-
Neuropsychopharmacology Reports Dec 2022Depression is a common disorder that affects patients' quality of life and incurs health system costs. Due to the resistance to treat depression, better understanding of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Depression is a common disorder that affects patients' quality of life and incurs health system costs. Due to the resistance to treat depression, better understanding of neurophysiology was considered; one of the implications is the glutamatergic system. This study aims to systematically review clinical trials investigating the antidepressant effects of kainate receptor antagonists.
METHODS
The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021213912). Scopus, ISI, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and two trial registries were searched for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of topiramate, phenobarbital, and other ten barbiturates in depression. The difference with control groups in terms of changing depressive symptoms was the primary outcome.
RESULTS
Nine trials were identified, in which 784 patients were studied. The efficacy of thiopental was comparable to that of imipramine, with fewer side effects. When administered with electroconvulsive therapy, it had fewer to similar effects and fewer side effects than ketamine. Both monotherapy and adjunctive therapy with topiramate were effective and tolerable in treating depressed patients. Phenobarbital had therapeutic effects compared to imipramine and amitriptyline with fewer side effects.
CONCLUSION
Regarding the glutamatergic hypothesis of depression and obtained promising results, further studies of kainate receptor antagonists in high-quality trials are recommended. Given the high prevalence of depression in epileptic patients, more problems with its treatment, and the fact that the studied agents were anticonvulsants, it is recommended that future studies prioritize depressed-epileptic patients.
Topics: Humans; Depression; Imipramine; Phenobarbital; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Kainic Acid; Topiramate
PubMed: 35912516
DOI: 10.1002/npr2.12284 -
Contraception Dec 2016To examine whether the co-administration of hormonal contraceptives (HC) and psychotropic drugs commonly used to treat anxiety and/or depression results in safety or... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To examine whether the co-administration of hormonal contraceptives (HC) and psychotropic drugs commonly used to treat anxiety and/or depression results in safety or efficacy concerns for either drug.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and Cochrane libraries for clinical or pharmacokinetic (PK) studies that examined co-administration of any HC with psychotropic drugs [selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), oral benzodiazepines, bupropion, mirtazapine, trazadone, buspirone, hydroxyzine, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), or atypical antipsychotics] in reproductive aged women.
RESULTS
Of 555 articles identified, 22 articles (18 studies) met inclusion criteria. We identified 5 studies on SSRIs, four on TCAs, one on bupropion, three on atypical antipsychotics and five on oral benzodiazepines. No articles met inclusion criteria for SNRIs, mirtazapine, trazadone, buspirone, hydroxyzine or MAOIs. Overall, clinical studies did not demonstrate differences in unintended pregnancy rates when HCs were administered with and without psychotropic drugs or in psychotropic drug treatment outcomes when psychotropic drugs were administered with and without HCs. PK studies did not demonstrate changes in drug exposure related to contraceptive safety, contraceptive effectiveness or psychotropic drug effectiveness for most classes of psychotropic drugs. However, limited PK data raise concern for HCs increasing systemic exposure of amitriptyline and imipramine (both TCAs), theoretically posing safety concerns.
CONCLUSION
Limited quality and quantity evidence on use of psychotropic drugs and HCs suggests low concern for clinically significant interactions, though no data exist specifically for non-oral formulations of HC. Given the high frequency of use for both HCs and psychotropic drugs among reproductive-age women in the US, this review highlights a need for further research in this area.
Topics: Anxiety; Contraceptives, Oral, Hormonal; Depression; Drug Interactions; Female; Humans; Psychotropic Drugs; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27444984
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.07.011 -
Breastfeeding Medicine : the Official... 2019The aim of this study was to determine the quality of lactation studies investigating antidepressants in breast milk according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)...
The aim of this study was to determine the quality of lactation studies investigating antidepressants in breast milk according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) draft guidelines and the article by Begg et al., 2002, published in the official journal of the International Lactation Consultant Association (ILCA). We used PubMed and LactMed for the literature search. Furthermore, cross references were searched for additional studies. A total number of 60 articles were included for review. For selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and venlafaxine, only two studies correctly assessed the absolute infant dose and milk to plasma ratio; one sertraline and one fluoxetine study. Of all tricyclic antidepressants, one study for amitriptyline and one for nortriptyline assessed these endpoints correctly. We found a lack of information on breast milk sampling methods in many studies. Concentrations needed for the calculations were based on single measurements instead of at least five measurements during one dose interval, and the relative infant dose was not normalized by maternal weight, or an average maternal weight of 70 kg was used as a standard. We conclude that the quality of the current literature on this topic does not meet the standards of the FDA. Studies of higher quality are needed to determine the extent of drug transfer to breast milk for antidepressants, so an adequate recommendation about use of these drugs during lactation can be given.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Biomedical Research; Breast Feeding; Female; Humans; Lactation; Milk, Human; Research Design
PubMed: 31013435
DOI: 10.1089/bfm.2019.0021 -
Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs Jul 2022This article reviews research on post-acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (PAWS) management.
