This review (2017) evaluates the therapeutic research into psilocybin as a treatment for addiction, treatment-resistant depression, and mood and anxiety disorders. The authors also analyse the safety data from these clinical trials.
Psilocybin and other 5-hydroxytryptamine2A agonist classic psychedelics have been used for centuries as sacraments within indigenous cultures. In the mid-twentieth century they were a focus within psychiatry as both probes of brain function and experimental therapeutics. By the late 1960s and early 1970s these scientific inquires fell out of favor because classic psychedelics were being used outside of medical research and in association with the emerging counter culture. However, in the twenty-first century, scientific interest in classic psychedelics has returned and grown as a result of several promising studies, validating earlier research. Here, we review therapeutic research on psilocybin, the classic psychedelic that has been the focus of most recent research. For mood and anxiety disorders, three controlled trials have suggested that psilocybin may decrease symptoms of depression and anxiety in the context of cancer-related psychiatric distress for at least 6 months following a single acute administration. A small, open-label study in patients with treatment-resistant depression showed reductions in depression and anxiety symptoms 3 months after two acute doses. For addiction, small, open-label pilot studies have shown promising success rates for both tobacco and alcohol addiction. Safety data from these various trials, which involve careful screening, preparation, monitoring, and follow-up, indicate the absence of severe drug-related adverse reactions. Modest drug-related adverse effects at the time of medication administration are readily managed. US federal funding has yet to support therapeutic psilocybin research, although such support will be important to thoroughly investigate efficacy, safety, and therapeutic mechanisms.
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Goodman, L. E., Grof, S., Kurland, A. A. et al. · Journal of Transpersonal Psychology (1972)
Richards, W. A., Rhead, J. C., Dileo, F. B. et al. · Journal of Psychedelic Drugs (1997)
Kurland, A. A. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (1985)
Ludwig, A., Levine, J., Stark, L. et al. · American Journal of Psychiatry (1969)
Classic psychedelics such as psilocybin have a long history of sacramental use in indigenous cultures and drew intense scientific interest in the mid-twentieth century. Between the 1950s and mid-1960s, more than 1,000 clinical papers involving roughly 40,000 patients were published, producing early, though methodologically limited, evidence that these compounds might aid end-of-life psychiatric distress and addiction. Political backlash and regulatory changes largely halted human research for decades, but interest has resumed in the twenty-first century, with psilocybin becoming the principal focus of recent clinical work. This review examines modern therapeutic research on psilocybin, emphasising two potential indications: cancer-related psychiatric distress and addiction. It summarises clinical trials, pilot studies, observational reports and mechanistic work, and highlights safety considerations and the structured therapeutic model commonly employed in clinical research with psilocybin.
Johnson and colleagues present a narrative review of contemporary psilocybin research rather than a systematic review with a reported search strategy. The extracted text describes and synthesises findings from a range of study types, including double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trials in cancer patients, small open-label pilot trials (for treatment-resistant depression, tobacco and alcohol dependence), case series and survey data (notably for cluster headaches), a small OCD pilot, and neurobiological investigations such as resting-state functional MRI studies. The review integrates clinical outcomes, safety data and theoretical biological mechanisms. The extracted text does not report explicit methods for literature identification, such as databases searched, date ranges, inclusion/exclusion criteria, study selection procedures, or formal risk-of-bias assessment. Consequently, it is not possible from the provided extraction to determine how comprehensively the literature was captured or whether study quality was systematically graded. Instead, the paper appears to select and discuss representative modern clinical studies and related earlier work to illustrate therapeutic potential and remaining gaps. A prominent feature of the review is description of the therapeutic model used in psilocybin studies: careful participant screening (notably excluding current psychosis or high cardiovascular risk), preparatory sessions, supervised dosing sessions with interpersonal support and encouragement of internal focus, and post-session integration. Safety and outcome data reported in the review derive from trials and pilot studies that used these structured procedures.
