-
Pharmacopsychiatry Sep 2022Early-onset schizophrenia (EOS) - onset before age 18 - is linked with great disease burden and disability. Decision-making for EOS pharmacological treatment may be... (Review)
Review
Early-onset schizophrenia (EOS) - onset before age 18 - is linked with great disease burden and disability. Decision-making for EOS pharmacological treatment may be challenging due to conflicting information from evidence and guidelines and unidentified care needs may remain unmet.We searched for systematic reviews, meta-analyses and umbrella reviews of EOS pharmacological treatment published in PubMed over the past 10 years and selected five clinical guidelines from Europe, North-America and Australia. Based on predefined outcomes, we critically compared the evidence supporting EOS-approved drugs in Europe and/or North-America with guidelines recommendations. We also evaluated the coverage of these outcomes to identify unmet needs.One systematic review, nine meta-analyses and two umbrella reviews (k=203 trials, N=81,289 participants, including duplicated samples across selected articles) were retrieved. Evidence supported the efficacy of aripiprazole, clozapine, haloperidol, lurasidone, molindone, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and paliperidone in EOS, all of which obtained approval for EOS either in Europe and/or in North-America. Cognition, functioning and quality of life, suicidal behaviour and mortality and services utilisation and cost-effectiveness were poorly covered/uncovered.Among the antipsychotics approved for EOS, aripiprazole, lurasidone, molindone, risperidone, paliperidone and quetiapine emerged as efficacious and comparably safe options. Olanzapine is known for a high risk of weight gain and haloperidol for extrapyramidal side-effects. Treatment-resistant patients should be offered clozapine. Future long-term trials looking at cognition, functioning, quality of life, suicidal behaviour, mortality, services utilisation and cost-effectiveness are warranted. Closer multi-agency collaboration may bridge the gap between evidence, guidelines and approved drugs.
Topics: Adolescent; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Clozapine; Haloperidol; Humans; Lurasidone Hydrochloride; Molindone; Olanzapine; Paliperidone Palmitate; Quality of Life; Quetiapine Fumarate; Risperidone; Schizophrenia; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 35777418
DOI: 10.1055/a-1854-0185 -
Palliative & Supportive Care Aug 2015The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side-effect profile of the typical antipsychotic haloperidol with that of the atypical antipsychotics risperidone,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and side-effect profile of the typical antipsychotic haloperidol with that of the atypical antipsychotics risperidone, olanzapine, and aripiprazole in the management of delirium.
METHOD
The Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale, and a side-effect rating were recorded at baseline (T1), after 2-3 days (T2), and after 4-7 days (T3). Some 21 cases were case-matched by age, preexisting dementia, and baseline MDAS scores, and subsequently analyzed.
RESULTS
The baseline characteristics of the medication groups were not different: The mean age of the patients ranged from 64.0 to 69.6 years, dementia was present in between 23.8 and 28.6%, and baseline MDAS scores were 19.9 (haloperidol), 18.6 (risperidone), 19.4 (olanzapine), and 18.0 (aripiprazole). The doses of medication at T3 were 5.5 mg haloperidol, 1.3 mg risperidone, 7.1 mg olanzapine, and 18.3 mg aripiprazole. Over one week, the decline in MDAS scores between medications was equal, and no differences between individual MDAS scores existed at T2 or T3. After one week, the MDAS scores were 6.8 (haloperidol), 7.1 (risperidone), 11.7 (olanzapine), and 8.3 (aripiprazole). At T2, delirium resolution occurred in 42.9-52.4% of cases and at T3 in 61.9-85.7%; no differences in assessments between medications existed. Recorded side effects were extrapyramidal symptoms (EPSs) in haloperidol- and risperidone-managed patients (19 and 4.8%, respectively) and sedation with olanzapine (28.6%).
SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS
Haloperidol, risperidone, aripiprazole, and olanzapine were equally effective in the management of delirium; however, they differed in terms of their side-effect profile. Extrapyramidal symptoms were most frequently recorded with haloperidol, and sedation occurred most frequently with olanzapine.
Topics: Aged; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Delirium; Dementia; Female; Haloperidol; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Olanzapine; Risperidone
PubMed: 25191793
DOI: 10.1017/S1478951514001059 -
Lancet (London, England) Dec 2015Treatment-resistant major depression is common and potentially life-threatening in elderly people, in whom little is known about the benefits and risks of augmentation... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of augmentation pharmacotherapy with aripiprazole for treatment-resistant depression in late life: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
Treatment-resistant major depression is common and potentially life-threatening in elderly people, in whom little is known about the benefits and risks of augmentation pharmacotherapy. We aimed to assess whether aripiprazole is associated with a higher probability of remission than is placebo.