OBJECTIVE
This article reviews research on post-acute alcohol withdrawal syndrome (PAWS) management.
METHOD
We conducted a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Revision and Meta-Analyses)-guided scoping review of the published PAWS literature, searching six electronic databases (from their inception through December 2020) for English-language randomized and nonrandomized studies.
RESULTS
A total of 16 treatment studies met the inclusion criteria. The strength of evidence overall for pharmacologic treatments is low, with often only short-term results being reported, small treatment samples used, or inconsistent results found. However, for negative affect and sleep symptoms, more evidence supports using gabapentinoids (gabapentin and pregabalin) and anticonvulsants (carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine). Although preliminary data support acamprosate, there were no controlled trials. Despite an older treatment trial showing some positive data for amitriptyline for mood, the clinical measures used were problematic, and side effects and safety profile limit its utility. Finally, there is no evidence that melatonin and other agents (homatropine, Proproten-100) show PAWS symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
Although there is some evidence for targeted pharmacotherapy for treating specific PAWS symptoms, there are few recent, robust, placebo-controlled trials, and the level of evidence for treatment efficacy is low.
Topics: Alcoholism; Anticonvulsants; Benzodiazepines; Gabapentin; Humans; Substance Withdrawal Syndrome
PubMed: 35838423
DOI: 10.15288/jsad.2022.83.470 -
The effect of smoking on the plasma concentration of tricyclic antidepressants: a systematic review.Acta Neuropsychiatrica Feb 2022Smoking is highly prevalent in the psychiatric population, and hospital admittance usually results in partial or complete smoking cessation. Tobacco use is known to... (Review)
Review
Smoking is highly prevalent in the psychiatric population, and hospital admittance usually results in partial or complete smoking cessation. Tobacco use is known to affect the metabolism of certain psychoactive drugs, but whether smoking influences the plasma concentration of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) remains unclear. This article investigates the possible effect of smoking on the plasma concentration of TCAs. A systematic review of the literature available on PubMed and EMBASE as of October 2020 was carried out using PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting plasma concentrations of any TCA in both a smoking and a non-smoking group were included and compared. Ten eligible studies were identified and included. In the eight studies investigating the effect of smoking on amitriptyline and/or nortriptyline, five studies found no significant effect. Two studies investigating the effect of smoking on imipramine found a significant effect, and one study investigating the effect of smoking on doxepin found no significant effect. The majority of studies included in this review were influenced by small study populations and other methodical issues. The effect of smoking on the plasma concentration of TCAs is still not entirely clear. There is a possibility that smoking affects the distribution of TCA metabolites, but this is probably not of clinical importance.
Topics: Amitriptyline; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Imipramine; Nortriptyline; Smoking
PubMed: 34497000
DOI: 10.1017/neu.2021.28 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014Antidepressants are widely used to treat chronic neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage), usually in doses below those at which they exert antidepressant effects. An... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Antidepressants are widely used to treat chronic neuropathic pain (pain due to nerve damage), usually in doses below those at which they exert antidepressant effects. An earlier review that included all antidepressants for neuropathic pain is being replaced by new reviews of individual drugs examining individual neuropathic pain conditions.Desipramine is a tricyclic antidepressant that is occasionally used for treating neuropathic pain.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the analgesic efficacy of desipramine for chronic neuropathic pain in adults, and to assess the associated adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE from inception to 29 April 2014, and the reference lists of retrieved papers and other reviews. We also used our own hand searched database to identify older studies, and two clinical trials databases for ongoing or unpublished studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised, double-blind studies of at least two weeks duration comparing desipramine with placebo or another active treatment in chronic neuropathic pain. Participants were adults aged 18 years and over. We included only full journal publication articles.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the efficacy and adverse event data, and examined issues of study quality. We performed analysis using three tiers of evidence. First tier evidence was derived from data meeting current best standards and subject to minimal risk of bias (outcome equivalent to substantial pain intensity reduction, intention-to-treat analysis without imputation for dropouts, at least 200 participants in the comparison, 8 to 12 weeks duration, parallel design); second tier from data that failed to meet one or more of these criteria and were considered at some risk of bias but with adequate numbers in the comparison; and third tier from data involving small numbers of participants and considered very likely to be biased or that used outcomes of limited clinical utility, or both.