Pharmacology and safety profile: Psilocybin is a naturally occurring tryptamine found in many mushroom species and is a prodrug converted in vivo to psilocin, which acts primarily as a 5-HT2A receptor agonist. The compound is described as having low physiological toxicity and low abuse liability; nonhuman self-administration studies show only marginal levels of reinforcing behaviour. Transient increases in blood pressure and dose-related post-session headaches have been reported, but serious drug-related adverse events were not attributed to psilocybin in the clinical studies reviewed. Cancer-related psychiatric distress: Three controlled trials in patients with cancer-related anxiety and/or depression are summarised. A small double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study in 12 patients used 0.2 mg/kg psilocybin versus niacin and found nonsignificant trends favouring psilocybin for short-term reductions in depression (BDI) and anxiety (STAI); however, anxiety was reduced at 3 months and depression was significantly reduced at 6 months compared with baseline. A larger double-blind crossover study in 51 patients compared higher doses (~0.31 or ~0.43 mg/kg) with very-low-dose psilocybin (~0.014 or ~0.043 mg/kg) and reported numerous improved clinical outcomes at 5 weeks and large, persistent reductions on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, STAI, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and BDI at 6 months. Approximately 80% of participants at 6 months showed clinically significant decreases in depressed mood and anxiety and about 60% met remission criteria. A third crossover trial in 29 patients (0.3 mg/kg vs niacin) similarly found significant improvements before the crossover and persisting anxiolytic and antidepressant effects at about 6 months, with response/remission rates of roughly 60% to 80%. Across these studies, greater subjective mystical-type experiences during sessions were associated with larger and longer-lasting clinical benefits. No serious adverse events were attributed to psilocybin in these cancer trials. Treatment-resistant depression: A small open-label pilot study in 12 patients with treatment-resistant major depression administered 10 mg oral psilocybin in the first session and 25 mg in a second session one week later. Depressive symptoms (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms, BDI and others) and anxiety (STAI) were significantly reduced at 1 week and at 3 months compared with baseline. All participants showed some reduction at 1 week; by standard BDI remission criteria, 8 of 12 met complete remission at an early time point and 5 of 12 remained in remission at the 3-month follow-up. No unexpected or serious adverse events were reported. Addiction: Historical studies of LSD and observational data suggested possible benefits for alcoholism, and a meta-analysis of six randomized LSD studies (total n = 536) reported an odds ratio favouring LSD for reduced alcohol misuse at initial follow-up. Modern psilocybin pilot studies are preliminary but promising. In an open-label smoking cessation pilot (n = 15) combining cognitive behavioural therapy and psilocybin, participants received ~0.29 mg/kg on a target quit date and optional additional doses of ~0.43 mg/kg at 2 and 8 weeks. Biologically verified abstinence rates were 12 of 15 (80%) at 6 months, 10 of 15 (67%) at 12 months, and 9 of 12 (75%) at an average 2.5-year follow-up. Higher mystical-type experience scores correlated with abstinence and reduced craving. In a small alcohol-dependence pilot (n = 10) embedded in a 12-week motivational enhancement programme, initial 0.3 mg/kg and, for some, 0.4 mg/kg psilocybin sessions were followed by significant reductions in self-reported alcohol use that persisted to 36-week follow-up; days drinking fell from about 40% at baseline to under 20% at follow-up, and greater mystical-type experiences correlated with larger decreases in consumption. No serious adverse events were reported in these addiction studies. The authors note that these open-label findings require confirmation in larger randomized trials, which are underway. Other disorders and case reports: A pilot study in nine patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder using escalating doses (0.025–0.3 mg/kg) observed substantial symptom reduction during at least one session for all participants, but only one participant showed long-term improvement at 6 months; similar effects across very low and higher doses raise concern about expectancy/placebo influences. For cluster headaches, a case series of 53 self-medicating patients and a survey of 496 individuals reported that psilocybin-containing mushrooms and related psychedelics sometimes terminated or prevented cluster headaches, including reports of efficacy at doses without noticeable psychoactive effects; evidence is uncontrolled and based largely on self-medication. An open-label pilot of the non-psychoactive analogue 2-bromo-LSD showed promise, which, if confirmed, could reduce the clinical appeal of psychoactive psilocybin for this indication. Biological mechanisms: The review reiterates the central role of 5-HT2A agonism in acute effects but notes that this does not fully explain therapeutic outcomes. Resting-state fMRI studies show acute alterations in brain network activity, including decreased connectivity within the default mode network. The authors advance a hypothesis that psilocybin may transiently destabilise brain networks, creating a plastic state during which psychotherapeutic context helps shape persistent network changes; however, no biological markers have yet been shown to distinguish responders from non-responders.
