-
Heliyon Apr 2024Buspirone, a 5-hydroxytryptamine 1A (5-HT1A) receptor agonist, has been investigated for its use in various diseases. However, knowledge about its side effects and...
Buspirone, a 5-hydroxytryptamine 1A (5-HT1A) receptor agonist, has been investigated for its use in various diseases. However, knowledge about its side effects and potential cognitive benefits in different conditions is limited. Cognitive impairment is also a prevalent symptom in many diseases, yet effective treatments are still lacking. Therefore, to explore the potential side effects of buspirone and the possible cognitive benefits of buspirone, we conducted a comprehensive search of several databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Review, Cochrane Trial, and ClinicalTrials.gov, to identify eligible randomized clinical trials. Our primary outcome measures included both side effects (adverse events) and cognitive benefits. For continuous variables, we utilized effect size with a 95% confidence interval (CI), whereas for dichotomous variables, we used odds ratios (OR) with a 95% CI. In total, 16 studies were included in this analysis, with 13 studies reporting on buspirone's side effects and 4 studies focusing on cognitive tasks. In terms of side effects, buspirone exhibited a higher rate of dizziness (OR = 4.66, 95% CI: 2.07-10.47), constipation (OR = 4.11, 95% CI: 1.34-12.55), and gastric distress (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: 1.03-3.78) than the placebo group. Regarding cognitive functions, buspirone showed significant benefits (g = 0.20, 95% CI: 0.06-0.34) while the placebo did not. Subgroup analysis indicated superior performance in visual learning and memory (g = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.21-0.78), logical reasoning (g = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.14-0.71), and attention (g = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.13-0.61) when compared to placebo. Our findings indicated that participants in the buspirone group experienced side effects of dizziness, constipation, and gastric distress in different diseases. Despite these adverse events, however, buspirone demonstrated significant cognitive benefits, particularly in the domains of visual learning and memory, logical reasoning, and attention.
PubMed: 38601569
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28918 -
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews Feb 2024People living with dementia commonly experience anxiety, which is often challenging to manage. We investigated the effectiveness of treatments for the management of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Clinical effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for the management of anxiety in community dwelling people living with dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
People living with dementia commonly experience anxiety, which is often challenging to manage. We investigated the effectiveness of treatments for the management of anxiety in this population. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials, and searched EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE and PsycInfo. We estimated standardised mean differences at follow-up between treatments relative to control groups and pooled these across studies using random-effects models where feasible. Thirty-one studies were identified. Meta-analysis demonstrated non-pharmacological interventions were effective in reducing anxiety in people living with dementia, compared to care as usual or active controls. Specifically, music therapy (SMD-1.92(CI:-2.58,-1.25)), muscular approaches (SMD-0.65(CI:-1.02,-0.28)) and stimulating cognitive and physical activities (SMD-0.31(CI:-0.53,-0.09)). Pharmacological interventions with evidence of potential effectiveness included Ginkgo biloba, probiotics, olanzapine, loxapine and citalopram compared to placebo, olanzapine compared to bromazepam and buspirone and risperidone compared to haloperidol. Meta-analyses were not performed for pharmacological interventions due to studies' heterogeneity. This has practice implications when promoting the use of more non-pharmacological interventions to help reduce anxiety among people living with dementia.
Topics: Humans; Independent Living; Olanzapine; Anxiety; Treatment Outcome; Dementia
PubMed: 38097097
DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105507 -
Psychopharmacology Nov 2023Fear conditioning is an important aspect in the pathophysiology of anxiety disorders. The fear-potentiated startle test is based on classical fear conditioning and over... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES
Fear conditioning is an important aspect in the pathophysiology of anxiety disorders. The fear-potentiated startle test is based on classical fear conditioning and over the years, a broad range of drugs have been tested in this test. Synthesis of the available data may further our understanding of the neurotransmitter systems that are involved in the expression of conditioned fear.
METHODS
Following a comprehensive search in Medline and Embase, we included 68 research articles that reported on 103 drugs, covering 56 different drug classes. The systematic review was limited to studies using acute, systemic drug administration in naive animals.
RESULTS
Qualitative data synthesis showed that most clinically active anxiolytics, but not serotonin-reuptake inhibitors, reduced cued fear. Anxiogenic drugs increased fear potentiation in 35% of the experiments, reduced fear potentiation in 29% of the experiments, and were without effect in 29% of the experiments. Meta-analyses could be performed for five drug classes and showed that benzodiazepines, buspirone, 5-HT agonists, 5-HT antagonists, and mGluR2,3 agonists reduced cued conditioned fear. The non-cued baseline startle response, which may reflect contextual anxiety, was only significantly reduced by benzodiazepines and 5-HT antagonists. No associations were found between drug effects and methodological characteristics, except for strain.
CONCLUSIONS
The fear-potentiated startle test appears to have moderate to high predictive validity and may serve as a valuable tool for the development of novel anxiolytics. Given the limited available data, the generally low study quality and high heterogeneity additional studies are warranted to corroborate the findings of this review.
Topics: Animals; Anti-Anxiety Agents; Serotonin; Fear; Anxiety; Benzodiazepines; Reflex, Startle
PubMed: 36651922
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-022-06307-1 -
Schizophrenia Research. Cognition Dec 2023In a previous meta-analysis, the use of serotonin(5-HT) receptor partial agonists of the azapirone class as an add-on therapy was associated with beneficial effects on...
BACKGROUND
In a previous meta-analysis, the use of serotonin(5-HT) receptor partial agonists of the azapirone class as an add-on therapy was associated with beneficial effects on positive symptoms and attention/processing speed in schizophrenia patients. This meta-analysis builds on that study by examining the effects of adjunctive treatment with 5-HT partial agonists in improving other domains of neurocognitive function in schizophrenia patients.
METHODS
A literature search was performed from 1987 to May 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials. The standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) was calculated when there were two or more studies. Four studies, involving 313 patients, met the inclusion criteria and were used in the analysis.
RESULTS
5-HT partial agonists (buspirone or tandospirone) did not have a significant effect on verbal learning (SMD = 0.08, 95 % CI = -0.31 to 0.47) or working memory (SMD = 0.15, 95 % CI = -0.09 to 0.39). Regarding executive functions (Wisconsin Card Sorting Test), positive but non-significant results were seen with the category number (SMD = 0.26, 95 % CI = -0.81 to 1.32), while non-significant effects were noted for percent preservation errors (SMD = -0.10, 95 % CI = -0.53 to 0.33).
CONCLUSIONS
The absence of any significant benefits in the cognitive domains studied here may have been due to the variance in the concomitant medication (typical vs atypical antipsychotic drugs), the level of cognition at baseline, or other factors. Further studies with various types of 5-HT agonists are warranted to examine the potential cognitive efficacy of stimulating these receptors.
PubMed: 37732133
DOI: 10.1016/j.scog.2023.100290