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies treated 177 participants with painful diabetic neuropathy (104) or postherpetic neuralgia (73). The mean or median ages in the studies were 55 to 72 years. Four studies used a cross-over, and one a parallel group design; 145 participants were randomised to receive desipramine 12.5 mg to 250 mg daily, with most taking 100 mg to 150 mg daily following titration. Comparators were placebo in three studies (an 'active placebo' in two studies), fluoxetine, clomipramine (one study each), and amitriptyline (two studies), and treatment was for two to six weeks. All studies had one or more sources of potential major bias.No study provided first or second tier evidence for any outcome. No data were available on the proportion of people with at least 50% or 30% reduction in pain, but data were available from three studies for our other primary outcome of Patient Global Impression of Change, reported as patient evaluation of pain relief that was 'complete' or 'a lot'. No pooling of data was possible, but third tier evidence in individual studies indicated some improvement in pain relief with desipramine compared with placebo, although this was very low quality evidence, derived mainly from group mean data and completer analyses in small, short duration studies where major bias was possible. There were too few participants in comparisons of desipramine with another active treatment to draw any conclusions.All studies reported some information about adverse events, but reporting was inconsistent and fragmented. Participants taking desipramine experienced more adverse events, and a higher rate of withdrawal due to adverse events, than did participants taking placebo (very low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review found little evidence to support the use of desipramine to treat neuropathic pain. There was very low quality evidence of benefit and harm, but this came from studies that were methodologically flawed and potentially subject to major bias. Effective medicines with much greater supportive evidence are available. There may be a role for desipramine in patients who have not obtained pain relief from other treatments.
Topics: Aged; Amitriptyline; Analgesics; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Chronic Pain; Clomipramine; Desipramine; Diabetic Neuropathies; Fluoxetine; Humans; Middle Aged; Neuralgia, Postherpetic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 25246131
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011003.pub2 -
Pain and Therapy Jun 2021Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable disease burden. The management of PNP is often challenging. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current evidence, derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed pharmacological interventions for the treatment of PNP due to polyneuropathy (PN).
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed database led to the identification of 538 papers, of which 457 were excluded due to not meeting the eligibility criteria, and two articles were identified through screening of the reference lists of the 81 eligible studies. Ultimately, 83 papers were included in this systematic review.
RESULTS
The best available evidence for the management of painful diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is for amitriptyline, duloxetine, gabapentin, pregabalin and venlafaxine as monotherapies and oxycodone as add-on therapy (level II of evidence). Tramadol appears to be effective when used as a monotherapy and add-on therapy in patients with PN of various etiologies (level II of evidence). Weaker evidence (level III) is available on the effectiveness of several other agents discussed in this review for the management of PNP due to PN.
DISCUSSION
Response to treatment may be affected by the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms that are involved in the pathogenesis of the PN and, therefore, it is very important to thoroughly investigate patients presenting with PNP to determine the causes of this neuropathy. Future RCTs should be conducted to shed more light on the use of pharmacological approaches in patients with other forms of PNP and to design specific treatment algorithms.
PubMed: 33145709
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-020-00210-3 -
European Review For Medical and... May 2024Painful peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PRDN) is a common disabling condition. Pregabalin and amitriptyline are commonly prescribed as the first-line for PPDN despite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Painful peripheral diabetic neuropathy (PRDN) is a common disabling condition. Pregabalin and amitriptyline are commonly prescribed as the first-line for PPDN despite the contradicting recommendations. There is a need to inform the scientific community regarding first-line pain control among patients with PPDN. This meta-analysis assessed pregabalin and amitriptyline effects on PPDN.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, and Google Scholar; the terms used were amitriptyline, pregabalin, painful diabetic neuropathy, antidepressant, gabapentinoids, quality of life, and adverse events. Boolean operators like AND, and OR were used. Six hundred and thirty-one studies were retrieved, and 37 full texts were screened. However, only six randomized controlled trials fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
RESULTS
No significant statistical differences between amitriptyline and pregabalin regarding pain score and significant pain reduction (odd ratio, -0.82, 95% CI, -2.21-0.58, and odd ratio, 1.16, 95% CI, 0.76-1.76 respectively). Quality of life, total adverse events, and drug discontinuation were not different between the two drugs (odd ratio, 0.89, 95% CI, -2.11-3.89, odd ratio, 0.98, 95% CI, 0.52-1.85, and odd ratio, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.08-3.15, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
No significant statistical differences between amitriptyline and pregabalin regarding their effects on pain and quality of life. The drugs showed similar total adverse events and drug withdrawal. Further larger real-world studies are needed.