METHODS
We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at three centres in the USA and Canada to test the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole augmentation for adults aged older than 60 years with treatment-resistant depression (Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score of ≥15). Patients who did not achieve remission during a pre-trial with venlafaxine extended-release (150-300 mg/day) were randomly assigned (1:1) to the addition of aripiprazole (target dose 10 mg [maximum 15 mg] daily) daily or placebo for 12 weeks. The computer-generated randomisation was done in blocks and stratified by site. Only the database administrator and research pharmacists had knowledge of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was remission, defined as an MADRS score of 10 or less (and at least 2 points below the score at the start of the randomised phase) at both of the final two consecutive visits, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00892047.
FINDINGS
From July 20, 2009, to Dec 30, 2013, we recruited 468 eligible participants, 181 (39%) of whom did not remit and were randomly assigned to aripiprazole (n=91) or placebo (n=90). A greater proportion of participants in the aripiprazole group achieved remission than did those in the placebo group (40 [44%] vs 26 [29%] participants; odds ratio [OR] 2·0 [95% CI 1·1-3·7], p=0·03; number needed to treat [NNT] 6·6 [95% CI 3·5-81·8]). Akathisia was the most common adverse effect of aripiprazole (reported in 24 [26%] of 91 participants on aripiprazole vs 11 [12%] of 90 on placebo). Compared with placebo, aripiprazole was also associated with more Parkinsonism (15 [17%] of 86 vs two [2%] of 81 participants), but not with treatment-emergent suicidal ideation (13 [21%] of 61 vs 19 [29%] of 65 participants) or other measured safety variables.
INTERPRETATION
In adults aged 60 years or older who do not achieve remission from depression with a first-line antidepressant, the addition of aripiprazole is effective in achieving and sustaining remission. Tolerability concerns include the potential for akathisia and Parkinsonism.
FUNDING
National Institute of Mental Health, UPMC Endowment in Geriatric Psychiatry, Taylor Family Institute for Innovative Psychiatric Research, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, and the Campbell Family Mental Health Research Institute.
Topics: Aged; Akathisia, Drug-Induced; Antidepressive Agents; Aripiprazole; Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant; Double-Blind Method; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Parkinson Disease, Secondary; Recurrence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26423182
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00308-6 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jan 2022Uncertainty remains regarding the relative efficacy of maintenance pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder (BD), and available data require updating. The present systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Uncertainty remains regarding the relative efficacy of maintenance pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder (BD), and available data require updating. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to consolidate the evidence from the highest quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to July 2021, overcoming the limitations of earlier reviews. The PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for double-blind RCTs involving lithium, mood stabilizing anticonvulsants (MSAs), antipsychotics, antidepressants, and other treatments. Rates of new mood episodes with test vs. reference treatments (placebo or alternative active agent) were compared by random-effects meta-analysis. Polarity index was calculated for each treatment type. Eligible trials involved ≥6 months of maintenance follow up. Of 2,158 identified reports, 22 met study eligibility criteria, and involved 7,773 subjects stabilized for 1-12 weeks and followed-up for 24-104 weeks. Psychotropic monotherapy overall (including lithium, MSAs, and second generation antipsychotics (SGA) was more effective in preventing new BD episodes than placebo (odds ratio, OR=0.42; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.34-0.51, p<0.00001). Significantly lower risk of new BD episodes was observed with the following individual drugs: aripiprazole, asenapine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone long-acting (ORs varied 0.19-0.46). Adding aripiprazole, divalproex, quetiapine, or olanzapine/risperidone to lithium or an MSA was more effective compared with lithium or MSA monotherapy (OR=0.37; 95%CI 0.25-0.55, p<0.00001). Active treatment favored prevention of mania over depression. The key limitations were "responder-enriched" design in most trials and high outcomes heterogeneity. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42020162663.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Bipolar Disorder; Humans; Lithium; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone
PubMed: 34489127
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2021.08.264 -
