David Bender1, David J Hellerstein2,3. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. 2. Columbia University Department of Psychiatry, New York, NY, USA. David.hellerstein@nyspi.columbia.edu. 3. New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1051 Riverside Drive, Unit #51, New York, NY, 10032, USA. David.hellerstein@nyspi.columbia.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE: A broad reassessment of the potential benefits of psychedelic drugs has led to the initiation of multiple major clinical trials in an effort to advance their status to become FDA-approved medications, as well as local legislative efforts to legalize or decriminalize their use. OBJECTIVES: To use recently published data to assess potential risks and benefits of psychedelic drugs as therapeutics, as well as to synthesize what is currently known in order to generate fruitful future research directions. METHODS: A review of studies conducted since 1991 identified 14 clinical trials of classical psychedelics, including 11 of psilocybin (N = 257 participants), 1 of lysergic acid diethylamide (N = 12 participants), and 2 of ayahuasca (N = 46 participants). Other published studies (e.g., of healthy volunteers, survey studies, case reports, neuroimaging) were also considered for review. RESULTS: Published studies since 1991 largely support the hypothesis that small numbers of treatments with psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy can offer significant and sustained alleviation to symptoms of multiple psychiatric conditions. No serious adverse events attributed to psychedelic therapy have been reported. Existing studies have several limitations, including small sample sizes, inherent difficulty in blinding, relatively limited follow-up, and highly screened treatment populations. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial data have been gathered in the past 30 years suggesting that psychedelics are a potent treatment for a variety of common psychiatric conditions, though the ideal means of employing these substances to minimize adverse events and maximize therapeutic effects remains controversial. Unique factors related to study design are vital for clinical researchers in the field to address.
RATIONALE: A broad reassessment of the potential benefits of psychedelic drugs has led to the initiation of multiple major clinical trials in an effort to advance their status to become FDA-approved medications, as well as local legislative efforts to legalize or decriminalize their use. OBJECTIVES: To use recently published data to assess potential risks and benefits of psychedelic drugs as therapeutics, as well as to synthesize what is currently known in order to generate fruitful future research directions. METHODS: A review of studies conducted since 1991 identified 14 clinical trials of classical psychedelics, including 11 of psilocybin (N = 257 participants), 1 of lysergic acid diethylamide (N = 12 participants), and 2 of ayahuasca (N = 46 participants). Other published studies (e.g., of healthy volunteers, survey studies, case reports, neuroimaging) were also considered for review. RESULTS: Published studies since 1991 largely support the hypothesis that small numbers of treatments with psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy can offer significant and sustained alleviation to symptoms of multiple psychiatric conditions. No serious adverse events attributed to psychedelic therapy have been reported. Existing studies have several limitations, including small sample sizes, inherent difficulty in blinding, relatively limited follow-up, and highly screened treatment populations. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial data have been gathered in the past 30 years suggesting that psychedelics are a potent treatment for a variety of common psychiatric conditions, though the ideal means of employing these substances to minimize adverse events and maximize therapeutic effects remains controversial. Unique factors related to study design are vital for clinical researchers in the field to address.
Authors: Frederick S Barrett; Matthew P Bradstreet; Jeannie-Marie S Leoutsakos; Matthew W Johnson; Roland R Griffiths Journal: J Psychopharmacol Date: 2016-11-17 Impact factor: 4.153
Authors: Michael P Bogenschutz; Alyssa A Forcehimes; Jessica A Pommy; Claire E Wilcox; P C R Barbosa; Rick J Strassman Journal: J Psychopharmacol Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 4.153
Authors: Markus Bickel; Tilmann Ditting; Henrik Watz; Alexander Roesler; Stefan Weidauer; Volkmar Jacobi; Saskia Gueller; Christoph Betz; Stephan Fichtlscherer; Juergen Stein Journal: Eur J Emerg Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 2.799
Authors: Brian T Anderson; Alicia Danforth; Prof Robert Daroff; Christopher Stauffer; Eve Ekman; Gabrielle Agin-Liebes; Alexander Trope; Matthew Tyler Boden; Prof James Dilley; Jennifer Mitchell; Joshua Woolley Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2020-09-24
Authors: Kristoffer A A Andersen; Robin Carhart-Harris; David J Nutt; David Erritzoe Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2020-10-30 Impact factor: 6.392
Authors: Sean J Belouin; Lynnette A Averill; Jack E Henningfield; Stephen N Xenakis; Ingrid Donato; Charles S Grob; Ann Berger; Veronica Magar; Alicia L Danforth; Brian T Anderson Journal: Neuropharmacology Date: 2022-08-13 Impact factor: 5.273
Authors: Elin Pöllänen; Walter Osika; Cecilia U D Stenfors; Otto Simonsson Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-01 Impact factor: 4.614