-
BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Dec 2023The main purpose was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of different medications used to treat bulimia nervosa (BN). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The main purpose was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of different medications used to treat bulimia nervosa (BN).
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from published sources through searches in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase from inception to November 2022. Primary outcomes were changes in the frequency of binge eating episodes and vomiting episodes from baseline to endpoint. Secondary outcomes were differences in the improvement of scores in depressive symptoms, tolerability (dropout due to adverse events) and weight change.
RESULTS
The literature search ultimately included 11 drugs, 33 studies and 6 types of drugs, 8 trials with TCAs (imipramine, desipramine), 14 with SSRIs (fluoxetine, citalopram and fluvoxamine), 6 with MAOIs (phenelzine, moclobemide and brofaromine), 3 with antiepileptic drugs (topiramate), 1 with mood stabilizers (lithium), and 1 with amphetamine-type appetite suppressant (fenfluramine). The reduction in binge eating episodes was more likely due to these drugs than the placebo, and the SMD was -0.4 (95% CI -0.61 ~ -0.19); the changes in the frequency of vomiting episodes (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI -0.3 ~ -0.03); weight (WMD = -3.05, 95% CI -5.97 ~ -0.13); and depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.32, 95% CI -0.51 ~ -0.13). However, no significant difference was found in dropout due to adverse events (RR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.14 ~ 2.41).
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis indicates that most pharmacotherapies decreased the frequency of binge-eating and vomiting episodes, body weight, and depressive symptoms in BN patients, but the efficacy was not significant. In each drug the efficacy is different, treating different aspects, different symptoms to improve the clinical performance of bulimia nervosa.
Topics: Humans; Bulimia Nervosa; Bulimia; Fluoxetine; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Vomiting
PubMed: 38042827
DOI: 10.1186/s40360-023-00713-7 -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Dec 2023This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine,...
PURPOSE
This systematic review updates the MASCC/ESMO recommendations for high-emetic-risk chemotherapy (HEC) published in 2016-2017. HEC still includes cisplatin, carmustine, dacarbazine, mechlorethamine, streptozocin, and cyclophosphamide in doses of > 1500 mg/m and the combination of cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline (AC) in women with breast cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review report following the PRISMA guidelines of the literature from January 1, 2015, until February 1, 2023, was performed. PubMed (Ovid), Scopus (Google), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched. The literature search was limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.
RESULTS
Forty-six new references were determined to be relevant. The main topics identified were (1) steroid-sparing regimens, (2) olanzapine-containing regimens, and (3) other issues such as comparisons of antiemetics of the same drug class, intravenous NK receptor antagonists, and potentially new antiemetics. Five updated recommendations are presented.
CONCLUSION
There is no need to prescribe steroids (dexamethasone) beyond day 1 after AC HEC, whereas a 4-day regimen is recommended in non-AC HEC. Olanzapine is now recommended as a fixed part of a four-drug prophylactic antiemetic regimen in both non-AC and AC HEC. No major differences between 5-HT receptor antagonists or between NK receptor antagonists were identified. No new antiemetic agents qualified for inclusion in the updated recommendations.
Topics: Female; Humans; Emetics; Antiemetics; Consensus; Olanzapine; Nausea; Vomiting; Antineoplastic Agents; Cyclophosphamide; Anthracyclines
PubMed: 38127246
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-023-08221-4 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Dec 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Child; Humans; Pediatric Anesthesia; Ketamine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37684126
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.08.073 -
Ayahuasca and Dimethyltryptamine Adverse Events and Toxicity Analysis: A Systematic Thematic Review.International Journal of Toxicology 2024The objective of this paper is to conduct a systematic thematic review of adverse events, safety, and toxicity of traditional ayahuasca plant preparations and its main... (Review)
Review
The objective of this paper is to conduct a systematic thematic review of adverse events, safety, and toxicity of traditional ayahuasca plant preparations and its main psychoactive alkaloids (dimethyltryptamine [DMT], harmine, harmaline, and tetrahydroharmine), including discussing clinical considerations (within clinical trials or approved settings). A systematic literature search of preclinical, clinical, epidemiological, and pharmacovigilance data (as well as pertinent reviews and case studies) was conducted for articles using the electronic databases of PubMed and Web of Science (to 6 July 2023) and PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Embase (to 21 September 2022) and included articles in English in peer-reviewed journals. Additionally, reference lists were searched. Due to the breadth of the area covered, we presented the relevant data in a thematic format. Our searches revealed 78 relevant articles. Data showed that ayahuasca or DMT is generally safe; however, some adverse human events have been reported. Animal models using higher doses of ayahuasca have shown abortifacient and teratogenic effects. Isolated harmala alkaloid studies have also revealed evidence of potential toxicity at higher doses, which may increase with co-administration with certain medications. Harmaline revealed the most issues in preclinical models. Nevertheless, animal models involving higher-dose synthetic isolates may not necessarily be able to be extrapolated to human use of therapeutic doses of plant-based extracts. Serious adverse effects are rarely reported within healthy populations, indicating an acceptable safety profile for the traditional use of ayahuasca and DMT in controlled settings. Further randomized, controlled trials with judicious blinding, larger samples, and longer duration are needed.
