Top 10 Esketamine Papers for Depressive Disorders

The paper (2021), written by a large group of international experts, reviews the state of knowledge around ketamine and esketamine as potential treatments for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Special attention is given to the risk of suicide after discontinuing (es)ketamine treatment. It adds a concrete angle on esketamine for depressive disorders, helping readers understand the topic through evidence rather than broad claims alone. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

This trial tests esketamine for depressive disorders under more rigorous clinical conditions, moving the question beyond early pilot evidence. It helps readers see whether the approach can hold up when protocols are more standardised, outcomes are clearer, and follow-up becomes harder to ignore. For readers, the value is not just the result but the study design: it shows how esketamine for depressive disorders performs when tested under more structured clinical conditions. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

The systemic review and meta-analysis (2020) of 24 clinical trials assessed the comparative efficacy and tolerability of racemic and esketamine for the treatment of unipolar and bipolar major depression. The authors found that intravenous ketamine appeared to be more efficacious than intranasal esketamine for the treatment of depression. That makes it useful as a map of esketamine for depressive disorders: it shows where evidence clusters, where the field is thin, and which claims need more cautious reading. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

This placebo-controlled, double-blind study, phase 3 study compared esketamine with a placebo spray and found esketamine to be effective in lowering depression scores for those suffering from depression (MDD) and suicidal ideation (SI). Scores on a measure of SI was, however, not different between the two groups. For readers, the value is not just the result but the study design: it shows how esketamine for depressive disorders performs when tested under more structured clinical conditions. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

The open-label Phase IIIb trial compared the efficacy of esketamine nasal spray and extended-release quetiapine, combined with an SSRI or SNRI, in patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The study found that a higher percentage of patients in the esketamine group achieved remission at week 8 (27. 6%) and had no relapse through week 32 after remission at week 8. It adds a concrete angle on esketamine for depressive disorders, helping readers understand the topic through evidence rather than broad claims alone. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

The paper investigated adverse events after administration of nasal esketamine (Spravato) for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The study found increased suicidal ideation (versus antidepressants) but not suicide attempts or completions. It is a useful counterweight to efficacy-focused papers because it keeps attention on screening, monitoring, and the conditions under which treatment can be used responsibly. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

The first open-label real-world study of esketamine found similar positive outcomes as previous clinical trials. At three months, the response rate and remission for those with treatment-resistant depression are impressive. Only 3% of participants dropped out of the study because of side effects. It is a useful counterweight to efficacy-focused papers because it keeps attention on screening, monitoring, and the conditions under which treatment can be used responsibly. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

In pooled data from two identically designed phase 3 randomised trials, esketamine 84 mg nasal spray plus comprehensive standard of care produced a rapid and statistically significant greater. It adds a concrete angle on esketamine for depressive disorders, helping readers understand the topic through evidence rather than broad claims alone. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.

The review and meta-analysis (s=87; 2025) found esketamine's efficacy as an adjunctive therapy for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) to be modest (effect size 0. 23) and comparable to atypical antipsychotics. The review raises concerns about esketamine's abuse potential and unknown long-term effects. It also highlights regulatory issues, including deaths and emerging suicidality during clinical trials. That makes it useful as a map of esketamine for depressive disorders: it shows where evidence clusters, where the field is thin, and which claims need more cautious reading.

The open-label study compared the effect of esketamine in those with bipolar treatment-resistant depression and those with unipolar TRD. There was no significant difference between the two groups on depression scores, and both responded to treatment. Those in the B-TRD group had more anxiety-reducing effects. The paper is part of the REAL-ESK study. It is a useful counterweight to efficacy-focused papers because it keeps attention on screening, monitoring, and the conditions under which treatment can be used responsibly. Together with the other papers here, it connects the compound-specific evidence to the clinical question rather than treating esketamine for depressive disorders as a single settled topic.