Translational Psychiatry Jul 2022Antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia (AP-induced HPRL) occurs overall in up to 70% of patients with schizophrenia, which is associated with hypogonadism and sexual... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia (AP-induced HPRL) occurs overall in up to 70% of patients with schizophrenia, which is associated with hypogonadism and sexual dysfunction. We summarized the latest evidence for the benefits of prolactin-lowering drugs. We performed network meta-analyses to summarize the evidence and applied Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation frameworks (GRADE) to rate the certainty of evidence, categorize interventions, and present the findings. The search identified 3,022 citations, 31 studies of which with 1999 participants were included in network meta-analysis. All options were not significantly better than placebo among patients with prolactin (PRL) less than 50 ng/ml. However, adjunctive aripiprazole (ARI) (5 mg: MD = -64.26, 95% CI = -87.00 to -41.37; 10 mg: MD = -59.81, 95% CI = -90.10 to -29.76; more than 10 mg: MD = -68.01, 95% CI = -97.12 to -39.72), switching to ARI in titration (MD = -74.80, 95% CI = -134.22 to -15.99) and adjunctive vitamin B6 (MD = -91.84, 95% CI = -165.31 to -17.74) were associated with significant decrease in AP-induced PRL among patients with PRL more than 50 ng/ml with moderated (adjunctive vitamin B6) to high (adjunctive ARI) certainty of evidence. Pharmacological treatment strategies for AP-induced HPRL depends on initial PRL level. No effective strategy was found for patients with AP-induced HPRL less than 50 ng/ml, while adjunctive ARI, switching to ARI in titration and adjunctive high-dose vitamin B6 showed better PRL decrease effect on AP-induced HPRL more than 50 ng/ml.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Humans; Hyperprolactinemia; Network Meta-Analysis; Prolactin; Vitamin B 6
PubMed: 35790713
DOI: 10.1038/s41398-022-02027-4 -
JAMA Jul 2017Less than one-third of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) achieve remission with their first antidepressant. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Effect of Antidepressant Switching vs Augmentation on Remission Among Patients With Major Depressive Disorder Unresponsive to Antidepressant Treatment: The VAST-D Randomized Clinical Trial.
IMPORTANCE
Less than one-third of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) achieve remission with their first antidepressant.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the relative effectiveness and safety of 3 common alternate treatments for MDD.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
From December 2012 to May 2015, 1522 patients at 35 US Veterans Health Administration medical centers who were diagnosed with nonpsychotic MDD, unresponsive to at least 1 antidepressant course meeting minimal standards for treatment dose and duration, participated in the study. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 1 of 3 treatments and evaluated for up to 36 weeks.
INTERVENTIONS
Switch to a different antidepressant, bupropion (switch group, n = 511); augment current treatment with bupropion (augment-bupropion group, n = 506); or augment with an atypical antipsychotic, aripiprazole (augment-aripiprazole group, n = 505) for 12 weeks (acute treatment phase) and up to 36 weeks for longer-term follow-up (continuation phase).
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was remission during the acute treatment phase (16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated [QIDS-C16] score ≤5 at 2 consecutive visits). Secondary outcomes included response (≥50% reduction in QIDS-C16 score or improvement on the Clinical Global Impression Improvement scale), relapse, and adverse effects.
RESULTS
Among 1522 randomized patients (mean age, 54.4 years; men, 1296 [85.2%]), 1137 (74.7%) completed the acute treatment phase. Remission rates at 12 weeks were 22.3% (n = 114) for the switch group, 26.9% (n = 136)for the augment-bupropion group, and 28.9% (n = 146) for the augment-aripiprazole group. The augment-aripiprazole group exceeded the switch group in remission (relative risk [RR], 1.30 [95% CI, 1.05-1.60]; P = .02), but other remission comparisons were not significant. Response was greater for the augment-aripiprazole group (74.3%) than for either the switch group (62.4%; RR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.09-1.29]) or the augment-bupropion group (65.6%; RR, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.04-1.23]). No significant treatment differences were observed for relapse. Anxiety was more frequent in the 2 bupropion groups (24.3% in the switch group [n = 124] vs 16.6% in the augment-aripiprazole group [n = 84]; and 22.5% in augment-bupropion group [n = 114]). Adverse effects more frequent in the augment-aripiprazole group included somnolence, akathisia, and weight gain.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among a predominantly male population with major depressive disorder unresponsive to antidepressant treatment, augmentation with aripiprazole resulted in a statistically significant but only modestly increased likelihood of remission during 12 weeks of treatment compared with switching to bupropion monotherapy. Given the small effect size and adverse effects associated with aripiprazole, further analysis including cost-effectiveness is needed to understand the net utility of this approach.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01421342.