Topics: Banisteriopsis; Humans; N,N-Dimethyltryptamine; Animals; Plant Extracts; Harmine; Harmaline
PubMed: 38363085
DOI: 10.1177/10915818241230916 -
Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria (Sao... 2023To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To determine the prevalence and correlates of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, an electronic search was performed in PubMed and Embase through May 17, 2022. All study designs that assessed a minimum of 20 schizophrenia-spectrum patients and provided data on TRS prevalence or allowed its calculation were included. Estimates were produced using a random-effects model meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The TRS prevalence across 50 studies (n = 29,390) was 36.7% (95%CI 33.1-40.5, p < 0.0001). The prevalence ranged from 22% (95%CI 18.4-25.8) in first-episode to 39.5% (95%CI 32.2-47.0) in multiple-episode samples (Q = 18.27, p < 0.0001). Primary treatment resistance, defined as no response from the first episode, was 23.6% (95%CI 20.5-26.8) vs. 9.3% (95%CI 6.8-12.2) for later-onset/secondary (≥ 6 months after initial treatment response). Longer illness duration and recruitment from long-term hospitals or clozapine clinics were associated with higher prevalence estimates. In meta-regression analyses, older age and poor functioning predicted greater TRS. When including only studies with lower bias risk, the TRS prevalence was 28.4%.
CONCLUSION
Different study designs and recruitment strategies accounted for most of the observed heterogeneity in TRS prevalence rates. The results point to early-onset and later-onset TRS as two separate disease pathways requiring clinical attention.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Clozapine; Prevalence; Schizophrenia; Drug Resistance
PubMed: 37718484
DOI: 10.47626/1516-4446-2023-3126 -
JAMA Psychiatry May 2024Cognitive impairment contributes significantly to clinical outcome and level of function in individuals with psychotic disorders. These impairments are present already... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Cognitive impairment contributes significantly to clinical outcome and level of function in individuals with psychotic disorders. These impairments are present already at psychosis onset at a group level; however, the question of heterogeneity in cognitive function among patients has not been systematically investigated.
OBJECTIVE
To provide an updated quantification of cognitive impairment at psychosis onset before patients receive potentially confounding antipsychotic treatment, and to investigate variability in cognitive function compared with healthy controls.
DATA SOURCES
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed articles were searched up to September 15, 2022.
STUDY SELECTION
Original studies reporting data on cognitive function in antipsychotic drug-naive patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP) were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Data were independently extracted by 2 researchers. Cognitive tasks were clustered according to 6 domains of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Consensus Cognitive Battery and the domain of executive function. Random-effects model meta-analyses of mean differences and coefficient of variation ratios (CVRs) were performed, as well as meta-regressions, assessment of study quality, and publication bias.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The main outcome measure was Hedges g for mean differences in cognition and CVR for within-group variability.
