Placebo response in pharmacological and dietary supplement trials of autism spectrum disorder (ASD): systematic review and meta-regression analysis

• Main Authors: Spyridon Siafis, Oğulcan Çıray, Johannes Schneider-Thoma, Irene Bighelli, Marc Krause, Alessandro Rodolico, Anna Ceraso, Giacomo Deste, Maximilian Huhn, David Fraguas, Dimitris Mavridis, Tony Charman, Declan G. Murphy, Mara Parellada, Celso Arango, Stefan Leucht
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2020-08-01
• Series: Molecular Autism
• Subjects: Autism spectrum disorder; Placebo; Trials
• Online Access: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13229-020-00372-z

Abstract Background Placebo response in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) might dilute drug-placebo differences and hinder drug development. Therefore, this meta-analysis investigated placebo response in core symptoms. Methods We searched ClinicalTrials.gov , CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, WHO-ICTRP (up to July 8, 2018), and PubMed (up to July 4, 2019) for randomized pharmacological and dietary supplement placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) with a minimum of seven days of treatment. Single-group meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Standardized mean changes (SMC) of core symptoms in placebo arms were the primary outcomes and placebo positive response rates were a secondary outcome. Predictors of placebo response were investigated with meta-regression analyses. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO ID CRD42019125317 . Results Eighty-six RCTs with 2360 participants on placebo were included in our analysis (87% in children/adolescents). The majority of trials were small, single-center with a duration of 8–12 weeks and published after 2009. Placebo response in social-communication difficulties was SMC = − 0.32, 95% CI [− 0.39, − 0.25], in repetitive behaviors − 0.23[− 0.32, − 0.15] and in scales measuring overall core symptoms − 0.36 [− 0.46, − 0.26]. Overall, 19%, 95% CI [16–22%] of participants were at least much improved with placebo. Caregiver (vs. clinician) ratings, lower risk of bias, flexible-dosing, larger sample sizes and number of sites, less recent publication year, baseline levels of irritability, and the use of a threshold of core symptoms at inclusion were associated with larger placebo response in at least a core symptom domain. Limitations About 40% of the trials had an apparent focus on core symptoms. Investigation of the differential impact of predictors on placebo and drug response was impeded by the use of diverse experimental interventions with essentially different mechanisms of action. An individual-participant-data meta-analysis could allow for a more fine-grained analysis and provide more informative answers. Conclusions Placebo response in ASD was substantial and predicted by design- and participant-related factors, which could inform the design of future trials in order to improve the detection of efficacy in core symptoms. Potential solutions could be the minimization and careful selection of study sites as well as rigorous participant enrollment and the use of measurements of change not solely dependent on caregivers.