Suicide risk management for the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression study: applied NIMH guidelines.

NIMH guidelines to manage subjects who are suicidal during their participation in clinical trials include a full range of procedures to minimize suicidal risk, yet no reports to date have shown how researchers should best implement these guidelines. The architects of the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D) study operationalized and implemented the NIMH guidelines by developing a comprehensive set of procedures to detect, monitor, and manage suicidal subjects during a large, complex, multisite clinical trial. Because of the large size of the study (anticipated n = 4000), the wide geographic distribution, the large number of treating STAR*D clinicians, the broad array of subjects with psychiatric and medical comorbidities, and the focus on treatment-resistant depression, along with the complexity of multiple treatment steps and randomization points in STAR*D, the risk of suicide, safety monitoring of suicidal subjects presented a unique challenge. This paper describes methods derived from the NIMH guidelines used to manage suicidal risk in STAR*D including the use of an interactive voice response system to alert clinicians, regional center directors, and safety officers.

Methods of testing feasibility for sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression (STAR*D).

In large multi-site trials, a feasibility or pilot study can be crucial to test the functionality of all aspects of conducting the study prior to the initiation of the formal study. A feasibility trial was conducted for the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Project, a multi-site, prospective, sequentially randomized, clinical trial of outpatients with nonpsychotic major depressive disorder. From 14 December 2000 to 8 June 2001, 42 patients were screened for enrollment into the STAR*D Feasibility Trial. Twenty-four patients who were eligible and consented to participate were treated with citalopram for up to 12 weeks. During the course of this trial, issues were raised that resulted in modifications to the study procedures. Modifications made as a result of this trial affected four domains: (1) communication, (2) patient and provider burden, (3) data collection forms, and (4) recruitment and retention of subjects. This paper describes what was learned during the STAR*D Feasibility Trial so researchers planning to conduct similar trials can learn the practical issues related to conducting such a research project. While the information gathered was useful, it did delay the initiation of the formal trial. We view this cost as an investment in the development of overall study procedures that should lead to a stronger study.