-
The Lancet. Psychiatry Sep 2023Bipolar depression constitutes a major public health problem due to its substantial burden of disease. Although pharmacological interventions are available, guidelines... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Bipolar depression constitutes a major public health problem due to its substantial burden of disease. Although pharmacological interventions are available, guidelines required updated evidence synthesis to improve their current recommendations. In order to inform evidence-based prescribing, we investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for acute bipolar depression.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched for randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological interventions with each other or placebo in adults with acute bipolar depression (type I, type II, or not otherwise specified), excluding those with substance misuse, unipolar depression, or schizophrenia, in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Web of Knowledge, CINAHL, and LILACS from database inception up to April 13, 2023. Criteria for eligibility were a duration of 2-16 weeks with masked outcome assessments, and we included combination, add-on design, and monotherapy studies. The co-primary outcomes were depressive symptoms, examined with standardised mean differences (SMDs), and manic switch, examined with odds ratios (ORs). We also investigated dropouts due to any reason, inefficacy, adverse events, and important side-effects as secondary outcomes. The confidence in the evidence was evaluated using Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020171726.
RESULTS
We analysed data from 101 randomised controlled trials covering 20 081 participants, 8063 men (41·7%) and 11 263 women (58·3%; sex not available in four studies), mean age 41·0 years (range of means 28·7-53·6 years), and 68 medications and placebo. Ethnicity data were not available. With moderate confidence in the evidence, olanzapine plus fluoxetine, quetiapine, olanzapine, lurasidone, lumateperone, cariprazine, and lamotrigine were more efficacious than placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, with SMDs ranging from 0·41 (95% CI 0·19-0·64) for olanzapine plus fluoxetine to 0·16 (0·03-0·29) for lamotrigine. Several other drugs might also be efficacious, but the confidence in the evidence was very low to low. Antidepressants as a class seem to be efficacious, but had a higher risk for manic switch compared to antipsychotics. Medications differed in their side-effect profiles.
INTERPRETATION
This is, to our knowledge, the largest network meta-analysis of pharmacotherapy for bipolar depression to date. Olanzapine plus fluoxetine, quetiapine, olanzapine, lurasidone, lumateperone, cariprazine, and lamotrigine were found to be more efficacious than placebo in adults with acute bipolar depression, with good confidence in the evidence, and to differ in their side-effect profiles. These findings can inform evidence-based care and the development of treatment guidelines internationally.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Adult; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Bipolar Disorder; Depression; Fluoxetine; Lamotrigine; Olanzapine; Lurasidone Hydrochloride; Quetiapine Fumarate; Network Meta-Analysis; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions
PubMed: 37595997
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(23)00199-2 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Oct 2023The concurrent assessment of weight and affective psychopathology outcomes relevant to the psychopharmacology of major eating disorders (EDs), namely anorexia nervosa... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The concurrent assessment of weight and affective psychopathology outcomes relevant to the psychopharmacology of major eating disorders (EDs), namely anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge eating disorder (BED), warrants systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were inquired from inception through August 31st, 2022, for RCTs documenting any psychopharmacological intervention for EDs diagnosed according to validated criteria and reporting weight and psychopathology changes. Adopted keywords were: "anorexia nervosa," "bulimia nervosa," "binge eating disorder," "antidepressant," "antipsychotic," and "mood stabilizer." No language restriction applied.
RESULTS
5122 records were identified, and 203 full-texts were reviewed. Sixty-two studies entered the qualitative synthesis (AN = 22, BN = 23, BED = 17), of which 22 entered the meta-analysis (AN = 9, BN = 10, BED = 3). Concerning BMI increase in AN, olanzapine outperformed placebo (Hedges'g = 0.283, 95%C·I. = 0.051-0.515, I = 0 %; p = .017), whereas fluoxetine failed (Hedges'g = 0.351, 95%C.I. = -0.248 to 0.95, I = 63.37 %; p = .251). Fluoxetine not significantly changed weight (Hedges'g = 0.147, 95%C.I. = -0.157-0.451, I = 0 %; p = .343), reducing binging (Hedges'g = 0.203, 95%C.I. = 0.007-0.399, I = 0 %; p = .042), and purging episodes (Hedges'g = 0.328, 95%C.I. = -0.061-0.717, I = 58.97 %; p = .099) in BN. Lisdexamfetamine reduced weight (Hedges'g = 0.259, 95%C.I. = 0.071-0.446, I = 0 %; p = .007) and binging (Hedges'g = 0.571, 95%C.I. = 0.282-0.860, I = 53.84 %; p < .001) in BED.
