-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2023A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, churning stomach, faintness and breathlessness. Other recognised panic attack symptoms involve fearful cognitions, such as the fear of collapse, going mad or dying, and derealisation (the sensation that the world is unreal). Panic disorder is common in the general population with a prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants and benzodiazepines.
OBJECTIVES
To compare, via network meta-analysis, individual drugs (antidepressants and benzodiazepines) or placebo in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. To rank individual active drugs for panic disorder (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To rank drug classes for panic disorder (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), mono-amine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and benzodiazepines (BDZs) and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To explore heterogeneity and inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, CENTRAL, CDSR, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and PsycINFO to 26 May 2022.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people aged 18 years or older of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. We included trials that compared the effectiveness of antidepressants and benzodiazepines with each other or with a placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data and continuous data as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD): response to treatment (i.e. substantial improvement from baseline as defined by the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), total number of dropouts due to any reason (as a proxy measure of treatment acceptability: dichotomous outcome), remission (i.e. satisfactory end state as defined by global judgement of the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), panic symptom scales and global judgement (continuous outcome), frequency of panic attacks (as recorded, for example, by a panic diary; continuous outcome), agoraphobia (dichotomous outcome). We assessed the certainty of evidence using threshold analyses.
MAIN RESULTS
Overall, we included 70 trials in this review. Sample sizes ranged between 5 and 445 participants in each arm, and the total sample size per study ranged from 10 to 1168. Thirty-five studies included sample sizes of over 100 participants. There is evidence from 48 RCTs (N = 10,118) that most medications are more effective in the response outcome than placebo. In particular, diazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, paroxetine, venlafaxine, clomipramine, fluoxetine and adinazolam showed the strongest effect, with diazepam, alprazolam and clonazepam ranking as the most effective. We found heterogeneity in most of the comparisons, but our threshold analyses suggest that this is unlikely to impact the findings of the network meta-analysis. Results from 64 RCTs (N = 12,310) suggest that most medications are associated with either a reduced or similar risk of dropouts to placebo. Alprazolam and diazepam were associated with a lower dropout rate compared to placebo and were ranked as the most tolerated of all the medications examined. Thirty-two RCTs (N = 8569) were included in the remission outcome. Most medications were more effective than placebo, namely desipramine, fluoxetine, clonazepam, diazepam, fluvoxamine, imipramine, venlafaxine and paroxetine, and their effects were clinically meaningful. Amongst these medications, desipramine and alprazolam were ranked highest. Thirty-five RCTs (N = 8826) are included in the continuous outcome reduction in panic scale scores. Brofaromine, clonazepam and reboxetine had the strongest reductions in panic symptoms compared to placebo, but results were based on either one trial or very small trials. Forty-one RCTs (N = 7853) are included in the frequency of panic attack outcome. Only clonazepam and alprazolam showed a strong reduction in the frequency of panic attacks compared to placebo, and were ranked highest. Twenty-six RCTs (N = 7044) provided data for agoraphobia. The strongest reductions in agoraphobia symptoms were found for citalopram, reboxetine, escitalopram, clomipramine and diazepam, compared to placebo. For the pooled intervention classes, we examined the two primary outcomes (response and dropout). The classes of medication were: SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs. For the response outcome, all classes of medications examined were more effective than placebo. TCAs as a class ranked as the most effective, followed by BDZs and MAOIs. SSRIs as a class ranked fifth on average, while SNRIs were ranked lowest. When we compared classes of medication with each other for the response outcome, we found no difference between classes. Comparisons between MAOIs and TCAs and between BDZs and TCAs also suggested no differences between these medications, but the results were imprecise. For the dropout outcome, BDZs were the only class associated with a lower dropout compared to placebo and were ranked first in terms of tolerability. The other classes did not show any difference in dropouts compared to placebo. In terms of ranking, TCAs are on average second to BDZs, followed by SNRIs, then by SSRIs and lastly by MAOIs. BDZs were associated with lower dropout rates compared to SSRIs, SNRIs and TCAs. The quality of the studies comparing antidepressants with placebo was moderate, while the quality of the studies comparing BDZs with placebo and antidepressants was low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In terms of efficacy, SSRIs, SNRIs (venlafaxine), TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs may be effective, with little difference between classes. However, it is important to note that the reliability of these findings may be limited due to the overall low quality of the studies, with all having unclear or high risk of bias across multiple domains. Within classes, some differences emerged. For example, amongst the SSRIs paroxetine and fluoxetine seem to have stronger evidence of efficacy than sertraline. Benzodiazepines appear to have a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability (incidence of dropouts) over other classes.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Panic Disorder; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Paroxetine; Fluoxetine; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride; Serotonin and Noradrenaline Reuptake Inhibitors; Alprazolam; Clomipramine; Reboxetine; Clonazepam; Desipramine; Network Meta-Analysis; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Benzodiazepines; Diazepam
PubMed: 38014714
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012729.pub3 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Sep 2023The United States Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on the mental health adverse effects of montelukast in 2020. Age-related effects on the risk of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The United States Food and Drug Administration issued a black box warning on the mental health adverse effects of montelukast in 2020. Age-related effects on the risk of developing specific neuropsychiatric events in montelukast users remain largely unknown.