RESULTS
Fifty studies were included in the analysis with a total of 2625 individuals with FEP (mean [SD] age, 25.2 [3.6] years, 60% male; 40% female) and 2917 healthy controls (mean [SD] age, 26.0 [4.6]; 55% male; 45% female). In all cognitive domains, the FEP group displayed significant impairment compared with controls (speed of processing: Hedges g = -1.16; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.98; verbal learning: Hedges g = -1.08; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.88; visual learning: Hedges g = -1.05; 95% CI, -1.27 to -0.82; working memory: Hedges g = -1.04; 95% CI, -1.35 to -0.73; attention: Hedges g = -1.03; 95% CI, -1.24 to -0.82; reasoning/problem solving: Hedges g = -0.90; 95% CI, -1.12 to -0.68; executive function: Hedges g = -0.88; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.69). Individuals with FEP also exhibited a larger variability across all domains (CVR range, 1.34-1.92).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis identified cognitive impairment in FEP before the initiation of antipsychotic treatment, with large effect sizes. The high variability within the FEP group suggests the need to identify those individuals with more severe cognitive problems who risk worse outcomes and could benefit the most from cognitive remediation.
Topics: Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Cognitive Dysfunction; Executive Function; Cognition; Antipsychotic Agents; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 38416480
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2024.0016 -
BMJ Open Jan 2024Literature surrounding the association between antidepressant use during pregnancy and miscarriage is conflicting. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Literature surrounding the association between antidepressant use during pregnancy and miscarriage is conflicting. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies among pregnant women regarding the association between exposure to antidepressants during pregnancy and the risk of miscarriage, compared with pregnant women not exposed to antidepressants.
DESIGN
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomised studies.
DATA SOURCES
We searched Medline, Embase and PsychINFO up to 6 August 2023.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA AND OUTCOMES
Case-control, cohort and cross-sectional study designs were selected if they compared individuals exposed to any antidepressant class during pregnancy to comparator groups of either no antidepressant use or an alternate antidepressant.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Effect estimates were extracted from selected studies and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-Randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, and heterogeneity assessed using the I statistic. Subgroup analyses were used to explore antidepressant classes and the impact of confounding by indication.
RESULTS
1800 records were identified from the search, of which 29 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The total sample included 5 671 135 individuals. Antidepressant users initially appeared to have a higher risk of miscarriage compared with unexposed individuals from the general population (summary effect estimate: 1.24, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.31, I=69.2%; number of studies (n)=29). However, the summary estimate decreased when comparing against unexposed individuals with maternal depression (1.16, 1.04 to 1.31; I=58.6%; n=6), suggesting confounding by indication may be driving the association. 22 studies suffered from serious RoB, and only two of the 29 studies were deemed at moderate RoB.
CONCLUSIONS
After accounting for maternal depression, there is little evidence of any association between antidepressant use during pregnancy and miscarriage. Instead, the results indicate the biasing impact of confounding by indication.
Topics: Humans; Female; Pregnancy; Abortion, Spontaneous; Cross-Sectional Studies; Antidepressive Agents
PubMed: 38272551
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074600 -
Medicine Sep 2023Atypical antipsychotic (AAP) augmentation is an alternative strategy for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had an inadequate response to antidepressant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Comparative efficacy and safety of 4 atypical antipsychotics augmentation treatment for major depressive disorder in adults: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Atypical antipsychotic (AAP) augmentation is an alternative strategy for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had an inadequate response to antidepressant therapy (ADT). We aimed to compare and rank the efficacy and safety of 4 AAPs in the adjuvant treatment of MDD.
METHODS
We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published and unpublished from the date of databases and clinical trial websites inception to April 30, 2023. The evidence risk of bias (RoB) and certainty are assessed using the Cochrane bias risk tool and grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) framework, respectively. Using network meta-analysis, we estimated summary risk ratios (RRs) or standardized mean difference (SMD) based on the random effects model.
RESULTS
56 eligible studies comprising 11448 participants were included. In terms of primary efficacy outcome, compared with placebo (PBO), all AAPs had significant efficacy (SMD = -0.40; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.12 for quetiapine (QTP); -0.35, -0.59 to -0.11 for olanzapine (OLA); -0.28, -0.47 to -0.09 for aripiprazole (ARI) and -0.25, -0.42 to -0.07 for brexpiprazole (BRE), respectively). In terms of acceptability, no significant difference was found, either agents versus agents or agents versus PBO. In terms of tolerability, compared with the PBO, QTP (RR = 0.24; 95% CI,0.11-0.53), OLA (0.30,0.10-0.55), ARI (0.39,0.22-0.69), and BRE (0.37,0.18-0.75) were significantly less well tolerated. 8 (14.2%) of 56 trials were assessed as low RoB, 38 (67.9%) trials had moderate RoB, and 10 (17.9%) had high RoB; By the GRADE, the certainty of most evidence was low or very low.