LIMITATIONS
Small sample size, short duration, and lack of reliable operational definitions affect most of the included sponsored RCTs.
CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy of different drugs varies across different EDs, warranting additional primary studies recording broad psychopathological and cardiometabolic outcomes besides weight, especially against established psychotherapy interventions.
Topics: Humans; Fluoxetine; Psychopharmacology; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Feeding and Eating Disorders; Bulimia Nervosa; Binge-Eating Disorder; Anorexia Nervosa; Antipsychotic Agents
PubMed: 37393954
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.06.068 -
European Journal of Investigation in... Aug 2023This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact... (Review)
Review
This review aimed to investigate the metabolic alterations associated with psychopharmacological treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders, which can significantly impact patients' physical health and overall quality of life. The study utilized the PRISMA methodology and included cross-sectional, retrospective studies, and randomized clinical trials from reputable databases like SCOPUS, CLARIVATE, SCIENCE DIRECT, and PUBMED. Out of the 64 selected studies, various psychotropic drug classes were analyzed, including antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and antipsychotics. Among the antidepressants, such as amitriptyline, Imipramine, and clomipramine, weight gain, constipation, and cardiovascular effects were the most commonly reported metabolic adverse effects. SSRI antidepressants like Fluoxetine, Sertraline, Citalopram, Escitalopram, and Paroxetine exhibited a high prevalence of gastrointestinal and cardiac alterations. Regarding anticonvulsants, valproic acid and Fosphenytoin were associated with adverse reactions such as weight gain and disturbances in appetite and sleep patterns. As for antipsychotics, drugs like Clozapine, Olanzapine, and Risperidone were linked to weight gain, diabetes, and deterioration of the lipid profile. The findings of this review emphasize the importance of continuous monitoring for adverse effects, particularly considering that the metabolic changes caused by psychopharmacological medications may vary depending on the age of the patients. Future research should focus on conducting field studies to further expand knowledge on the metabolic effects of other commonly prescribed psychotropic drugs. Overall, the study highlights the significance of understanding and managing metabolic alterations induced by psychopharmacological treatment to enhance patient care and well-being.
PubMed: 37623307
DOI: 10.3390/ejihpe13080110 -
European Journal of Human Genetics :... Mar 2024The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate pharmacogenetics implementation in clinical practice by developing evidence-based guidelines to...
The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate pharmacogenetics implementation in clinical practice by developing evidence-based guidelines to optimize pharmacotherapy. A guideline describing the gene-drug interaction between the genes CYP2D6, CYP3A4 and CYP1A2 and antipsychotics is presented here. The DPWG identified gene-drug interactions that require therapy adjustments when respective genotype is known for CYP2D6 with aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, haloperidol, pimozide, risperidone and zuclopenthixol, and for CYP3A4 with quetiapine. Evidence-based dose recommendations were obtained based on a systematic review of published literature. Reduction of the normal dose is recommended for aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, haloperidol, pimozide, risperidone and zuclopenthixol for CYP2D6-predicted PMs, and for pimozide and zuclopenthixol also for CYP2D6 IMs. For CYP2D6 UMs, a dose increase or an alternative drug is recommended for haloperidol and an alternative drug or titration of the dose for risperidone. In addition, in case of no or limited clinical effect, a dose increase is recommended for zuclopenthixol for CYP2D6 UMs. Even though evidence is limited, the DPWG recommends choosing an alternative drug to treat symptoms of depression or a dose reduction for other indications for quetiapine and CYP3A4 PMs. No therapy adjustments are recommended for the other CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 predicted phenotypes. In addition, no action is required for the gene-drug combinations CYP2D6 and clozapine, flupentixol, olanzapine or quetiapine and also not for CYP1A2 and clozapine or olanzapine. For identified gene-drug interactions requiring therapy adjustments, genotyping of CYP2D6 or CYP3A4 prior to treatment should not be considered for all patients, but on an individual patient basis only.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Clopenthixol; Clozapine; Cytochrome P-450 CYP1A2; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A; Drug Interactions; Haloperidol; Olanzapine; Pharmacogenetics; Pimozide; Quetiapine Fumarate; Quinolones; Risperidone; Thiophenes
PubMed: 37002327
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01347-3 -
The Lancet. Psychiatry Mar 2024There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to Nov 23, 2023 for randomised controlled trials published in any language that assessed pharmacological treatments for individuals of any age with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode with psychotic features, in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in any setting. We excluded continuation or maintenance trials. We screened the study titles and abstracts identified, and we extracted data from relevant studies after full-text review. If full data were not available, we requested data from study authors twice. We analysed treatments for individual drugs (or drug combinations) and by grouping them on the basis of mechanisms of action. The primary outcomes were response rate (ie, the proportion of participants who responded to treatment) and acceptability (ie, the proportion who discontinued treatment for any reason). We calculated risk ratios and did separate frequentist network meta-analyses by using random-effects models. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the confidence in the evidence with the Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023392926.