OBJECTIVE
To describe the risk of neuropsychiatric events associated with montelukast in adults and children with asthma.
METHODS
A systematic search of all studies investigating neuropsychiatric events in montelukast users was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane Library and Embase from inception to 7 September 2022. Animal studies and conference abstracts were excluded.
RESULTS
59 studies (21 pharmacovigilance studies, four reviews from 172 randomised controlled trials, 20 observational studies, 10 case reports and four case series) evaluating neuropsychiatric events in patients with asthma on montelukast were reviewed. No significant association was shown between montelukast and suicide-related events in six of the observational studies. No association was found for depression as defined by the International Classification of Diseases 10 revision codes in three observational studies and a review of randomised clinical trials. However, findings from four studies using antidepressant prescriptions as the outcome identified significant associations. Consistent with nine pharmacovigilance studies, two large-scale observational studies revealed possible associations of montelukast with anxiety and sleeping disorders in adult patients with asthma, respectively. However, the results were not replicated in two observational studies on children.
CONCLUSION
Montelukast is not associated with suicide- and depression-related events in asthma patients. Older adults may be particularly susceptible to anxiety and sleeping disorders.
Topics: Child; Animals; Humans; Aged; Asthma; Acetates; Quinolines; Cyclopropanes; Anti-Asthmatic Agents
PubMed: 37758273
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0079-2023 -
JAMA Network Open Mar 2024Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Antipsychotic-induced akathisia (AIA) occurs in 14% to 35% of patients treated with antipsychotics and is associated with increased suicide and decreased adherence in patients with schizophrenia. However, no comprehensive review and network meta-analysis has been conducted to compare the efficacy of treatments for AIA.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy associated with AIA treatments.
DATA SOURCES
Three databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were systematically searched by multiple researchers for double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing active drugs for the treatment of AIA with placebo or another treatment between May 30 and June 18, 2023.
STUDY SELECTION
Selected studies were RCTs that compared adjunctive drugs for AIA vs placebo or adjunctive treatment in patients treated with antipsychotics fulfilling the criteria for akathisia, RCTs with sample size of 10 patients or more, only trials in which no additional drugs were administered during the study, and RCTs that used a validated akathisia score. Trials with missing data for the main outcome (akathisia score at the end points) were excluded.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data extraction and synthesis were performed, estimating standardized mean differences (SMDs) through pairwise and network meta-analysis with a random-effects model. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline was followed.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was the severity of akathisia measured by a validated scale at the last available end point.