CONCLUSION
Adjuvant AAPs had significant efficacy compared with PBO, but treatment decisions must be made to balance the risks and benefits.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Depressive Disorder, Major; Antipsychotic Agents; Network Meta-Analysis; Quetiapine Fumarate; Aripiprazole; Olanzapine; Adjuvants, Immunologic; Adjuvants, Pharmaceutic
PubMed: 37746943
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000034670 -
Addiction (Abingdon, England) Dec 2023Many countries have recently legalized medicinal and recreational cannabis. With increasing use and access come the potential for harms. We aimed to examine the effect... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Many countries have recently legalized medicinal and recreational cannabis. With increasing use and access come the potential for harms. We aimed to examine the effect of cannabis legalization/decriminalization on acute poisoning.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022323437). We searched Embase, Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to March 2022. No restrictions on language, age or geography were applied. Abstracts from three main clinical toxicology conferences were hand-searched. Included studies had to report on poisonings before and after changes in cannabis legislation, including legalization and decriminalization of medicinal and recreational cannabis. Where possible, relative risk (RR) of poisoning after legalization (versus before) was calculated and pooled. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-I.
RESULTS
Of the 1065 articles retrieved, 30 met inclusion criteria (including 10 conference abstracts). Studies used data from the United States, Canada and Thailand. Studies examined legalization of medicinal cannabis (n = 14) and decriminalization or legalization of recreational cannabis (n = 21). Common data sources included poisons centre records (n = 18) and hospital presentations/admissions (n = 15, individual studies could report multiple intervention types and multiple data sources). Most studies (n = 19) investigated paediatric poisoning. Most (n = 24) reported an increase in poisonings; however, the magnitude varied greatly. Twenty studies were included in quantitative analysis, with RRs ranging from 0.81 to 29.00. Our pooled estimate indicated an increase in poisoning after legalization [RR = 3.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.43-5.20], which was greater in studies that focused on paediatric patients (RR = 4.31, 95% CI = 2.30-8.07).
CONCLUSIONS
Most studies on the effect of medicinal or recreational cannabis legalization/decriminalization on acute poisoning reported a rise in cannabis poisoning after legalization/decriminalization. Most evidence is from US legalization, despite legalization and decriminalization in many countries.
Topics: Humans; United States; Child; Cannabis; Medical Marijuana; Legislation, Drug; Hallucinogens; Canada
PubMed: 37496145
DOI: 10.1111/add.16280 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Aug 2023The present systematic review was aimed at critically summarizing the evidence about treatment-emergent manic/hypomanic and depressive switches during the course of... (Review)
Review
A systematic review of manic/hypomanic and depressive switches in patients with bipolar disorder in naturalistic settings: The role of antidepressant and antipsychotic drugs.
The present systematic review was aimed at critically summarizing the evidence about treatment-emergent manic/hypomanic and depressive switches during the course of bipolar disorder (BD). A systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycInfo electronic databases was conducted until March 24th, 2021, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Observational studies clearly reporting data regarding the prevalence of treatment-emergent mood switches in patients with BD were considered for inclusion. Thirty-two original studies met the inclusion criteria. In the majority of cases, manic switches were analyzed; only 3 papers investigated depressive switches in type I BD. Treatment-emergent mania/hypomania in BD subjects ranged from 17.3% to 48.8% and was more frequent with antidepressant monotherapy compared to combination treatment with mood stabilizers, especially lithium, or second-generation antipsychotics. A higher likelihood of mood switch has been reported with tricyclics and a lower rate with bupropion. Depressive switches were detected in 5-16% of type I BD subjects and were associated with first-generation antipsychotic use, the concomitant use of first- and second-generation antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines. The included studies presented considerable methodological heterogeneity, small sample sizes and comparability flaws. In conclusion, many studies, although heterogeneous and partly discordant, have been conducted on manic/hypomanic switches, whereas depressive switches during treatment with antipsychotics are poorly investigated. In BD subjects, both antidepressant and antipsychotic medications seems to play a role in the occurrence of mood switches, although the effects of different pharmacological compounds have yet to be fully investigated.
Topics: Humans; Bipolar Disorder; Antipsychotic Agents; Mania; Antidepressive Agents; Lithium
PubMed: 37119556
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2023.04.013