FINDINGS
Of 6313 reports identified, 16 randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and 14 were included in the network meta-analyses. The 16 trials included 1161 people with psychotic depression (mean age 50·5 years [SD 11·4]). 516 (44·4%) participants were female and 422 (36·3%) were male; sex data were not available for the other 223 (19·2%). 489 (42·1%) participants were White, 47 (4·0%) were African American, and 12 (1·0%) were Asian; race or ethnicity data were not available for the other 613 (52·8%). Only the combination of fluoxetine plus olanzapine was associated with a higher proportion of participants with a treatment response compared with placebo (risk ratio 1·91 [95% CI 1·27-2·85]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes compared with placebo. When treatments were grouped by mechanism of action, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a second-generation antipsychotic was associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses than was placebo (1·89 [1·17-3·04]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes. In head-to-head comparisons of active treatments, a significantly higher proportion of participants had a response to amitriptyline plus perphenazine (3·61 [1·23-10·56]) and amoxapine (3·14 [1·01-9·80]) than to perphenazine, and to fluoxetine plus olanzapine compared with olanzapine alone (1·60 [1·09-2·34]). Venlafaxine, venlafaxine plus quetiapine (2·25 [1·09-4·63]), and imipramine (1·95 [1·01-3·79]) were also associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses overall. In head-to-head comparisons grouped by mechanism of action, antipsychotic plus antidepressant combinations consistently outperformed monotherapies from either drug class in terms of the proportion of participants with treatment responses. Heterogeneity was low. No high-risk instances were identified in the bias assessment for our primary outcomes.
INTERPRETATION
According to the available evidence, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a second-generation antipsychotic-and particularly of fluoxetine and olanzapine-could be the optimal treatment choice for psychotic depression. These findings should be taken into account in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, these conclusions should be interpreted cautiously in view of the low number of included studies and the limitations of these studies.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Depressive Disorder, Major; Fluoxetine; Perphenazine; Network Meta-Analysis; Bipolar Disorder; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Depression; Antipsychotic Agents; Olanzapine
PubMed: 38360024
DOI: 10.1016/S2215-0366(24)00006-3 -
Schizophrenia Bulletin Jan 2024Long-acting injectable antipsychotic drugs (LAIs) are mainly used for relapse prevention but could also be advantageous for acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Long-Acting Injectable Second-Generation Antipsychotics vs Placebo and Their Oral Formulations in Acute Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Controlled-Trials.
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS
Long-acting injectable antipsychotic drugs (LAIs) are mainly used for relapse prevention but could also be advantageous for acutely ill patients with schizophrenia.
STUDY DESIGN
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled-trials (RCTs) comparing the second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (SGA-LAIs) olanzapine, risperidone, paliperidone, and aripiprazole with placebo or their oral counterparts in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. We analyzed 23 efficacy and tolerability outcomes, with the primary outcome being overall symptoms of schizophrenia. The results were obtained through random effects, pairwise meta-analyses, and subgroup tests. The study quality was assessed using the Cochrane-Risk-of-Bias-Tool version-1.