Johnson and colleagues interpret the assembled evidence as indicating substantial therapeutic promise for psilocybin, particularly for cancer-related psychiatric distress where three randomized, placebo-controlled trials have reported large, enduring reductions in depression and anxiety following a single active administration. The magnitude and persistence of effects at 6 months in those trials are highlighted as notable and relatively unprecedented within psychiatry. Outside the cancer context, the open-label treatment-resistant depression study provides preliminary evidence that sustained antidepressant effects may generalise beyond cancer-related distress. Addiction research is described as encouraging but earlier in development; two small open-label pilots for tobacco and alcohol dependence produced high abstinence or reduced use rates and established safety in carefully controlled settings, motivating larger randomized trials now in progress. Across indications, the authors emphasise a consistent association between intensity of subjective mystical-type experiences during sessions and better clinical outcomes, suggesting psychological processes play an important role in therapeutic response. The authors acknowledge important limitations in the existing literature: many studies have small sample sizes, some use open-label designs or lack active comparators, and expectancy or placebo effects cannot be ruled out in several cases (notably the OCD and self-medication reports). They also note the scarcity of biological markers that predict or explain therapeutic success. Safety conclusions are qualified by the fact that trials have used careful screening and structured therapeutic support, and that individuals at risk for psychosis or significant cardiovascular disease were routinely excluded. Finally, the authors call for larger, rigorous trials and for government funding to facilitate thorough evaluation of efficacy, safety and mechanisms, and recommend that any clinical implementation mirror the screening, preparation, monitoring and integration procedures used in research to optimise benefits and minimise risks.
The authors conclude that modern research provides considerable reason for optimism about psilocybin as a therapeutic modality. Evidence is strongest for cancer-related psychiatric distress, where randomized trials have shown substantial and durable anxiolytic and antidepressant effects after single-dose administration. Early open-label studies in treatment-resistant depression and addiction also suggest potential utility, warranting larger randomized trials. Johnson and colleagues argue that if further trials confirm safety and persisting efficacy, psilocybin could become an approved medicine, but they stress that regulatory frameworks should require the careful clinical procedures used in research. Greater public research funding is recommended to enable cautious, scholarly investigation into clinical applications and mechanisms.
Various indigenous societies have used classic psychedelic compounds (e.g., psilocybin, mescaline, dimethyltryptamine) for centuries, typically incorporating them into sacramental contexts. Arthur Heffter isolated mescaline, the principal psychoactive constituent of the peyote cactus, in 1897, but it was only after the synthesis and identification of psychoactivity of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in 1943that these compounds received significant attention from the scientific community. There were > 1000 clinical papers published on classic psychedelics, collectively involving approximately 40,000 patients between 1950 and the mid-1960s. Aside from basic research studies, this period generated exciting preliminary evidence that classic psychedelics, when administered in the context of psychotherapy, showed particular promise for 2 disorders: end-of-life psychiatric distress secondary to cancerand addiction. While some initial results were promising, most studies did not employ rigorous designs by current standards. Nonmedical classic psychedelic use, and the association between classic psychedelics and the emerging counterculture, prompted a political backlash whereby human classic psychedelic research was marginalized, government funding for classic psychedelic research ended, and regulations made such research difficult, putting an end to nearly all human classic psychedelic research. Modern research with classic psychedelics has reinitiated interest in the treatment of both cancer-related distress and addiction, with promising initial results. Although LSD was the most studied classic psychedelic compound in the earlier era of research, recent clinical research has been primarily focused on the classic psychedelic psilocybin, which is closely pharmacologically related to LSD. Here we focus on these two potential indications for psilocybin medication development.
Over 100 species of mushrooms have been found to contain psilocybin, many falling within the genus Psilocybe. Psilocybin is a relatively small compound based on the structure of tryptamine. Psilocybin is a prodrug metabolized through in vivo dephosphorylation to psilocin, which is presumed to be the active agent in the central nervous system. Like other classic psychedelics, the behavioral effects of psilocybin appear to be mediated primarily by agonist activity at the 5-hydroxytryptamine (HT) 2A receptor; however, 5-HT 2A activity does not appear to account fully for its effects. Psilocybin is characterized by low physiological toxicityand low abuse liability, as demonstrated by marginal levels of nonhuman drug self-administration.
For the therapeutic laboratory studies of psilocybin to be described later in this review, psilocybin was administered as part of structured psychotherapy, unlike most psychiatric medications. This therapeutic context includes screening to exclude those with psychotic disorders, preparation of the participant for sessions, session monitoring and interpersonal support that encourages internal focus, and postsession discussion of session experiences to leverage those experiences in encouraging enduring changes in behavior and attitude. These factors are believed to maximize efficacy while minimizing psychiatric adverse effects. Individuals with current psychosis or who are at risk for psychotic disorders are thought to be at increased risk for prolonged psychiatric reactions resulting from classic psychedelic administration, and are therefore excluded from psilocybin studies. Psilocybin moderately increases blood pressure, so those at high risk for cardiovascular problems are also excluded. Aside from adverse reactions that could occur if these exclusions were not made, the major risk of administering psilocybin and other classic psychedelics is that they can cause psychologically overwhelming anxious, fearful, and confused reactions that can potentially lead to dangerous behavior in unmonitored settings. Participant preparation, session monitoring, and follow-up discussion about sessions all are thought to minimize the occurrences of such adverse reactions. Although psilocybin has been shown to cause dose-related increases in transient postsession headaches, this does not constitute a contraindication for therapeutic studies. For more detailed information on the safety profile of psilocybin discussed above, as well as recommended guidelines for safely conducting such sessions, see a previous publication by the present authors.