Topics: Pregabalin; Amitriptyline; Humans; Diabetic Neuropathies; Analgesics; Quality of Life
PubMed: 38856135
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_202405_36296 -
Medicine Jun 2024Chaihu-Shugan-San (CSS), a Traditional Chinese Medicine formula, has been widely used for treating depression since the Ming Dynasty, as recorded in Jingyue Quanshu, but... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chaihu-Shugan-San (CSS), a Traditional Chinese Medicine formula, has been widely used for treating depression since the Ming Dynasty, as recorded in Jingyue Quanshu, but its effectiveness and safety lack comprehensive and objective evaluation. Based on our meta-analysis, we aimed to adequately evaluate the efficacy and risk of CSS by considering the latest clinical literature.
METHODS
Multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chongqing VIP, and Wanfang, were used to collect clinical data. The quality of the included clinical studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, and the data were meta-analyzed using Review Manager 5.0 and Stata 17. The data were obtained from a genome-wide association study, and Mendelian randomization (MR) was performed using R Software 4.3.2 with the TwoSampleMR and MR Pleiotropy RESidual Sum and Outlier packages.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies with 1034 patients and 6 antidepressant drugs were included in this work. Meta-analyses revealed that drug combinations of CSS and antidepressants significantly improved depressive symptoms (weighted mean difference = -4.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -5.62--2.81), increased the effective rate (odds ratio [OR] = 3.82; 95% CI: 2.44-6.83), and reduced side effects (OR = -3.55; 95% CI: -5.66--1.43) compared with antidepressant monotherapy. Additionally, compared with antidepressant monotherapy, CSS alone exhibited fewer side effects (95% CI:-9.25--6.95). Like antidepressants, CSS also improved depressive symptoms (weighted mean difference = -0.05; 95% CI: -0.63--0.52) and increased the effective rate (OR = 1.07; 95% CI: 0.52-2.20). Additionally, MR was used to evaluate the safety of traditional antidepressants, as there was a causal association between amitriptyline and body mass index.
CONCLUSION
This analysis demonstrated that compared with traditional antidepressants, CSS combined with antidepressants was more effective and safer for treating depressed patients. MR showed that a causal relationship may exist between amitriptyline and body mass index. Therefore, clinicians should carefully consider the advantages and potential drawbacks of Traditional Chinese Medicine and classic drugs to serve patients better.
Topics: Humans; Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Plant Extracts; Drugs, Chinese Herbal; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38941409
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038668 -
BMC Psychiatry Nov 2014Current guidelines for treatment-resistant depression in adolescents remain inadequate. This study aimed to systematically review the management of treatment-resistant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines for treatment-resistant depression in adolescents remain inadequate. This study aimed to systematically review the management of treatment-resistant depression in adolescent patients.
METHODS
We conducted an electronic database search of PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science and PsycINFO for studies with adolescent treatment-resistant depression published up to January 2014. Treatment-resistant depression was defined as failure to respond to at least one course of psychological or pharmacological treatment for depression with an adequate dosage, duration, and appropriate compliance during the current illness episode. The Cochrane risk-of-bias method was used to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis of all active treatments was conducted.
RESULTS
Eight studies with 411 depressed adolescents that fit predetermined criteria investigated pharmacological treatments and psychotherapies. Six were open-label studies, and two were randomized controlled trials. The overall response rate for all active treatments investigated was 46% (95% CI 33 to 59; N = 411) with a moderately high degree of heterogeneity (I2 = 76.1%, 95% CI = 47%-86%). When only the two randomized trials were included, the overall response rate of active treatment was 53% (95% CI = 38-67; N = 347). In these randomized trials, SSRI therapy plus CBT was significantly more effective than SSRI therapy alone, while amitriptyline was not more effective than placebo.
CONCLUSIONS
Approximately half of the adolescents who presented with treatment-refractory depression responded to active treatment, which suggests that practitioners should remain persistent in managing these challenging cases. The combination of antidepressant medication and psychotherapy should be recommended for adolescents who present with treatment-resistant depression.
Topics: Adolescent; Antidepressive Agents; Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant; Female; Humans; Male; Psychotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25433401
DOI: 10.1186/s12888-014-0340-6