Topics: Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Bupropion; Depressive Disorder, Major; Drug Resistance; Drug Substitution; Drug Synergism; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Remission Induction; United States; Veterans
PubMed: 28697253
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.8036 -
Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Mar 2023Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly burdensome health condition, for which there are numerous accepted pharmacological and psychological interventions.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a highly burdensome health condition, for which there are numerous accepted pharmacological and psychological interventions. Adjunctive treatment (augmentation/combination) is recommended for the ~50% of MDD patients who do not adequately respond to first-line treatment. We aimed to evaluate the current evidence for concomitant approaches for people with early-stage treatment-resistant depression (TRD; defined below).
METHODS
We systematically searched Medline and Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science to identify randomised controlled trials of adjunctive treatment of ⩾10 adults with MDD who had not responded to ⩾1 adequate antidepressant. The cochrane risk of bias (RoB) tool was used to assess study quality. Pre-post treatment meta-analyses were performed, allowing for comparison across heterogeneous study designs independent of comparator interventions.
RESULTS
In total, 115 trials investigating 48 treatments were synthesised. The mean intervention duration was 9 weeks (range 5 days to 18 months) with most studies assessed to have low ( = 57) or moderate ( = 51) RoB. The highest effect sizes (ESs) were from cognitive behavioural therapy (ES = 1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-2.07), (es)ketamine (ES = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.23-1.73) and risperidone (ES = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.29-1.61). Only aripiprazole and lithium were examined in ⩾10 studies. Pill placebo (ES = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98) had a not inconsiderable ES, and only six treatments' 95% CIs did not overlap with pill placebo's (aripiprazole, (es)ketamine, mirtazapine, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone). We report marked heterogeneity between studies for almost all analyses.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings support cautious optimism for several augmentation strategies; although considering the high prevalence of TRD, evidence remains inadequate for each treatment option.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aripiprazole; Risperidone; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Ketamine
PubMed: 35861202
DOI: 10.1177/02698811221104058 -
Military Medical Research Jun 2023Choosing the appropriate antipsychotic drug (APD) treatment for patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) can be challenging, as the treatment response to APD is highly variable...
BACKGROUND
Choosing the appropriate antipsychotic drug (APD) treatment for patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) can be challenging, as the treatment response to APD is highly variable and difficult to predict due to the lack of effective biomarkers. Previous studies have indicated the association between treatment response and genetic and epigenetic factors, but no effective biomarkers have been identified. Hence, further research is imperative to enhance precision medicine in SCZ treatment.
METHODS
Participants with SCZ were recruited from two randomized trials. The discovery cohort was recruited from the CAPOC trial (n = 2307) involved 6 weeks of treatment and equally randomized the participants to the Olanzapine, Risperidone, Quetiapine, Aripiprazole, Ziprasidone, and Haloperidol/Perphenazine (subsequently equally assigned to one or the other) groups. The external validation cohort was recruited from the CAPEC trial (n = 1379), which involved 8 weeks of treatment and equally randomized the participants to the Olanzapine, Risperidone, and Aripiprazole groups. Additionally, healthy controls (n = 275) from the local community were utilized as a genetic/epigenetic reference. The genetic and epigenetic (DNA methylation) risks of SCZ were assessed using the polygenic risk score (PRS) and polymethylation score, respectively. The study also examined the genetic-epigenetic interactions with treatment response through differential methylation analysis, methylation quantitative trait loci, colocalization, and promoter-anchored chromatin interaction. Machine learning was used to develop a prediction model for treatment response, which was evaluated for accuracy and clinical benefit using the area under curve (AUC) for classification, R for regression, and decision curve analysis.
RESULTS
Six risk genes for SCZ (LINC01795, DDHD2, SBNO1, KCNG2, SEMA7A, and RUFY1) involved in cortical morphology were identified as having a genetic-epigenetic interaction associated with treatment response. The developed and externally validated prediction model, which incorporated clinical information, PRS, genetic risk score (GRS), and proxy methylation level (proxyDNAm), demonstrated positive benefits for a wide range of patients receiving different APDs, regardless of sex [discovery cohort: AUC = 0.874 (95% CI 0.867-0.881), R = 0.478; external validation cohort: AUC = 0.851 (95% CI 0.841-0.861), R = 0.507].