A small double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study administered a moderate dose of oral psilocybin (0.2 mg/kg oral) and active placebo (niacin) in separate sessions (Bseveral weeks apart^) to 12 patients with advanced-stage cancer. These patients were diagnosed with one of multiple possible DSM-IV anxiety-related disorders in relation to their cancer. Although the size was small, the study showed nonsignificant trends for psilocybin to decrease depression [Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)] and anxiety [State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)] more than placebo in the 2 weeks following each of the two conditions. Moreover, compared with the time of baseline screening, anxiety was reduced at a 3-month follow-up and depression outcomes were significantly reduced at a 6-month follow-up. Psilocybin caused no clinically significant adverse events. A recent study published by the present authors examined a larger dose of psilocybin in the treatment of depression and anxiety in patients with cancer. Patients were 51 individuals diagnosed with one of multiple possible DSM-IV moodor anxiety-related disorders in relation to a life-threatening cancer diagnosis. This study used a double-blind crossover design to compare oral psilocybin (~0.31 or ~0.43 mg/kg) with a very low dose of psilocybin (~0.014 or ~0.043 mg/ kg) that was expected to have little pharmacological activity. The two sessions were separated by approximately 5 weeks. The study showed the high psilocybin dose to result in numerous improved clinical outcomes over the very-low-dose condition at 5 weeks (before the crossover). Moreover, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the STAI, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and the BDI all showed large and persisting reductions at a 6-month follow-up. These results are remarkable not only because they show persistent benefits for many months after a single medication administration, but also because of the large magnitude of clinical effects. Approximately 80% of participants at the 6-month follow-up continued to show clinically significant decreases in depressed mood and anxiety, and approximately 60% showed remission: in other words, symptom levels in the normal range. Like previous research in healthy volunteers, long-term benefits were greater for those whose psilocybin session subjective experiences were high in the construct of mystical-type experience, which involves the following psychological qualities: a sense of unity, a noetic quality, sacredness, positive mood, transcendence of time and space, and ineffability. No serious adverse events were attributed to psilocybin administration. Another recent study using a similar double-blind crossover design examined 29 patients with cancer diagnosed with one of several DSM-IV anxiety-related disorders. Patients were administered a moderate oral dose of 0.3 mg/kg oral psilocybin and active placebo (niacin) in different sessions separated by approximately 7 weeks. Like the previously described study, this study found significant clinical improvements in numerous domains when comparing the two conditions before the crossover, including reduced anxiety and depression, and increased quality of life. At a follow up at about 6 months, the study showed enduring anxiolytic and antidepressant effects compared with baseline measures, using measures that largely overlapped with the previously described study. Like that study, clinical response was large, with antidepressant and anxiolytic response rates of approximately 60% to 80% at the 6month follow up, and reductions in anxiety and depression were greater for those patients who had subjective mystical-type experiences during psilocybin sessions. Also like the other studies in cancer patients, no serious adverse events were attributed to psilocybin administration. Although not conducted with psilocybin, another recent blinded study using the related compound LSD lends support to the abovementioned psilocybin results. Twelve patients with anxiety associated with life-threatening diseases (6 with cancer) were randomized to be treated with either 200 μg LSD or a very low dose of 20 μg LSD intended to serve as an active placebo. The study showed nonsignificant reduction in anxiety using the STAI, which persisted for 12 months after treatment. As with the psilocybin studies, there were no serious adverse effects resulting from LSD administration. Although the original era of classic psychedelic research focused on end-of-life cancer-related distress, some of the promising recent studies discussed above included some participants who did not have a terminal diagnosis, and other recent research has included some participants with a life-threatening disease other than cancer. Classic psychedelics might therefore hold potential therapeutic efficacy for psychiatric distress across both terminal and nonterminal cases of cancer, as well as across both cancer and noncancer disease states. Future research should investigate potential differences in efficacy across these domains.
