Cited by 80Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Riluzole Augmentation in Treatment-Refractory Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Pilot Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Open access
Pittenger, Christopher, Bloch, Michael H., Wasylink, Suzanne, Billingslea, Eileen, Simpson, Ryan, Jakubovski, Ewgeni, Kelmendi, Ben, Sanacora, Gerard +1 more·2015·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) affects approximately 2.5% of the population and is associated with significant morbidity. Many patients receive little benefit from the best available treatments, and even those who do respond often suffer from significant residual symptoms. Convergent evidence suggests that abnormalities in glutamate homeostasis and neurotransmission may contribute to OCD and that glutamate-modulating medications may be of benefit in patients whose symptoms are refractory to standard interventions. Small open-label trials of augmentation of serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SRI) pharmacotherapy with the glutamate modulator riluzole have suggested benefit in adults with refractory symptoms. We report a pilot randomized placebo-controlled trial of riluzole augmentation of ongoing SRI treatment in SRI-refractory patients. METHOD: Outpatients (n = 27) and inpatients (n = 11) with DSM-IV OCD on stable SRI pharmacotherapy were randomized between November 2006 and December 2012 to receive riluzole 50 mg or placebo twice a day and followed for 12 weeks after a 2-week placebo lead-in phase. RESULTS: Riluzole was well tolerated; 1 patient experienced moderate nausea, but none discontinued treatment due to side effects. While there was nominally greater Y-BOCS improvement in the riluzole group (our primary outcome) compared to placebo, it did not reach statistical significance. In the outpatient subsample, a trend suggesting benefit from riluzole augmentation for obsessions (P = .056, 2-tailed, uncorrected) was found in a secondary analysis. Among outpatients, more achieved at least a partial response (> 25% improvement) with riluzole than with placebo (P = .02 in a secondary analysis). CONCLUSIONS: Riluzole may be of benefit to a subset of patients. Larger samples would be required to detect effects of the order suggested by the nominal improvement in our outpatient subsample. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00523718.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.14m09123

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Riluzole reduces clinical symptoms in adults with treatment-refractory OCD when used as add-on to existing pharmacotherapy including SSRIs and antipsychotics.

    “Riluzole was shown to reduce clinical symptoms in adults with treatment-refractory OCD when used as add-on to existing pharmacotherapy, including SSRIs and antipsychotics (Coric et al., 2005;Pittenger et al., 2015).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [32]First MB Strucutred Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders, Clinician Version 1996 Washington, D.C American Psychiatric Press, Inc
  2. [39]Hamilton M Diagnosis and rating of anxiety Studies of Anxiety Lader M 1969 British Journal of Psychiatry Special Publication 76 79

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pittenger, C., Bloch, M. H., Wasylink, S., Billingslea, E., Simpson, R., Jakubovski, E., Kelmendi, B., Sanacora, G., & Coric, V.
Affiliations
Yale University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2015-07-07
Volume
76
Issue
08
Pages
1075-1084
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W761557485
Cited by
80
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3
FWCI
11.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH095790, R34MH083115, K08MH081190, R25MH077823)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
riluzole, obsessive-compulsive disorder, treatment-refractory OCD, drug augmentation, serotonin reuptake inhibitors, glutamate modulation, glutamate homeostasis, obsession, drug tolerability
MeSH terms
Adult, Drug Synergism, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Pilot Projects, Treatment Outcome, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Excitatory Amino Acid Antagonists, Riluzole

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review