RESULTS
Fifteen trials involving 492 participants compared 10 treatments with placebo. Mirtazapine (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -1.20; 95% CI, -1.83 to -0.58), biperiden (6 mg/d for ≥14 days; SMD, -1.01; 95% CI, -1.69 to -0.34), vitamin B6 (600-1200 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.92; 95% CI, -1.57 to -0.26), trazodone (50 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.84; 95% CI, -1.54 to -0.14), mianserin (15 mg/d for ≥5 days; SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.44 to -0.19), and propranolol (20 mg/d for ≥6 days; SMD, -0.78; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.22) were associated with greater efficacy than placebo, with low to moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 34.6%; 95% CI, 0.0%-71.1%). Cyproheptadine, clonazepam, zolmitriptan, and valproate did not yield significant effects. Eight trials were rated as having low risk of bias; 2, moderate risk; and 5, high risk. Sensitivity analyses generally confirmed the results for all drugs except for cyproheptadine and propranolol. No association between effect sizes and psychotic severity was found.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, mirtazapine, biperiden, and vitamin B6 were associated with the greatest efficacy for AIA, with vitamin B6 having the best efficacy and tolerance profile. Trazodone, mianserin, and propranolol appeared as effective alternatives with slightly less favorable efficacy and tolerance profiles. These findings should assist prescribers in selecting an appropriate medication for treating AIA.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Biperiden; Cyproheptadine; Gallopamil; Mianserin; Mirtazapine; Network Meta-Analysis; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Trazodone; Vitamin B 6; Akathisia, Drug-Induced
PubMed: 38451521
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.1527 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jul 2023The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for anxiety-reduction by compounds that facilitate endocannabinoid signaling in humans and animals. To identify areas of specific potential, effects of moderators were assessed. Literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to May 2021. A placebo/vehicle-control group was required and in human studies, randomization. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE's RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. We conducted three-level random effects meta-analyses and explored sources of heterogeneity using Bayesian regularized meta-regression (BRMA). The systematic review yielded 134 studies. We analyzed 120 studies (114 animal, 6 human) that investigated cannabidiol (CBD, 61), URB597 (39), PF-3845 (6) and AM404 (14). Pooled effects on conditioned and unconditioned anxiety in animals (with the exception of URB597 on unconditioned anxiety) and on experimentally induced anxiety in humans favored the investigational drugs over placebo/vehicle. Publication year was negatively associated with effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety. Compared to approach avoidance tests, tests of repetitive-compulsive behavior were associated with larger effects of CBD and URB597, and the social interaction test with smaller effects of URB597. Larger effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety were observed when anxiety pre-existed. Studies reported few side effects at therapeutic doses. The evidence quality was low with indications of publication bias. More clinical trials are needed to translate the overall positive results to clinical applications.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Endocannabinoids; Bayes Theorem; Anxiety; Cannabidiol
PubMed: 37094409
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2023.04.001 -
The 5-HT7 receptor system as a treatment target for mood and anxiety disorders: A systematic review.Journal of Psychopharmacology (Oxford,... Dec 2023Preclinical animal and preliminary human studies indicate that 5-HT7 antagonists have the potential as a new treatment approach for mood and anxiety disorders. In this... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Preclinical animal and preliminary human studies indicate that 5-HT7 antagonists have the potential as a new treatment approach for mood and anxiety disorders. In this systematic review, we aimed to review the relationship between the 5-HT7 receptor system and mood and anxiety disorders, and to explore the pharmacology and therapeutic potential of medications that target the 5-HT7 receptor for their treatment.
METHODS
Medline, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PsycINFO databases, the National Institute of Health website Clinicaltrials.gov, controlled-trials.com, and relevant grey literature were used to search for original research articles, and reference lists of included articles were then hand searched.
RESULTS
Sixty-four studies were included in the review: 52 animal studies and 12 human studies. Studies used a variety of preclinical paradigms and questionnaires to assess change in mood, and few studies examined sleep or cognition. Forty-four out of 47 (44/47) preclinical 5-HT7 modulation studies identified potential antidepressant effects and 20/23 studies identified potential anxiolytic effects. In clinical studies, 5/7 identified potential antidepressant effects in major depressive disorder, 1/2 identified potential anxiolytic effects in generalized anxiety disorder, and 3/3 identified potential antidepressant effects in bipolar disorders.
CONCLUSION
While there is some evidence that the 5-HT7 receptor system may be a potential target for treating mood and anxiety disorders, many agents included in the review also bind to other receptors. Further research is needed using drugs that bind specifically to 5-HT7 receptors to examine treatment proof of concept further.