Outside of the context of cancer, a recent small, open-label, pilot study tested the effect of psilocybin in treatment-resistant major depression. Patients received 10 mg oral psilocybin on the first session, and 25 mg in a second session 1 week later. Depressive symptoms, as measured by the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms, the BDI, and other measures, were significantly decreased at 1 week and 3 months post-treatment, when compared with baseline scores. The same pattern was found for anxiety symptoms as measured by the STAI. Every individual participant showed reduction in depression severity at 1 week that was sustained in the majority for 3 months. According to standard criteria for determining remission with the BDI, 8 of 12 met threshold for complete remission, and 5 of 12 were in remission at the final 3month follow-up. Psilocybin did not cause any unexpected or serious adverse events.
Research examining the potential of classic psychedelics to treat addiction occurred as early as the 1950s. These investigators initially thought classic psychedelics might safely mimic the effects of delirium tremens and these aversive effects would prompt sobriety among alcoholics. However, they soon realized that insightful effects often occurred and were claimed to occasion sobriety. Such effects prompted one of these early researchers, Humphry Osmond, to coin the term Bpsychedelic^, meaning Bmind-manifesting^as a descriptor of this class of drugs. Some studies examining classic psychedelics in the treatment of alcoholism did not contain experimental elements critical for confirming causal efficacy such as randomization and comparison conditions, and other small randomized studies found improved outcomes for the classic psychedelic group that were not statistically significant. Firm conclusions from this literature were unclear. However, a recent meta-analysis examining the only 6 studies to randomize participants to LSD or another condition (total participants = 536) found overall significant decreases in alcohol misuse in the LSD groups compared with control groups, with an odds ratio for improvement with LSD of 1.96 at the initial follow-up, which was at least 1 month after treatment. Notably, every one of the original six studies showed an odds ratio that favored LSD. In addition to these early medical studies suggesting potential efficacy of classic psychedelics in addictions treatment, a number of observational studies documented reports of recovery from addiction to alcohol and other drugs resulting from ceremonies involving classic psychedelic consumption among religions that view such compounds as sacraments. Consistent with medical and observational studies, the founder of Alcoholic Anonymous, Bill Wilson, was a proponent of the theoretic potential of classic psychedelics to facilitate treatment of addiction. Wilson concluded this after receiving medically supervised LSD sessions, and likening the effects to the spiritual experience that had prompted his sobriety decades beforehand. Recent studies examining the classic psychedelic psilocybin in the treatment of addiction are currently at a less advanced stage of research than the studies on cancer-related psychiatric distress reviewed earlier. These studies were conducted with relatively limited resources and were designed to establish safety and determine if efficacy results are encouraging enough to warrant the effort and funding required to conduct larger randomized clinical trials. The present authors conducted an open-label pilot study that administered psilocybin to 15 treatment-resistant tobacco/nicotine-dependent smokers, in the context of cognitive behavioral therapy for smoking cessation. Participants were administered ~0.29 mg/kg oral psilocybin on the participant's target date to quit smoking, which was assigned several weeks ahead of time. A second and third (optional) dose of psilocybin were administered 2 and 8 weeks, respectively, after the target quit date. In these subsequent sessions the dose administered was increased to ~0.43 mg/kg unless researchers and participants decided to remain at the original dose based on the first session experience. Weekly cognitive behavioral therapy sessions were conducted up to 10 weeks after target quit date except when a psilocybin session was scheduled. At the 6-month follow up, 12 of 15 participants (80%) were abstinent from smoking based on biological verification with breath carbon monoxide and urine cotinine results. At a 12-month follow-up, 10 of 15 participants (67%) were biologically verified as abstinent. At a long-term term follow that averaged 2.5 years after the target quit date, 9 of the 12 participants (75%) were biologically verified as abstinent. No serious adverse events were caused by psilocybin. The results of this open-label pilot study cannot be taken as solid evidence for the efficacy of psilocybin for smoking cessation. However, the high rates of abstinence compared with existing medications provide justification for a larger randomized trial the present authors are currently conducting. Regarding psychological mechanisms or correlates of efficacy, those participants in the smoking cessation pilot study who were abstinent at the 6-month follow-up had significantly higher scores on a measure of mystical-type experience resulting from psilocybin compared with those who had relapsed to smoking. Moreover, higher mystical-type experience scores significantly correlated