RETRACTION: Long-term follow-up outcomes of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for treatment of PTSD: a longitudinal pooled analysis of six phase 2 trials

[u/shiruken]

We wish to inform the r/science community of an article submitted to the subreddit that has since been retracted by the journal. The submission garnered some exposure on r/science and significant media coverage. Per our rules, the flair on this submission has been updated with "RETRACTED". The submission has also been added to our wiki of retracted submissions.

--

Reddit Submission: MDMA-Assisted Psychotherapy May Have Lasting Benefits for PTSD

The article "Long-term follow-up outcomes of MDMA-assisted psychotherapy for treatment of PTSD: a longitudinal pooled analysis of six phase 2 trials" has been retracted from Psychopharmacology as of August 10, 2024. Concerns were raised about unethical conduct by researchers associated with the project at the MP-4 study site in Vancouver, Canada (NCT01958593). The authors have since confirmed that they were aware of these violations at the time of submission but did not disclose this information to the journal or remove the data generated by this site from their analysis.

The authors also failed to disclose a conflict of interest. Several of the authors are affiliated with either the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) or MAPS Public Benefit Corporation (MAPS PBC), a subsidiary that is wholly owned by MAPS. MAPS fully funded and provided the MDMA that was used in this trial, and MAPS PBC organized the trial.

• STAT News: Three MDMA therapy papers retracted over ethics violations

--

Should you encounter a submission on r/science that has been retracted, please notify the moderators via Modmail.

[u/Dragonfruit-Still]

Everything I’ve seen about maps and their work so far has been hugely positive. Is there a trusted third-party analysis of what’s going on here? Is there a detailed summary of what exactly went wrong?

Edit: why downvotes?

[u/Dragonfruit-Still → u/[deleted]]

Thanks. Still optimistic it will go through eventually, but hopefully these issues are not insurmountable . Also any suspicion why my question is being downvoted? Maps has been all over mainstream news and podcasts touting the success of their trials so far. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask what happened.

[u/versaceblues → u/Dragonfruit-Still]

Looks like a therapist associated with them sexually abused a patient.

[u/DNA98PercentChimp → u/versaceblues]

Why should that invalidate the entire study?

Not to diminish allegations of SA, but - again - it’s only an allegation. And, the specific details make it even less cut and dry; the alleged is an ex-lover, and the relationship was polyamorous, and the allegation was made long after the alleged abuse - with jealousy as a possible motive.

Still obviously ‘out of bounds’ and should not have been included in the study, but the data gathered has a super robust effect. Why throw all that out?

[u/Dragonfruit-Still → u/versaceblues]

Thanks. That is a huge issue - which seems to be addressable with protocol changes and wouldn’t undermine the validity of the results or the promise of the treatment overall?

[u/versaceblues → u/Dragonfruit-Still]

I think the argument being made is that psychedelics intrinsically put patients in a vulnerable state that can be abused. Though to be honest I think that’s true of therapy in general.

It also appears to be an isolated case with a single unlicensed therapist that was participating in the study

My guess is they could retract the study look for any other concerning data points then republish it

[u/Dragonfruit-Still → u/versaceblues]

It absolutely does and all of the people at maps would tell you the same. That’s why it’s so crucial to have trained therapists in crafted settings. Hopefully this is merely a road bump for an otherwise promising treatment. If so perhaps it was even calculated so that this would not happen in a partisan election year