Topics: Animals; Humans; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Anxiety Disorders; Depressive Disorder, Major
PubMed: 37994803
DOI: 10.1177/02698811231211228 -
JAMA Network Open Aug 2023Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain. The optimal dosage of pregabalin and gabapentin for pain control and safety in these patients has not... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Patients undergoing spine surgery often experience severe pain. The optimal dosage of pregabalin and gabapentin for pain control and safety in these patients has not been well established.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the associations of pain, opioid consumption, and adverse events with different dosages of pregabalin and gabapentin in patients undergoing spine surgery.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and Scopus databases were searched for articles until August 7, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials conducted among patients who received pregabalin or gabapentin while undergoing spine surgery were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two investigators independently performed data extraction following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) reporting guideline. The network meta-analysis was conducted from August 2022 to February 2023 using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was pain intensity measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and secondary outcomes included opioid consumption and adverse events.
RESULTS
Twenty-seven randomized clinical trials with 1861 patients (median age, 45.99 years [range, 20.00-70.00 years]; 759 women [40.8%]) were included in the systematic review and network meta-analysis. Compared with placebo, the VAS pain score was lowest with gabapentin 900 mg per day, followed by gabapentin 1200 mg per day, gabapentin 600 mg per day, gabapentin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 300 mg per day, pregabalin 150 mg per day, and pregabalin 75 mg per day. Additionally, gabapentin 900 mg per day was found to be associated with the lowest opioid consumption among all dosages of gabapentin and pregabalin, with a mean difference of -22.07% (95% CI, -33.22% to -10.92%) for the surface under the cumulative ranking curve compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in adverse events (nausea, vomiting, and dizziness) among all treatments. No substantial inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence was detected for all outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These findings suggest that gabapentin 900 mg per day before spine surgery is associated with the lowest VAS pain score among all dosages. In addition, no differences in adverse events were noted among all treatments.
Topics: Humans; Female; Middle Aged; Gabapentin; Pregabalin; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Network Meta-Analysis; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 37556139
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.28121 -
Frontiers in Nutrition 2023Central nervous system (CNS) disorders present a growing and costly global health challenge, accounting for over 11% of the diseases burden in high-income countries.... (Review)
Review
Central nervous system (CNS) disorders present a growing and costly global health challenge, accounting for over 11% of the diseases burden in high-income countries. Despite current treatments, patients often experience persistent symptoms that significantly affect their quality of life. Dietary polysaccharides have garnered attention for their potential as interventions for CNS disorders due to their diverse mechanisms of action, including antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and neuroprotective effects. Through an analysis of research articles published between January 5, 2013 and August 30, 2023, encompassing the intervention effects of dietary polysaccharides on Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, depression, anxiety disorders, autism spectrum disorder, epilepsy, and stroke, we have conducted a comprehensive review with the aim of elucidating the role and mechanisms of dietary polysaccharides in various CNS diseases, spanning neurodegenerative, psychiatric, neurodevelopmental disorders, and neurological dysfunctions. At least four categories of mechanistic bases are included in the dietary polysaccharides' intervention against CNS disease, which involves oxidative stress reduction, neuronal production, metabolic regulation, and gut barrier integrity. Notably, the ability of dietary polysaccharides to resist oxidation and modulate gut microbiota not only helps to curb the development of these diseases at an early stage, but also holds promise for the development of novel therapeutic agents for CNS diseases. In conclusion, this comprehensive review strives to advance therapeutic strategies for CNS disorders by elucidating the potential of dietary polysaccharides and advocating interdisciplinary collaboration to propel further research in this realm.
PubMed: 38075226
DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2023.1299117 -
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2023The pharmacological treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is unsatisfactory, and there is a clinical need for new approaches. Several drugs under advanced clinical...
The pharmacological treatment of postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) is unsatisfactory, and there is a clinical need for new approaches. Several drugs under advanced clinical development are addressed in this review. A systematic literature search was conducted in three electronic databases (Medline, Web of Science, Scopus) and in the ClinicalTrials.gov register from 1 January 2016 to 1 June 2023 to identify Phase II, III and IV clinical trials evaluating drugs for the treatment of PHN. A total of 18 clinical trials were selected evaluating 15 molecules with pharmacological actions on nine different molecular targets: Angiotensin Type 2 Receptor (AT2R) antagonism (olodanrigan), Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) α2δ subunit inhibition (crisugabalin, mirogabalin and pregabalin), Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel (VGSC) blockade (funapide and lidocaine), Cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1) inhibition (TRK-700), Adaptor-Associated Kinase 1 (AAK1) inhibition (LX9211), Lanthionine Synthetase C-Like Protein (LANCL) activation (LAT8881), N-Methyl-D-Aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonism (esketamine), mu opioid receptor agonism (tramadol, oxycodone and hydromorphone) and Nerve Growth Factor (NGF) inhibition (fulranumab). In brief, there are several drugs in advanced clinical development for treating PHN with some of them reporting promising results. AT2R antagonism, AAK1 inhibition, LANCL activation and NGF inhibition are considered first-in-class analgesics. Hopefully, these trials will result in a better clinical management of PHN.