STUDY RESULTS
Sixty-six studies with 16 457 participants were included in the analysis. Eleven studies compared second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (SGA-LAIs) with a placebo, 54 compared second-generation oral antipsychotics (SGA-orals) with a placebo, and one compared an SGA-LAI (aripiprazole) with its oral formulation. All 4 SGA-LAIs reduced overall symptoms more than placebo, with mean standardized differences of -0.66 (95% CI: -0.90; -0.43) for olanzapine, -0.64 (-0.80; -0.48) for aripiprazole, -0.62 (-0.76; -0.48) for risperidone and -0.42 (-0.53; -0.31) for paliperidone. The side-effect profiles of the LAIs corresponded to the patterns known from the oral formulations. In subgroup tests compared to placebo, some side effects were less pronounced under LAIs than under their oral formulations.
CONCLUSIONS
SGA-LAIs effectively treat acute schizophrenia. Some side effects may be less frequent than under oral drugs, but due to the indirect nature of the comparisons, this finding must be confirmed by RCTs comparing LAIs and orals head-to-head.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Paliperidone Palmitate; Aripiprazole; Olanzapine; Risperidone; Delayed-Action Preparations; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 37350486
DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbad089 -
Psychiatry Research Feb 2024Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are widely used in treating schizophrenia and related disorders, also other mental disorders. However, the efficacy and safety of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are widely used in treating schizophrenia and related disorders, also other mental disorders. However, the efficacy and safety of SGAs for treating other mental disorders is unclear. A systematic literature search for randomized, placebo-controlled trials of 11 SGAs for treating 18 mental disorders apart from schizophrenia were carried out from database inception to April 3, 2022. The primary outcome was the mean change in the total score for different mental disorders. The secondary outcome was the odds ratio (OR) of response, remission rates and risk ratio (RR) of adverse events (AEs). A total of 181 studies (N = 65,480) were included. All SGAs showed significant effects in treating other mental disorders compared with placebo, except autistic disorder and dementia. Aripiprazole is the most effective treatment for bipolar mania [effect size = -0.90, 95% CI: -1.59, -0.21] and Tourette's disorder [effect size = -0.80, 95% CI: -1.14, -0.45], olanzapine for bipolar depression [effect size = -0.86, 95% CI: -1.32, -0.39] and post-traumatic stress disorder [effect size = -0.98, 95% CI: -1.55, -0.41], lurasidone for depression [effect size = -0.66, 95% CI: -0.82, -0.50], quetiapine for anxiety [effect size = -1.20, 95% CI: -1.96, -0.43], sleep disorders [effect size = -1.2, 95% CI: -1.97, -0.58], and delirium [effect size = -0.36, 95% CI: -0.70, -0.03], and risperidone for obsessive-compulsive disorder [effect size = -2.37, 95% CI: -3.25, -1.49], respectively. For safety, AE items for each SGAs was different. Interestingly, we found that some AEs of OLZ, QTP, RIS and PALI have significant palliative effects on some symptoms. Significant differences in the efficacy and safety of different SGAs for treatment of other mental disorders should be considered for choosing the drug and for the balance between efficacy and tolerability for the specific patient.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Risperidone; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 38150810
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2023.115637 -
Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine Jan 2024United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) recently approved a novel combination of olanzapine-samidorphan (OLZSAM) for managing olanzapine-associated adverse... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
United States Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) recently approved a novel combination of olanzapine-samidorphan (OLZSAM) for managing olanzapine-associated adverse events (weight gain) in adult patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. To opine about the safety and efficacy of OLZSAM, authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to convene justifiable evidence.
METHODS
A thorough literature search was performed through the databases Embase, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov, from inception to September 2022, with the keywords: 'olanzapine and samidorphan' and schizophrenia; and "ALKS3831" and "lybalvi." Clinical trials published in English that analyzed the efficacy and safety of OLZSAM were included. The significant outcomes included in this study were change from baseline (CFB) in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at the end of the study, the proportion of patients with weight gain at the end of the study, the proportion of patients with at least one adverse event, and the incidence of drug discontinuation due to adverse events.