CONCLUSIONS
This study presents a promising precision medicine approach to evaluate treatment response, which has the potential to aid clinicians in making informed decisions about APD treatment for patients with SCZ. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/ ), 18. Aug 2009 retrospectively registered: CAPOC-ChiCTR-RNC-09000521 ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=9014 ), CAPEC-ChiCTR-RNC-09000522 ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=9013 ).
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Schizophrenia; Olanzapine; Risperidone; Aripiprazole; Precision Medicine; Multiomics; Benzodiazepines; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Phospholipases
PubMed: 37269009
DOI: 10.1186/s40779-023-00459-7 -
Molecular Psychiatry Jan 2023People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical...
The impact of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on physical health outcomes in people with mood disorders across the lifespan: An umbrella review of the evidence from randomised controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical health in this population.
METHODS
Umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on pharmacological/non-pharmacological interventions for physical health outcomes/intolerability-related discontinuation in mood disorders (any age).
RESULTS
Ninety-seven meta-analyses were included. Among youths, against placebo, in depression, antidepressants/antipsychotics had higher discontinuation rates; in bipolar depression, olanzapine+fluoxetine worsened total cholesterol (TC)/triglycerides/weight gain (WG) (large ES). In adults with bipolar disorder, olanzapine worsened HbA1c/TC/WG (moderate/large ES); asenapine increased fasting glucose (small ES); quetiapine/cariprazine/risperidone induced WG (small/moderate ES). In bipolar depression, lurasidone was metabolically neutral. In depression, psychological interventions improved physical health-related quality of life (PHQoL) (small ES), fasting glucose/HbA1c (medium/large ES); SSRIs improved fasting glucose/HbA1c, readmission for coronary disease, pain (small ES); quetiapine/aripiprazole/olanzapine induced WG (small to large ES). Exercise improved cardiorespiratory fitness (moderate ES). In the elderly, fluoxetine yielded more detrimental cardiovascular effects than sertraline/escitalopram (large ES); antidepressants were neutral on exercise tolerance and PHQoL. In mixed age groups, in bipolar disorder aripiprazole was metabolically neutral; in depression, SSRIs lowered blood pressure versus placebo and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (small ES); brexpiprazole augmentation caused WG and was less tolerated (small ES); exercise improved PHQoL (moderate ES).
CONCLUSIONS
Some interventions (psychological therapies, exercise and SSRIs) improve certain physical health outcomes in mood disorders, few are neutral, but various pharmacological interventions are associated with negative effects. Evidence from this umbrella review has limitations, should consider evidence from other disorders and should be integrated with recent evidence from individual RCTs, and observational evidence. Effective treatments with either beneficial or physically neutral profiles should be prioritized.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aged; Adolescent; Fluoxetine; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Aripiprazole; Longevity; Glycated Hemoglobin; Antipsychotic Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36138129
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-022-01770-w -
ACS Chemical Neuroscience Jun 2017Aripiprazole was the first antipsychotic developed to possess agonist properties at dopamine D autoreceptors, a groundbreaking strategy that presented a new vista for... (Review)
Review
Aripiprazole was the first antipsychotic developed to possess agonist properties at dopamine D autoreceptors, a groundbreaking strategy that presented a new vista for schizophrenia drug discovery. The dopamine D receptor is the crucial target of all extant antipsychotics, and all developed prior to aripiprazole were D receptor antagonists. Extensive blockade of these receptors, however, typically produces extrapyramidal (movement) side effects, which plagued first-generation antipsychotics, such as haloperidol. Second-generation antipsychotics, such as clozapine, with unique polypharmacology and D receptor binding kinetics, have significantly lower risk of movement side effects but can cause myriad additional ones, such as severe weight gain and metabolic dysfunction. Aripiprazole's polypharmacology, characterized by its unique agonist activity at dopamine D and D and serotonin 5-HT receptors, as well as antagonist activity at serotonin 5-HT receptors, translates to successful reduction of positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia, while also mitigating risk of weight gain and movement side effects. New observations, however, link aripiprazole to compulsive behaviors in a small group of patients, an unusual side effect for antipsychotics. In this review, we discuss the chemical synthesis, pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, drug metabolism, and adverse events of aripiprazole, and we present a current understanding of aripiprazole's neurotherapeutic mechanisms, as well as the history and importance of aripiprazole to neuroscience.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole
PubMed: 28368577
DOI: 10.1021/acschemneuro.7b00087