with a greater reduction in craving from baseline to 6-month follow-up. Consistent with results for cancer-related psychiatric distress reviewed above, these results suggest that specific types of psychological experiences, not just receiving the medication, are important for beneficial therapeutic outcomes. Another clue regarding psychological mechanisms underlying psilocybin effects in smoking cessation is provided by a recent online survey study conducted by the present authors examining 358 individuals reporting to have quit or reduced smoking after having taken a classic psychedelic. Specifically, participants reported less severe affective withdrawal symptoms (e.g., depression, craving) when compared with their previous attempts without classic psychedelics. This provides another potential connection to the cancer-related psychiatric distress and treatment resistant depression research. That is, affective processes might play a key role in therapeutic psilocybin effects, even outside of the context of mood disorders. Similar to the smoking cessation pilot study described above, another small, open-label study examined psilocybin in the treatment of alcohol dependence. Ten alcoholdependent participants were administered psilocybin in the context of a 12-week program of motivational enhancement therapy. Participants had to have been abstinent from alcohol for 24 h before their first psilocybin session, in which 0.3 mg/ kg oral psilocybin was administered. For some participants a second session occurred 4 weeks later, in which 0.4 mg/kg was administered, although the lower previous dose was sometimes administered based on the effects of the initial session. Four therapy sessions were conducted between the two psilocybin sessions, and an additional four therapy sessions were conducted after the final psilocybin session. Mean selfreported alcohol use decreased significantly after the first psilocybin session, and remained lower than baseline at 36-week follow-up. Drinking was reported to have occurred on 40% of days at baseline, and on < 20% of days at follow up. Consistent with findings from the studies of cancer-related psychiatric distress and smoking cessation, higher mysticaltype experience scores in the first psilocybin session were significantly related to greater reductions in alcohol consumption. No serious adverse events were reported as a result of psilocybin administration. Encouraged by these promising signs of potential efficacy, this research group has initiated a large randomized trial of psilocybin in the treatment of alcohol dependence
Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder One pilot study in 9 participants examined the effect of oral psilocybin in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Doses administered were 0.025, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 mg/ kg. A week elapsed between each session. All participants showed substantial symptom reduction during at least one session as assessed by the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. At a 6-month follow up, 1 participant showed longterm improvements. Although these results might suggest psilocybin efficacy, it should be noted that a similar magnitude of symptom reduction was observed at all dose conditions, including the extremely small dose intended to have little or no effect. The similar response across such a wide range of doses raises the possibility that placebo (e.g., expectancy) effects may have driven results. Otherwise, the symptom reductions at the lowest dose would appear remarkable. Only follow-up experimental studies involving a placebo or active comparator control will be able to disentangle these two possibilities.
One published case series of 53 self-medicating patients suggested that psilocybin-containing mushrooms, in addition to LSD, may be effective in terminating cluster headaches or preventing the regular occurrence of cluster headaches. This is exciting because approved therapies show limited efficacy in treating this disorder, and the pain resulting from the disorder is often severe and debilitating. Interestingly, case reports suggest efficacy with doses that do not result in noticeable psychoactive effects. If rigorous clinical trials confirm these results, this therapeutic application would likely be distinct from the other classic psychedelic therapies, in that positive therapeutic outcomes do not appear to rely on subjective experiences after psilocybin administration. In addition to the case series publication, a survey study of 496 individuals with cluster headaches suggested that psilocybin and related classic psychedelics may provide comparable or better treatment responses than existing approved therapies. Although potential efficacy of psilocybin for cluster headaches is exciting, it is important to keep in mind that evidence to date is based on self-medicating individuals using nonregulated substances, and involves no control for placebo effects. Also, it should be noted that an open-label pilot study of a non-psychoactive compound (2-bromo-LSD) with structural similarities to LSD showed promising effects. If future research confirms that this or other nonpsychoactive analogs of classic psychedelics provide relief from cluster headaches, it would likely decrease the chances that psilocybin would be developed into an approved medicine for this indication, given that potential psychoactive effects would be considered unnecessary side effects.