Topics: Humans; Drugs, Investigational; Nerve Growth Factor; Neuralgia, Postherpetic; Pregabalin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37629168
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241612987 -
Journal of Managed Care & Specialty... Dec 2023People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are often prescribed medications associated with adverse effects on bone health. However, it is unclear whether these medications... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are often prescribed medications associated with adverse effects on bone health. However, it is unclear whether these medications incur decreases in areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and higher fracture risk in this population.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the effects of commonly used medications on aBMD and fracture risk among people with MS.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science were searched from their inception until February 5, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials as well as cross-sectional, retrospective, and prospective studies investigating whether glucocorticoids, immunomodulators, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, anxiolytics, opioids, or antipsychotics influenced aBMD or fracture risk in people with MS. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analyses to determine hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs.
RESULTS
We included 22 studies (n = 18,193). Six studies were included in the meta-analyses of glucocorticoid use and aBMD, whereas 2 studies were included in the medication use and fracture risk meta-analyses. No studies assessed the effect of antidepressants, anxiolytics, anticonvulsants, opioids, and antipsychotics on aBMD, and no studies assessed the effect of immunomodulators on fracture risk. Glucocorticoid use was significantly negatively associated with femoral neck aBMD (correlation = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.29 to -0.13]), but not with lumbar spine aBMD (correlation = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.50 to 0.12]). There were no differences in fracture risk between users of glucocorticoids (HR = 1.71 [95% CI = 0.04 to 76.47]), antidepressants (HR = 1.84 [95% CI = 0.09 to 38.49]), or anxiolytics (HR = 2.01 [95% CI = 0.06 to 64.22]), compared with nonusers.
CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence is insufficient to support a relationship between greater fracture risk for people with MS taking glucocorticoid, antidepressant, or anxiolytic medication, compared with nonusers, and it is unclear whether these medications are associated with bone loss in people with MS, beyond that in the general population. Additional high-quality studies with homogenous methodology exploring how medications influence aBMD and fracture risk in people with MS are required.
Topics: Humans; Bone Density; Prospective Studies; Anticonvulsants; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Retrospective Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Glucocorticoids; Multiple Sclerosis; Fractures, Bone; Antidepressive Agents; Immunologic Factors
PubMed: 38058136
DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2023.29.12.1331 -
European Archives of Psychiatry and... Apr 2024Unspecific symptoms of anxiety and distress are frequently encountered in patients in both general practice and acute psychiatric services. Minor tranquillizers may be a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Unspecific symptoms of anxiety and distress are frequently encountered in patients in both general practice and acute psychiatric services. Minor tranquillizers may be a treatment option when non-pharmacological interventions are insufficient or unavailable. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the evidence for short-term (1-4 weeks) pharmacological treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress. We searched the PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and extracted data following a predefined hierarchy of outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). We included 34 randomized trials comprising a total of 7044 patients with adjustment disorders or anxiety spectrum disorders. The network meta-analysis showed that regarding the critical outcome symptoms of anxiety within 1-4 weeks benzodiazepines (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.40), quetiapine (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.90 to - 0.13) and pregabalin (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87 to - 0.28) all performed better than placebo with no statistically significant difference between the drugs. Data on other important outcomes were inconsistently reported. Adverse effects varied, but overall, it was uncertain whether adverse effects differed between interventions. The evidence regarding the risk of dependence was uncertain, but dependence may be a concern in susceptible individuals even with short-term treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was rated as low to very low across outcomes. Despite the limitations in the evidence, the results of this review can inform treatment guidelines, supporting clinicians in the choice of minor tranquillizer in this prevalent and help-seeking, clinically heterogeneous population.
Topics: Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Anti-Anxiety Agents
PubMed: 37624378
DOI: 10.1007/s00406-023-01680-0