-
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Jan 2022To identify drug classes and individual selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with high rates of remission and low risk of adverse events in the treatment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To identify drug classes and individual selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with high rates of remission and low risk of adverse events in the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Embase, Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 17 June 2021.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Randomised controlled trials that included adults aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of panic disorder, compared drugs used to treat the panic disorder, and measured the outcomes of interest, including remissions, dropouts, and adverse events.
METHODS
Risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. Direct meta-analyses were performed using random effects models. A two stage network meta-analysis with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to estimate the comparative efficacy of drug classes and individual SSRIs.
RESULTS
87 studies including a total of 12 800 participants and 12 drug classes were eligible for inclusion. Almost all the studies (86/87) had some concern or were at high risk of bias. Network meta-analysis of remission with consistent results indicated that tricyclic antidepressants, benzodiazepines, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, SSRIs, and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) were associated with significantly higher remission rates than placebo, with risk ratios of 1.39 (95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.54), 1.47 (1.36 to 1.60), 1.30 (1.00 to 1.69), 1.38 (1.26 to 1.50), and 1.27 (1.12 to 1.45), respectively. SUCRAs identified benzodiazepines (84.5%, mean rank=2.4), tricyclic antidepressants (68.7%, 3.8), and SSRIs (66.4%, 4.0) as the top three best treatments for remission. However, tricyclic antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and SSRIs were also significantly associated with increased risk of adverse events compared with placebo, with risk ratios of 1.79 (1.47 to 2.19), 1.76 (1.50 to 2.06), and 1.19 (1.01 to 1.41), respectively. Consistency assumption of adverse events was upheld but could still be present on removal of studies with high percentages of women participants and those with agoraphobia. A SUCRA cluster ranking plot considering both remission and adverse events among all drug classes indicated that SSRIs were associated with high remission and low risk of adverse events. Among individual SSRIs, sertraline and escitalopram provided high remission with an acceptable risk of adverse events.
CONCLUSION
The findings suggest that SSRIs provide high rates of remission with low risk of adverse events for the treatment of panic disorder. Among SSRIs, sertraline and escitalopram were associated with high remission and low risk of adverse events. The findings were, however, based on studies of moderate to very low certainty levels of evidence, mostly as a result of within study bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of the findings reported.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020180638.
Topics: Adult; Agoraphobia; Escitalopram; Female; Humans; Induction Chemotherapy; Male; Network Meta-Analysis; Panic Disorder; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Sertraline; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35045991
DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2021-066084 -
European Journal of Clinical... Dec 2020To investigate the comparative effectiveness of dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase type-B (MAO-B) inhibitors available for treatment of Parkinson's disease. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
To investigate the comparative effectiveness of dopamine agonists and monoamine oxidase type-B (MAO-B) inhibitors available for treatment of Parkinson's disease.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search identifying randomized controlled trials investigating 4 dopamine agonists (cabergoline, pramipexole, ropinirole, rotigotine) and 3 MAO-B inhibitors (selegiline, rasagiline, safinamide) for Parkinson's disease. We extracted and pooled data from included clinical trials in a joint model allowing both direct and indirect comparison of the seven drugs. We considered dopamine agonists and MAO-B inhibitors given as monotherapy or in combination with levodopa. Selected endpoints were change in the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) score, serious adverse events and withdrawals. We estimated the relative effectiveness of each dopamine agonist and MAO-B inhibitor versus comparator drug.
RESULTS
Altogether, 79 publications were included in the analysis. We found all the investigated drugs to be effective compared with placebo when given as monotherapy except safinamide. When considering combination treatment, the estimated relative effects of selegiline, pramipexole, ropinirole, rotigotine, cabergoline, rasagiline and safinamide were 2.316 (1.819, 2.951), 2.091 (1.889, 2.317), 2.037 (1.804, 2.294), 1.912 (1.716, 2.129), 1.664 (1.113, 2.418), 1.584 (1.379, 1.820) and 1.179 (1.031, 1.352), respectively, compared with joint placebo and levodopa treatment.
