Open research · Psilocybin & psilocin

Compare findings

Compare selected psilocybin depression and alcohol-use reports by population, design, sample, endpoint, finding and limitations with original source links.

Free access · No subscription for research tools or data exports

Compare selected original reports

This educational comparison reuses the original annotations in our evidence guides. It is a selected set, not a systematic review or an independently clinically reviewed treatment recommendation. Source-check dates belong to the annotations and do not advance when the page is rebuilt.

Understand the measures Depression safety and interpretation Alcohol evidence and correction links

16 selected reports. Different scales, comparators and follow-up times must not be ranked as equivalent effects.
Report and population	Design and sample	Endpoint	Finding	Limitations
Mertens et al. · EPISODE · 2026 Treatment-resistant depression; two German centers Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Phase 2b randomized trial; 25 mg, 5 mg and nicotinamide comparisons with psychotherapy 144 randomized; 142 in the primary efficacy analysis	HAMD17 response at week 6, before the second administration	Primary endpoint not met Primary comparison not significant: response 17.0% with 25 mg versus 10.6% with nicotinamide; adjusted odds ratio 1.73 (95% CI 0.53–6.23), p=0.19.	The first hierarchical test failed; secondary symptom changes are exploratory. Two serious adverse reactions followed 25 mg, including one case of hallucinogen persisting perception disorder.
Rucker et al. · NHS feasibility trial · 2026 Treatment-resistant major depression; one NHS site in England Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Randomized, double-blind feasibility trial; psilocybin versus placebo with psychological support 60 randomized; 59 completed MADRS at all follow-up visits	Primary outcomes: recruitment, retention and estimation of MADRS variance	Feasibility study Week-3 adjusted MADRS difference −10.41 points (95% CI −14.86 to −5.95), favoring psilocybin; the report describes persistence at week 6.	An encouraging symptom estimate from a feasibility study is not a confirmatory efficacy endpoint. A single site and six-week follow-up limit generalization.
Yngwe et al. · Stockholm trial · 2026 Moderate to severe recurrent major depressive disorder Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Randomized, double-blind trial; psilocybin versus niacin with five support sessions 35 randomized: 17 psilocybin, 18 niacin	Change in clinician-rated MADRS at day 8; follow-up through day 365	Primary endpoint met Day-8 difference −7.27 points (95% CI −12.89 to −1.65), p=0.01. The clinician-rated difference was not significant at day 365: −3.68 (95% CI −9.30 to 1.94), p=0.20.	A small sample; later self-reported outcomes are secondary and differ from the clinician-rated endpoint. Two psilocybin participants reported persistent severe anxiety requiring medical attention.
Raison et al. · 2023 Major depressive disorder; 11 US research sites Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Phase 2 randomized trial; psilocybin versus niacin with psychological support 104 randomized: 51 psilocybin, 53 niacin	Change in centrally rated MADRS from baseline to day 43	Primary endpoint met Between-group difference −12.3 points (95% CI −17.5 to −7.2), p<0.001, favoring psilocybin.	Six-week follow-up and selected eligibility. Participants using psychotropic medication could enter following taper. No serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported, but overall and severe adverse events were more frequent with psilocybin.
von Rotz et al. · 2023 Major depressive disorder; Zürich, Switzerland Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Randomized, double-blind trial; psilocybin versus placebo with psychological support 52 participants; 26 per group	Change in MADRS and Beck Depression Inventory at day 14	Primary outcomes favored psilocybin Greater symptom reduction with psilocybin; reported MADRS between-group effect size d=0.97, p=0.0011.	The primary assessment was only two weeks after treatment. The selected sample and single-center design do not establish long-term effectiveness in routine care.
Goodwin et al. · COMP001 · 2022 Treatment-resistant depression Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Phase 2 randomized, double-blind trial; 25 mg and 10 mg compared with 1 mg, with psychological support 233: 79 in the 25 mg group, 75 in the 10 mg group, 79 in the 1 mg group	Change in MADRS at week 3; sustained response assessed through week 12	25 mg primary comparison significant 25 mg versus 1 mg: −6.6 MADRS points (95% CI −10.2 to −2.9), p<0.001. The 10 mg comparison was not significant.	Sustained response at week 12 did not support the short-term result. Adverse events occurred in 77%; suicidal ideation, behavior or self-injury occurred across dose groups. This does not establish their cause.
Carhart-Harris et al. · 2021 Long-standing, moderate to severe major depressive disorder Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Phase 2 randomized trial; psilocybin treatment versus daily escitalopram, with psychological support in both groups 59: 30 assigned psilocybin, 29 escitalopram	Change in self-rated QIDS-SR-16 at week 6	Primary endpoint not met Primary between-group difference −2.0 points (95% CI −5.0 to 0.9), p=0.17; no statistically significant difference.	Several secondary outcomes favored psilocybin without correction for multiple comparisons. The primary result establishes neither superiority nor equivalence to escitalopram.