Considerable information is known about mechanisms underlying the general activity of psilocybin and other classic psychedelics, including a primary role of 5-HT 2A agonist action for psychoactive effects. However, no study investigating potential therapeutic uses of psilocybin has identified biological mechanisms that distinguish successful versus nonsuccessful therapeutic outcomes, which could suggest mechanisms responsible for therapeutic efficacy. The most promising line of research may be resting-state function magnetic resonance imaging analyses showing psilocybin administration to alter acutely brain network activity, including decreasing connectivity within the default mode network, a system of brain regions that strongly interact with each other, and which supports internal focus. A challenge to biological theories of therapeutic classic psychedelic effects is the fact that therapeutic effects persist long after acute drug effects. One plausible hypothesis is that the acute destabilization of brain networks by psilocybin (which may stem from receptor level effects via amplification of neuronal avalanches) may provide the opportunity to alter brain network activity in a persisting fashion. Aside from addressing the persisting nature of therapeutic effects, this hypothesis is also attractive because it may account for the strong role that appropriate context (Bset and setting^) and psychotherapy are thought to play in therapeutic classic psychedelic effects. That is, classic psychedelic administration may occasion a plastic state with regard to brain network activity, and the psychotherapeutic context surrounding classic psychedelic administration (which includes preparation for sessions, session monitoring and interpersonal support that encourages internal focus, and postsession discussion of session experiences to leverage those experiences in encouraging enduring changes in behavior and attitude change) may serve to establish longer-term changes in brain network activity. It remains for future research to test this hypothesis.
The current state of modern research suggests considerable therapeutic promise for psilocybin. This research is most advanced regarding the treatment of cancer-related psychiatric distress, with three randomized, placebo-controlled trials showing promising results for psilocybin. Two of these trials involved a moderate number of participants and administered relatively large doses of psilocybin. These two studies, in particular, provide strong evidence showing substantial decreases in depressive and anxious symptoms that appear to persist for at least 6 months after a single active treatment. Such results are unprecedented in psychiatry. The single open-label study of treatment-resistant depression outside the context of cancer provides initial preliminary evidence that persisting antidepressant effects of psilocybin might not be limited to those with cancer. If future trials with larger numbers of participants continue to show such persisting therapeutic effects and a favorable adverse effect profile, psilocybin may garner regulatory approval for use as a medicine in the USA and other nations. If approval is obtained, regulations governing clinical use should closely mirror the screening, preparation, monitoring, and follow-up procedures used in research studies to maximize efficacy and minimize medical and behavioral risks. Psilocybin in the treatment of addiction is currently at an earlier stage of research, with two recent open-label, pilot studies, one for tobacco smoking cessation and one treating alcohol dependence, suggesting potential safety and efficacy. Both of these lines of addiction research are being followed up with larger, randomized studies. If these trials continue to show safety and efficacy, a similar medications development pathway as described for cancer-related psychiatric distress could be anticipated. Although clinical approval for either cancer-related psychiatric distress treatment or addiction treatment do not depend on identification of mechanisms of action, it seems very likely that advancing knowledge of both biological and psychological mechanisms underlying efficacy would lead to advances that improve treatment outcomes. The US federal funding agencies have yet to support therapeutic psilocybin research. This is understandable given the complex social history surrounding classic psychedelics, and their perceived association with cultural changes that took place in the 1960s and early 1970s. However, as compelling evidence mounts for safety and efficacy, it will be important for government agencies to take a leadership role in supporting cautious and scholarly research on classic psychedelic therapeutics. The recent research with psilocybin, especially evidence of long persisting therapeutic effects that may stem from a single medication administration, suggests that therapy with classic psychedelics may constitute a major new area of medicine that might eventually alleviate suffering across multiple potential disorders.
Create a free account to open full-text PDFs.
Tomsovic, M., Edwards, R. V. · Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (1970)
Passie, T., Seifert, J., Schneider, U. et al. · Addiction Biology (2002)
Johnson, M. W., Richards, W. A., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2008)
