Clinical Trial Intelligence

Which Endpoints Are Measured Most Often in European Phase II & III Depression and Major Depressive Disorder Trials?

8 July 2026

Across 49 European CTIS-authorized Phase II & III depression / major depressive disorder trials, Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) endpoints dominate: 30/49 trials (61.2%) measured MADRS in at least one endpoint role and 25/49 (51.0%) used MADRS as a primary endpoint. Secondary endpoint architecture is broader: Clinical Global Impression (CGI) endpoints appear in 22/49 trials (44.9%) as secondary endpoints, followed by safety/tolerability in 17/49 (34.7%), functioning or quality-of-life in 16/49 (32.7%), remission in 14/49 (28.6%), and response in 13/49 (26.5%).

49
EU CTIS Phase II & III trials
30
Trials measuring MADRS
22
Trials with secondary CGI
108d
Median CTIS submission-to-authorization interval

MADRS is the leading endpoint domain, followed by CGI and safety

MADRS was measured in 30/49 trials (61.2%). CGI global severity or improvement endpoints followed in 24/49 (49.0%), safety/tolerability/adverse-event endpoints in 22/49 (44.9%), functioning or quality-of-life endpoints in 17/49 (34.7%), response in 16/49 (32.7%), and remission in 14/49 (28.6%).

Endpoint domains measured in at least one role
MADRS depression severity/change61.2%
CGI global severity/improvement49.0%
Safety, tolerability, AEs/labs/vitals44.9%
Functioning / QoL / disability34.7%
Response rate / responder status32.7%
Remission rate/status28.6%
Suicidality / C-SSRS / BSSI24.5%
Anxiety symptoms24.5%
Percentages use 49 CTIS-authorized European Phase II & III depression/MDD trials as denominator.
Interpretation

The endpoint stack is still anchored by clinician-rated depression severity, especially MADRS. CGI, safety, function/QoL, response, and remission appear most often as supporting domains rather than as primary trial-defining measures.

Primary endpoints are concentrated around MADRS; secondary endpoints carry the broader clinical profile

The 49 trials contained 47 primary endpoint records, 165 secondary endpoint records, and 7 exploratory/other endpoint records. MADRS appeared as a primary endpoint in 25/49 trials (51.0%), while CGI was mainly secondary, appearing as a secondary endpoint in 22/49 trials (44.9%) but as primary in only 1/49 (2.0%).

Trials measuring each endpoint domain by endpoint role
Endpoint domain Primary Secondary Exploratory/other
MADRS25182
CGI1222
Safety/tolerability/AEs4172
Functioning/QoL/disability1161
Response4131
Remission1140
Anxiety symptoms0120
Counts are trial-level counts; a trial can contribute to more than one endpoint domain.
Interpretation

For CTIS/EU submissions, the primary efficacy claim is usually built on MADRS change. The multidimensional benefit profile—global severity, function, response/remission, anxiety, suicidality, and safety—is generally documented in the secondary endpoint layer.

Phase III trials broaden beyond MADRS into CGI, function, response, remission and safety

Phase II accounted for 16/49 trials (32.7%) and Phase III for 33/49 (67.3%). MADRS was common in both phases: 9/16 Phase II trials (56.2%) and 21/33 Phase III trials (63.6%). Phase III showed higher use of CGI (19/33, 57.6%), functioning/QoL (15/33, 45.5%), response (12/33, 36.4%), remission (11/33, 33.3%), and safety (16/33, 48.5%).

Percentage of trials measuring selected endpoint domains
Endpoint domain Phase II Phase III
MADRS56.2%63.6%
CGI31.2%57.6%
Safety/tolerability37.5%48.5%
Functioning/QoL12.5%45.5%
Response25.0%36.4%
Remission18.8%33.3%
Neuroimaging/EEG/cognition25.0%15.2%
Phase II denominator: 16 trials. Phase III denominator: 33 trials.
Interpretation

Phase III CTIS submissions look more confirmatory and patient-relevant: they preserve MADRS but add more global severity, functioning, response/remission, and safety endpoints. Phase II retains more exploratory biology and neurocognitive signal work.