CONCLUSIONS
Dopamine agonists were found to be effective as treatment for Parkinson's disease, both when given as monotherapy and in combination with levodopa. Selegiline and rasagiline were also found to be effective for treating Parkinson's disease, and selegiline was the best option in combination with levodopa among all the drugs investigated.
Topics: Dopamine Agonists; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Indans; Levodopa; Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors; Parkinson Disease; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selegiline; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32710141
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-020-02961-6 -
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 -
Current Neuropharmacology 2022Despite increasing worldwide incidence of Parkinson's disease, the therapy is still suboptimal due to the diversified clinical manifestations, lack of sufficient...
BACKGROUND
Despite increasing worldwide incidence of Parkinson's disease, the therapy is still suboptimal due to the diversified clinical manifestations, lack of sufficient treatment, the poor adherence in advanced patients, and varied response. Proper intake of medications regarding food and managing drug-food interactions may optimize Parkinson's disease treatment.
OBJECTIVES
We investigated potential effects that food, beverages, and dietary supplements may have on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs used by parkinsonian patients; identified the most probable interactions; and shaped recommendations for the optimal intake of drugs regarding food.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review in adherence to PRISMA guidelines, and included a total of 81 studies in the qualitative synthesis.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION
We found evidence for levodopa positive interaction with coffee, fiber and vitamin C, as well as for the potential beneficial impact of low-fat and protein redistribution diet. Contrastingly, high-protein diet and ferrous sulfate supplements can negatively affect levodopa pharmacokinetics and effectiveness. For other drugs, the data of food impact are scarce. Based on the available limited evidence, all dopamine agonists (bromocriptine, cabergoline, ropinirole), tolcapone, rasagiline, selegiline in tablets, safinamide, amantadine and pimavanserin can be taken with or without a meal. Opicapone and orally disintegrating selegiline tablets should be administered on an empty stomach. Of monoamine oxidase B inhibitors, safinamide is the least susceptible for interaction with the tyramine-rich food, whereas selegiline and rasagiline may lose selectivity to monoamine oxidase B when administered in supratherapeutic doses. The level of presented evidence is low due to the poor studies design, their insufficient actuality, and missing data.
Topics: Antiparkinson Agents; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Levodopa; Monoamine Oxidase; Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors; Parkinson Disease; Selegiline
PubMed: 34784871
DOI: 10.2174/1570159X19666211116142806 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jul 2023Selegiline is an irreversible, selective type-B monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) approved for Parkison's disease-oral and major depressive disorder-transdermal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Selegiline is an irreversible, selective type-B monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) approved for Parkison's disease-oral and major depressive disorder-transdermal formulation) resulting in non-selective MAOI activity at oral doses≥20 mg/day. The present systematic review and meta-analysis appraises the evidence of different formulations/dosages of selegiline across different psychiatric conditions. We inquired PubMed/MEDLINE/Cochrane-Central/WHO-ICTRP/Clarivate-WebOfScience and the Chinese-Electronic-Journal Database from inception to 10/26/2022 for selegiline trials involving psychiatric patients. Random-effects meta-analyses assessed heterogeneity, publication/risk biases, and confidence in the evidence, followed by sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses. Co-primary outcomes were: changes in symptom score (standardized mean difference=SMD) and author-defined response (risk ratios=RRs). RRs of adverse events and all-cause discontinuation were secondary and acceptability outcomes, respectively. Systematic-review included 42 studies; meta-analysis, 23. Selegiline outperformed placebo in depressive symptom reduction (SMD=-0.96, 95%C.I.=-1.78, -0.14, k = 10, n = 1,308), depression (RR=1.61, 95%C.I.=1.20, 2.15, k = 9, n = 1,238) and atypical-depression response (RR=2.23, 95%C.I.=1.35, 3.68, k = 3, n = 136). Selegiline failed to outperform the placebo in negative (k = 4) or positive symptoms of schizophrenia (k = 4), attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms reduction (k = 2), and smoking abstinence rate (k = 4). Selegiline did not differ from methylphenidate and ADHD scores (k = 2). No significant difference emerged in acceptability, incident diarrhea, headache, dizziness, and nausea RRs, in contrast to xerostomia (RR=1.58, 95%C.I. =1.03, 2.43, k = 6, n = 1,134), insomnia (RR=1.61, 95%C.I.=1.19, 2.17, k = 10, n = 1,768), and application-site reaction for transdermal formulation (RR=1.81, 95%C.I.=1.40, 2.33, k = 6, n = 1,662). Confidence in findings was low/very-low for most outcomes; moderate for depressive symptoms reduction (transdermal). Selegiline proved effective, safe, and well-tolerated for depressive disorders, yet further evidence is warranted about specific psychiatric disorders.
