A good example of this is the notion of the superior efficacy of dual-action or multiaction antidepressants relative to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), briefly alluded to by Dr Madhukar Trivedi. 1(p29) The notion that certain antidepressants are more efficacious than others was lent credence with the 2001 publication of a meta-analysis of 8 comparative randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by Thase and colleagues 2 that reported a 10% remission rate advantage for venlafaxine over SSRIs. Subsequent meta-analyses using larger data sets found the advantage to be a more modest 6% 3 or 7%. 4 Other meta-analyses of comparative RCTs,5,6 involving more recently marketed antidepressants, have also touted evidence of superior remission rates relative to conventional SSRIs that were of a magnitude similar to the venlafaxine advantage. 4 This advantage, albeit statistically significant, represents only a 1.2-point mean difference 4 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), 7 falling well below the 3-point mark of clinical significance set by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). 8 Thase subsequently coauthored a meta-analysis 9 of trials comparing venlafaxine and other multiaction antidepressants to SSRIs which concluded that 24 patients would need to be treated with a multiaction agent to achieve 1 extra responder (number needed to treat [NNT] = 24). Similarly, their 2008 meta-analysis 10 of studies involving SSRI nonresponders switched either to a second SSRI or to a multiaction agent found a remission rate advantage for the latter group, with an NNT of 22. Although the authors acknowledged in both of these papers that their findings fell well below the mark of an NNT of 10 suggested by the NICE as a minimum threshold of clinical significance, they nonetheless grasped for pertinence, suggesting their findings could be of "public health relevance" given the large numbers of patients treated with antidepressants. 9,10 However, if clinical efficacy differences are negligible at the level of the individual patient, the choice of an antidepressant for that patient should be guided by other factors such as side effect profile and cost. 11 In 2009, Thase admitted, "Efficacy across all [antidepressant] drug classes is similar but underwhelming. " 12 This frank assessment of the evidence concurs with the most recent critical review of antidepressants, whose senior author was Andrew Nierenberg. 11 Yet, Thase and Nierenberg coauthored a 2010 meta-analysis of trials comparing mirtazapine and SSRIs, in which a slight remission rate difference (NNT = 23 in 8-week trials) in favor of mirtazapinetreated patents (who scored, on average, less than a single HDRS point better at endpoint) was presented as "further support for the notion that antidepressants that enhance serotonergic and noradrenergic neurotransmission convey efficacy advantages relative to SSRIs. " 13(p196) Clearly, the interpretation of such minor differences as anything more than clinically negligible is misleading and stands in sta...