Davis et al. · 2021 Major depressive disorder; participants not taking antidepressants Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Randomized immediate-treatment versus waiting-list trial with supportive psychotherapy 27 randomized; 24 completed treatment and post-session assessments	GRID-HAMD depression ratings at one and four weeks after the intervention	Positive waiting-list comparison Depression ratings were lower in the immediate-treatment group than in the waiting-list group at the corresponding assessments.	A small evaluable sample and a waiting-list comparator. The design does not separate drug effects from expectancy, therapist contact and the treatment setting.
Swiss relapse-prevention trial · 2025 Alcohol use disorder following recent withdrawal treatment Source checked 2026-10-07	Randomized placebo-controlled trial; one supervised session with brief psychotherapy 37 participants in the four-week analysis: 18 psilocybin, 19 placebo	Abstinence and average alcohol consumption at four weeks	Primary comparisons inconclusive Neither primary comparison was significant: abstinence p=0.55; alcohol use p=0.51. Six-month comparisons also showed no significant group difference.	Small sample; a different population, dosing schedule and psychotherapy programme from the 2022 trial. The result does not establish equivalence or rule out a clinically relevant effect.
Bogenschutz et al. · 2022 Adults with alcohol dependence; two US academic centres Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Randomized trial; two psilocybin or diphenhydramine sessions alongside 12 weeks of psychotherapy 95 randomized; 93 received study medication and entered the primary analysis	Percentage of heavy drinking days across 32 weeks after the first session	Primary endpoint favored psilocybin 9.7% with psilocybin versus 23.6% with active placebo: 13.9 percentage points fewer heavy drinking days (95% CI 3.0–24.7), p=0.01.	Participants could often identify their allocation. Results concern the combined supervised intervention and selected participants, not psilocybin alone or every person with alcohol use disorder.
Bogenschutz et al. · 2015 pilot Ten volunteers with alcohol dependence Source checked 2026-10-07 Indexed record	Single-group proof-of-concept study; supervised sessions with motivational and preparatory therapy 10 volunteers; no randomized comparison group	Drinking and abstinence over treatment and follow-up	Preliminary uncontrolled finding The investigators observed increased abstinence after dosing, with gains broadly maintained through 36 weeks.	Without a concurrent control, improvement cannot be attributed specifically to psilocybin. This preliminary report supported further trials rather than confirming efficacy.
Griffiths et al. · 2016 People with a life-threatening cancer diagnosis and depression or anxiety symptoms Source checked 2026-10-09 Indexed record	Randomized double-blind crossover: high versus very low psilocybin dose with psychological support 51 participants	Clinician- and self-rated anxiety and depressive symptoms; randomized comparison before crossover	Pre-crossover comparison favored high dose The high-dose condition showed greater symptom reductions. Improvements were also observed at six months after both sequences had received the high dose.	The six-month observations are not a continuing untreated-control comparison. Small, screened sample; expectancy and recognizable drug effects complicate blinding.
Ross et al. · 2016 People with cancer-related anxiety and depression Source checked 2026-10-09 Indexed record	Randomized double-blind crossover: psilocybin versus niacin, both with psychotherapy 29 participants	Anxiety and depression measures before crossover at seven weeks	Pre-crossover comparisons favored psilocybin Pre-crossover comparisons favored psilocybin on the anxiety and depression measures. Later observations suggested persistence after both groups had received psilocybin.	After crossover the study cannot establish a sustained between-group causal effect. A small selected cancer population does not establish efficacy for generalized anxiety disorder.
Johnson et al. · 2026 randomized pilot Psychiatrically healthy adult cigarette smokers Source checked 2026-10-09 Indexed record	Open-label randomized comparison: one psilocybin session versus nicotine patches; both groups received manualized cognitive behavioral therapy 82 randomized: 42 psilocybin, 40 nicotine patch	Biochemically verified prolonged abstinence at six months; intention-to-treat analysis	Primary abstinence comparison favored psilocybin 17/42 (40.5%) versus 4/40 (10.0%): odds ratio 6.12, 95% CI 1.99–23.26, p=0.003. Seven-day point-prevalence abstinence was a separate secondary endpoint.	Unblinded pilot at one centre, with different treatment contact time and a selected population. It does not compare against every established cessation treatment. No serious events were attributed to either intervention; this does not establish absence of rare harms.
Johnson et al. · 2014 pilot Nicotine-dependent smokers with previous quit attempts Source checked 2026-10-09 Indexed record	Open-label single-group psilocybin programme with cognitive behavioral therapy 15 participants; no randomized comparator	Biologically verified seven-day point-prevalence abstinence at six months	Preliminary uncontrolled finding 12/15 participants (80%) met this abstinence definition at six months.	A seven-day window does not mean continuous abstinence. Without a concurrent control, the contribution of psilocybin, therapy and selection cannot be separated.
Johnson et al. · 2017 follow-up The same 15-person cohort as the 2014 pilot Source checked 2026-10-09 Indexed record	Longer follow-up of the earlier uncontrolled programme; not an independent trial 15 assessed at 12 months; 12 returned for later follow-up	Biologically verified abstinence at 12 months and longer-term assessment	Follow-up of the original cohort 10/15 (67%) were abstinent at 12 months; 9/15 (60%) at longer follow-up, averaging 30 months after the target quit date.	Attrition and lack of a control remain. Counting this report and the 2014 pilot as separate participant cohorts would double-count evidence.

16 reports shown