Topics: Humans; Selegiline; Depressive Disorder, Major; Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Methylphenidate
PubMed: 37087864
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2023.03.012 -
Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and... Sep 2022Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is multifactorial in Parkinson's disease (PD). Antiparkinsonian medication can contribute to OH, leading to increased risk of falls,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Orthostatic hypotension (OH) is multifactorial in Parkinson's disease (PD). Antiparkinsonian medication can contribute to OH, leading to increased risk of falls, weakness and fatigue.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antiparkinsonian drugs associated with OH as an adverse effect, compared to placebo. We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE and Web of Science databases until November 2020. Analysis used fixed-effects models and the GRADE tool to rate quality of evidence. Meta-analysis was performed if 3 or more studies of a drug group were available.
RESULTS
Twenty-one RCTs including 3783 patients were included comparing 6 PD drug groups to placebo (MAO-B inhibitors, dopamine agonists, levodopa, COMT inhibitors, levodopa and adenosine receptor antagonists). OH was recorded as an adverse event or measurement of vital signs, without further specification on how this was defined or operationalised. Meta-analysis was performed for MAO-B inhibitors and dopamine agonists, as there were 3 or more studies for these drug groups. In this analysis, compared with placebo, neither MAO-B inhibitors or dopamine agonists were associated with increased risk of OH, (OR 2.28 [95% CI:0.81-6.46]), (OR 1.39 [95% CI:0.97-1.98]).
CONCLUSIONS
Most studies did not specifically report OH, or reporting of OH was limited, including how and when it was measured. Furthermore, studies specifically reporting OH included participants that were younger than typical PD populations without multimorbidity. Future trials should address this, for example,, by including individuals over the age of 75, to improve estimations of how antiparkinsonian medications affect risk of OH.
Topics: Antiparkinson Agents; Dopamine Agonists; Humans; Hypotension, Orthostatic; Levodopa; Monoamine Oxidase; Parkinson Disease
PubMed: 34964392
DOI: 10.1177/08919887211060017 -
CNS Drugs Nov 2023In Parkinson's disease, safinamide and zonisamide are novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors with a dual mechanism of action involving the inhibition of sodium and calcium... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
In Parkinson's disease, safinamide and zonisamide are novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors with a dual mechanism of action involving the inhibition of sodium and calcium channels and the subsequent release of glutamate. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy and safety of both drugs compared with placebo on motor symptoms, cognitive function, and quality of life in patients with Parkinson's disease.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, PsycINFO, and trials registries up to March 2023 for randomized controlled trials of adults with Parkinson's disease administered either safinamide or zonisamide and published in English. We excluded single-arm trials or if neither the efficacy nor safety outcomes of interest were reported. Primary outcomes were the change from baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale section III (UPDRS-III) and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes included a change from baseline in OFF-time, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 to evaluate quality of life, and Mini-Mental State Examination for cognitive function assessment. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5.4.1. Random-effect models were used to calculate the pooled mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses by medication, doses, Parkinson's disease stage, and risk of bias were conducted. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Sensitivity analysis was conducted, and publication bias were evaluated. This meta-analysis was not externally funded, and the protocol is available on the Open Science Framework Registration ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/AMNP5 ).