Grob, C. S., Danforth, A. L., Chopra, G. S. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2011)
Ross, S., Bossis, A. P., Guss, J. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Gasser, P., Holstein, D., Michel, Y. et al. · Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease (2014)
Dyck, E. · Social History of Medicine (2006)
Krebs, T. S., Johansen, P. Ø. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2012)
Fábregas, J. M., González, D., Fondevila, S. et al. · Drug and Alcohol Dependence (2010)
Johnson, M. W., Garcia-Romeu, A., Cosimano, M. P. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2014)
Johnson, M. W., Garcia-Romeu, A., Griffiths, R. R. · The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse (2016)
Johnson, M. W., Garcia-Romeu, A., Johnson, P. S. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2017)
Bogenschutz, M. P., Forcehimes, A. A., Pommy, J. A. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2015)
Sewell, R. A. · Neurology (2006)
Schindler, E. A. D., Gottschalk, C. H., Weil, M. J. et al. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2015)
Karst, M., Halpern, J. H., Bernateck, M. et al. · Cephalalgia (2010)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Erritzoe, D., Williams, T. et al. · PNAS (2012)
Nichols, C. D., Nichols, D. E., Johnson, M. W. · Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (2016)
Papers in Blossom that reference this study
Fleury, S., Nautiyal, K. M. · Biorxiv (2024)
Olami, A., Peled-Avron, L. · Scientific Reports (2024)
Juliani, A., Chelu, V., Graesser, L. et al. · Biorxiv (2024)
Tyagi, R., Saraf, T. S., Canal, C. E. · ACS Pharmacology and Translational Science (2023)
Nardou, R., Sawyer, E., Song, Y. J. et al. · Nature (2023)
DellaCrosse, M., Pleet, M. M., Morton, E. et al. · PLOS ONE (2022)
MacCallum, C. A., Pistawka, C. A., Deol, J. K. et al. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2022)
Jones, G. M., Lipson, J., Nock, M. K. · Scientific Reports (2022)
Johnson, M. W. · Current Topics in Behavioral Neurosciences (2022)
Jones, G. M., Ricard, J. A., Lipson, J. et al. · Scientific Reports (2022)
Elman, I., Borsook, D., Pustilink, A. · Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews (2022)
Jones, G. M., Nock, M. K. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2022)
Strickland, J. C., Johnson, M. W. · Advances in Pharmacology (2022)
Arnaud, K. O. S. · Drugs Education Prevention and Policy (2021)
Cavanna, F., Pallavicini, C., Milano, V. et al. · Journal of Psychedelic Studies (2021)
Yang, F., Yang, S., Tseng, P. et al. · Psychiatry Investigation (2021)
Rodríguez Arce, J. M., Winkelman, M. J. · Frontiers in Psychology (2021)
Basedow, L. A., Riemer, T. G., Reiche, S. et al. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2021)
Davis, A. K., Agin-Liebes, G. I., España, M. et al. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2021)
Davis, A. K., Xin, Y., Sepeda, N. D. et al. · Chronic Stress (2021)
Khan, S. I., Carter, G. T., Aggarwal, S. K. et al. · Frontiers in Neuroscience (2021)
Teixeira, P. J., Johnson, M. W., Timmermann, C. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2021)
Yaden, D. B., Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R. et al. · International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2021)
Pedersen, W., Copes, H., Gashi, L. · Acta Sociologica (2021)
Ortiz, M. I., Gómez-Busto, F. J. · Clinical Neuropsychiatry (2020)
Williams, T. M., Davis, A. K., Xin, Y. et al. · Drugs Education Prevention and Policy (2020)
DiVito, A. J., Leger, R. F. · Molecular Biology Reports (2020)
Stenbæk, D. S., Madsen, M. K., Ozenne, B. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2020)
Kuypers, K. P. C. · Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology (2020)
Breeksema, J. J., Niemeijer, A. R., Krediet, E. et al. · CNS Drugs (2020)
Kargbo, R. B., Sherwood, A. R., Walker, A. et al. · ACS Omega (2020)
Greif, A., Šurkala, M. · Medicine Health Care and Philosophy (2020)
Smith, W. R., Sisti, D. · Journal of Medical Ethics (2020)
Lancelotta, R., Davis, A. K. · Journal of Psychoactive Drugs (2020)
Bienemann, B., Ruschel, N. S., Campos, M. L. et al. · PLOS ONE (2020)
Lea, T., Amada, N., Jungaberle, H. et al. · International Journal of Drug Policy (2020)
Davis, A. K., Barrett, F. S., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science (2020)
Adams, A. M., Kaplan, N. A., Wei, Z. et al. · Metabolic Engineering (2019)
Andersson, M., Kjellgren, A. · Harm Reduction Journal (2019)
Davis, A. K., So, S., Lancelotta, R. et al. · The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse (2019)
Johnson, M. W. · International Review of Psychiatry (2018)
Renelli, M., Fletcher, J., Tupper, K. W. et al. · Eating and Weight Disorders - Studies on Anorexia Bulimia and Obesity (2018)
Haijen, E. C. H. M., Kaelen, M., Roseman, L. et al. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2018)
Barrett, F. S., Preller, K. H., Kaelen, M. · International Review of Psychiatry (2018)
Schenberg, E. E. · Frontiers in Pharmacology (2018)
Geiger, H. A., Wurst, M. G., Daniels, R. N. · ACS Chemical Neuroscience (2018)
Johnson, M. W., Griffiths, R. R., Hendricks, P. S. et al. · Neuropharmacology (2018)
Davis, A. K., Barsuglia, J. P., Lancelotta, R. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2018)
Byock, I. · Journal of Palliative Medicine (2018)
Carbonaro, T. M., Hurwitz, E., Johnson, M. W. · Psychopharmacology (2017)