MDD dominates the dataset; treatment-resistant depression adds heavier safety, biomarker and suicidality measurement

MDD / major depression appeared in 38/49 trials (77.6%). Treatment-resistant or refractory depression appeared in 10/49 (20.4%), bipolar depression in 3/49 (6.1%), anhedonia-enriched MDD in 3/49 (6.1%), and unspecified depression in 3/49 (6.1%).

Sub-disease tags in depression/MDD trials
38
MDD / major depression
77.6%
10
Treatment-resistant / refractory
20.4%
3
Bipolar depression
6.1%
3
Anhedonia-enriched MDD
6.1%
Sub-disease tags are not mutually exclusive; one trial may contain more than one disease tag.
Endpoint signatures in larger disease subgroups
Subgroup Most frequent endpoint domains
MDD / major depression
38 trials
MADRS 22/38 (57.9%); CGI 19/38 (50.0%); safety 18/38 (47.4%); function/QoL 15/38 (39.5%).
Treatment-resistant / refractory depression
10 trials
Safety 9/10 (90.0%); MADRS 9/10 (90.0%); response 6/10 (60.0%); biomarkers 5/10 (50.0%); suicidality 5/10 (50.0%).
Bipolar depression
3 trials
MADRS 3/3 (100.0%); anhedonia/SHAPS 2/3 (66.7%); CGI 2/3 (66.7%); safety 1/3 (33.3%).
Interpretation

Treatment-resistant depression trials show the clearest endpoint expansion: they retain MADRS but add more safety, biomarker, neurocognitive and suicidality measurement. This reflects a more complex risk-benefit package for EU/CTIS submissions in harder-to-treat depression populations.

Small molecules drive the observed endpoint norm

Small-molecule interventions appeared in 43/49 trials (87.8%), making them the only modality stratum large enough to shape the overall endpoint pattern. Within small-molecule trials, MADRS appeared in 29/43 (67.4%), CGI in 23/43 (53.5%), safety/tolerability in 20/43 (46.5%), functioning/QoL in 16/43 (37.2%), response in 15/43 (34.9%), and remission in 13/43 (30.2%).

Endpoint domains in small-molecule depression/MDD trials
67.4%
MADRS
53.5%
CGI
46.5%
Safety
37.2%
Function/QoL
34.9%
Response
30.2%
Remission
Interpretation

The practical benchmark for new European depression submissions is therefore a small-molecule endpoint package anchored by MADRS, supported by CGI, safety, response/remission, and patient-function measures.

CTIS authorization timing clusters around 61–120 days

Using initial CTIS submission date to first CTIS authorization date, the median interval was 108 days across all 49 trials. Phase II trials had a median of 100.5 days, while Phase III trials had a median of 111 days. Overall, 28/49 trials (57.1%) fell in the 61–120 day interval, 11/49 (22.4%) were authorized within 60 days, and 10/49 (20.4%) took more than 120 days.

CTIS timing distribution
≤60 days22.4%
61–120 days57.1%
>120 days20.4%
108
All trials median days
100.5
Phase II median days
111
Phase III median days
Interpretation

For European depression/MDD studies, CTIS endpoint packages should be planned early enough to support a roughly three-to-four-month submission-to-authorization path, especially in Phase III where the endpoint package is broader.

Definitions used in this report

MADRS = Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. CGI = Clinical Global Impression, including CGI-S, CGI-I, and CGI-E. HAMD/HDRS = Hamilton Depression Rating Scale variants. C-SSRS = Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. BSSI = Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation. SHAPS = Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale. PHQ-9 = Patient Health Questionnaire-9. BDI = Beck Depression Inventory. SDS = Sheehan Disability Scale. CTIS = Clinical Trials Information System.