Children and Adolescents

      2021, Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America
      Citation Excerpt :

      For example, in youth with ASD, treatment effects were much larger for noncompliance, hyperactivity, and aggression than they were for ED.30 Results across studies may be influenced by trial design issues regarding the use of psychotropics and baseline symptom severity because they have been found to predict treatment effects.49,56 Despite these improvements, the need for further refinement and innovation is clear.

    • Non-suicidal self-injury and electroconvulsive therapy: Outcomes in adolescent and young adult populations

      2019, Journal of Affective Disorders
      Citation Excerpt :

      In addition, young adults present with the second highest prevalence of depression amongst all adults, only led by individuals over the age of 80 (Mirowsky and Ross, 1992). Treatment resistance is high, including amongst adolescent depressives, where it has been estimated in the range of 30–40% (Brent et al., 2008; March et al., 2006). Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is highly effective for treatment resistant mood disorders (Weiner, 2015; Weiner and Reti, 2017), typically defined in adolescents as failure to respond to at least 2 antidepressant trials (Brent et al., 2008).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    See end of text for author affiliations.

    National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Program Staff participated in the design and implementation of the TADS, analysis of the data, and in authoring this article. Lilly, Inc. provided fluoxetine and matching placebo under an independent educational grant to Duke University but otherwise had no role in the design or implementation of the study, data analysis, or in authoring this manuscript. The authors are indebted to the TADS scientific advisors (Susan Essock, Ph.D., Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Barbara Geller, M.D., Washington University in St. Louis; Joel Greenhouse, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University; Robert Johnson, M.D., New Jersey Medical School; James Leckman, M.D., Yale University; Lydia Lewis, Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance; Sue Marcus, Ph.D., Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Kevin Stark, Ph.D., University of Texas at Austin) for their contributions to the design and methods of the study; to our cognitive-behavioral therapy consultants, David Brent, M.D., and Greg Clarke, Ph.D.; to the Columbia Suicidality Classification Group led by Kelly Posner, Ph.D., including Maria Oquendo, M.D., Madelyn Gould, Ph.D., M.P.H., and Barbara Stanley, Ph.D.; and to the members of the NIMH Data and Safety Monitoring Board for monitoring the progress of the study. The protocol and manuals used in this study can be found on the web at https://trialweb.dcri.duke.edu/tads/manuals.html. The opinions and assertions contained in this report are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the NIMH, the National Institutes of Health, or the Department of Health and Human Services.

    TADS is supported by contract RFP-NIH-NIMH 98-DS-0008 from NIMH to Duke University Medical Center (John March, principal investigator).

    Disclosure: Dr. March is a consultant or scientific advisor to Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Wyeth, GlaxoSmithKline, Jazz, and MedAvante; he is a stockholder in MedAvante; he is on the speakers' bureaus of Pfizer and Eli Lilly; and he receives research support from Eli Lilly, Pfizer, and Wyeth. Dr. Silva is a consultant for Pfizer. Dr. Vitiello has no financial relationships to disclose.

    View full text