Back

Efficacy and Safety of Esketamine Nasal Spray in Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Gowthami, B.; Mehta, I.; Baiju, S.; Appani, A.; Suvarna, T.; Randhawa, K. S.; Kakkad, A. M.; Syed, A. B.; Kumar, V.; Ramteke, H. D.; Khan, R.

2025-09-25 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2025.09.22.25336317 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionTreatment-resistant depression (TRD) affects up to one-third of patients with major depressive disorder, leading to poor outcomes and increased suicide risk. Esketamine nasal spray, a novel glutamatergic modulator, has emerged as an adjunctive option with rapid onset of action. However, the efficacy and safety of esketamine across randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain variably reported, necessitating a systematic synthesis. MethodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 2025. Seventeen RCTs comprising 10,073 patients were included, of whom 5,707 received esketamine plus oral antidepressant and 4,622 received placebo plus oral antidepressant. Primary efficacy outcomes included change in depressive symptoms, response ([&ge;]50% reduction), and remission rates. Secondary outcomes were functional improvement (Sheehan Disability Scale, SDS) and safety events (dissociation, sedation, hypertension, nausea). Random-effects models were used to pool mean differences (MD), odds ratios (OR), and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). ResultsEsketamine significantly improved response (OR = 0.51; 95% CI: 0.30-0.73; p < 0.001; 14 RCTs) and remission (OR = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.11-0.58; p < 0.01; 13 RCTs). Functional outcomes also favored esketamine (SDS MD = -2.27; 95% CI: -3.50 to -1.04; p < 0.01; 4 RCTs). Pooled analysis of continuous MADRS and CGI-S change showed non-significant differences (MADRS MD = -1.47; 95% CI: -3.01 to 0.07; CGI-S MD = -0.30; 95% CI: -0.75 to 0.14). Safety analysis revealed increased risk of dissociation (RR = 1.98; 95% CI: 1.68-2.28; 9 RCTs) and hypertension (RR = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.04-1.80; 9 RCTs), with non-significant elevations for sedation (RR = 1.23; 95% CI: 0.80-1.66) and nausea (RR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.82-1.37). ConclusionEsketamine nasal spray plus oral antidepressant significantly improves treatment response, remission, and functioning in TRD patients but is associated with increased risk of dissociation and hypertension. While efficacy is robust, safety monitoring and structured clinical delivery remain essential. Further long-term and comparative effectiveness studies are warranted to define esketamines role in TRD management.

Matching journals

The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.