RESULTS
The change in PANSS score at the end of the study was comparable among groups receiving OLZSAM and olanzapine alone: standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.04; 95% CI = -0.09 to 0.17; = 0.57. The OLZSAM group reported less incidence of weight gain: risk ratio (RR) = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.62-1.34; = 0.63, and any adverse event: RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.90-1.09; = 0.81. Drug discontinuation incidence was higher in the OLZSAM group: RR = 1.22; 95% CI = 0.84-1.79; = 0.30.
CONCLUSIONS
The combination OLZSAM showed comparable efficacy to olanzapine alone in schizophrenia patients, with relatively less incidence of weight gain and adverse events; however, the drug discontinuation due to adverse events was more in the OLZSAM group.
PubMed: 38524957
DOI: 10.1177/02537176231201326 -
The Psychiatric Quarterly Dec 2023Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic medication, and its use in treating borderline personality disorder (BPD) is debatable because it is not FDA-approved for... (Review)
Review
Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic medication, and its use in treating borderline personality disorder (BPD) is debatable because it is not FDA-approved for treating BPD. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole in patients with BPD. On July 2, 2021, the protocol (CRD42021256647) was registered in PROSPERO. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid-Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane (CENTRAL) were searched without regard for language or publication date. We also searched trial registries on ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Randomized clinical trials with adult patients diagnosed with BPD met the inclusion criteria. The Cochrane risk of bias for randomized trials (RoB-2) method was used to assess the quality of the included studies. We included two previously published randomized clinical trials. There were 76 patients with BPD, with 38, 12, and 26 assigned to the aripiprazole, olanzapine, and placebo groups, respectively. Most patients (88.16%) were females, with ages ranging from 22.1 to 28.14 yr. Aripiprazole has been proven to reduce anxiety, depression, anger, hostility, clinical severity, and obsessive-compulsive behavior, insecurity, melancholy, anxiety, aggressiveness/hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid thinking, psychoticism, and somatization. The adverse effects were headache, insomnia, restlessness, tremor, and akathisia. The risk of bias was considerable in both trials, which is somewhat problematic considering that prejudice can lead to incorrect outcomes and conclusions. Aripiprazole has demonstrated encouraging outcomes in the treatment of patients with BPD. More randomized controlled studies are needed.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Aripiprazole; Borderline Personality Disorder; Antipsychotic Agents; Olanzapine; Anxiety Disorders
PubMed: 37566261
DOI: 10.1007/s11126-023-10045-8 -
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry Jul 2023Aiming at revising the therapeutic reference range for olanzapine, the present study highlights the association between blood olanzapine levels, clinical effects, and...
Aiming at revising the therapeutic reference range for olanzapine, the present study highlights the association between blood olanzapine levels, clinical effects, and dopamine D-receptor occupancy for oral and long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations. Databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and uncontrolled trials concerning blood olanzapine levels in relation to clinical outcomes or D-receptor occupancy using MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library (March 2021, updated in December 2021). We excluded articles not written in English or German and non-human data. Search terms included , , , , and . The process of study selection followed a previously published protocol and PRISMA guidelines. A total of 2,824 articles were identified through database search and 1 article via reference list check. Thirty-four studies were suitable for qualitative synthesis, and 13 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Reviewers performed data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies independently following the review protocol. Evidence for a relationship between blood olanzapine level and efficacy/side effects (constipation) is considered low (Level C). In total, 3 studies of moderate quality consistently showed therapeutic thresholds of around 20 ng/mL for olanzapine 12 hours post-dose. This threshold is in line with findings from positron emission tomography (PET) studies that suggest optimal drug efficacy (65%-80% D-receptor occupancy) between 17 and 44 ng/mL. We suggest a therapeutic reference range of 20-40 ng/mL for olanzapine oral and LAI formulations. In this range, optimal treatment response is expected in patients with schizophrenia and schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Side effects, especially weight gain, may already occur at therapeutic levels. However, higher plasma concentrations are in general well tolerated and should not necessarily require a dose reduction in case of good response and tolerance.
Topics: Humans; Olanzapine; Antipsychotic Agents; Reference Values; Schizophrenia; Receptors, Dopamine D2; Benzodiazepines
PubMed: 37471567
DOI: 10.4088/JCP.22r14626