RESULTS
Of 3570 screened citations, 16 trials met inclusion criteria (4314 patients with Parkinson's disease). Ten safinamide trials were conducted in several countries. Six zonisamide trials were included, five of which were conducted in Japan and one in India. UPDRS Part III scores were significantly lower with both monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors than with placebo (MD = - 2.18; 95% CI - 2.88 to - 1.49; I =63%; n = 14 studies). A subgroup analysis showed a significant improvement in UPDRS-III in safinamide (MD = - 2.10; 95% CI - 3.09 to - 1.11; I = 71%; n = 8 studies) and zonisamide (MD = - 2.31; 95% CI - 3.35 to - 1.27; I = 52%; n = 6 studies) compared with placebo. Monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors significantly decreased OFF-time compared with placebo. No significant differences in cognitive function (Mini-Mental State Examination), whereas an improvement in quality of life (Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 scores) was observed. There was no significant difference in incidence rates of serious adverse events among all examined doses of zonisamide and safinamide compared with placebo. Two trials were reported as a high risk of bias and sensitivity analyses confirmed the primary analysis results.
CONCLUSIONS
Evidence suggests that novel monoamine oxidase-B inhibitors not only improve motor symptoms but also enhance patients' quality of life. The meta-analysis showed that both medications have a similar safety profile to placebo with regard to serious adverse events. The overall findings emphasize the effectiveness of safinamide and zonisamide in the treatment of Parkinson's disease as adjunct therapy. Further long-term studies examining the impact of these medications on motor and non-motor symptoms are necessary.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Parkinson Disease; Zonisamide; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Dopamine Agents; Monoamine Oxidase
PubMed: 37973769
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-023-01048-x -
NPJ Parkinson's Disease Jun 2022Non-motor symptoms (NMS) are common among patients with Parkinson's disease and reduce patients' quality of life (QOL). However, there remain considerable unmet needs...
Non-motor symptoms (NMS) are common among patients with Parkinson's disease and reduce patients' quality of life (QOL). However, there remain considerable unmet needs for NMS management. Three monoamine oxidase B inhibitors (MAO-BIs), selegiline, rasagiline, and safinamide, have become commercially available in many countries. Although an increasing number of studies have reported potential beneficial effects of MAO-BIs on QOL and NMS, there has been no consensus. Thus, the primary objective of this study was to provide an up-to-date systematic review of the QOL and NMS outcomes from the available clinical studies of MAO-BIs. We conducted a literature search using the PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases in November 2021. We identified 60 publications relevant to this topic. Overall, rasagiline and safinamide had more published evidence on QOL and NMS changes compared with selegiline. This was likely impacted by selegiline being introduced many years prior to the field embarking on the study of NMS. The impact of MAO-BIs on QOL was inconsistent across studies, and this was unlikely to be clinically meaningful. MAO-BIs may potentially improve depression, sleep disturbances, and pain. In contrast, cognitive and olfactory dysfunctions are likely unresponsive to MAO-BIs. Given the paucity of evidence and controlled, long-term studies, the effects of MAO-BIs on fatigue, autonomic dysfunctions, apathy, and ICD remain unclear. The effects of MAO-BIs on static and fluctuating NMS have never been investigated systematically. More high-quality studies will be needed and should enable clinicians to provide personalized medicine based on a non-motor symptom profile.
PubMed: 35697709
DOI: 10.1038/s41531-022-00339-2 -
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 -
Medicinal Research Reviews Mar 2024Lysine-specific demethylase 1 (LSD1) is a flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) dependent monoamine oxidase (MAO) that erases the mono-, and dimethylation of histone 3... (Review)
Review
Lysine-specific demethylase 1 (LSD1) is a flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) dependent monoamine oxidase (MAO) that erases the mono-, and dimethylation of histone 3 lysine 4 (H3K4), resulting in the suppression of target gene transcriptions. Besides, it can also demethylate some nonhistone substrates to regulate their biological functions. As reported, LSD1 is widely upregulated and plays a key role in several kinds of cancers, pharmacological or genetic ablation of LSD1 in cancer cells suppresses cell aggressiveness by several distinct mechanisms. Therefore, numerous LSD1 inhibitors, including covalent and noncovalent, have been developed and several of them have entered clinical trials. Herein, we systemically reviewed and discussed the biological function of LSD1 in tumors, lymphocytes as well as LSD1-targeting inhibitors in clinical trials, hoping to benefit the field of LSD1 and its inhibitors.
Topics: Humans; Lysine; Histone Demethylases; Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitors; Histones; Neoplasms; Drug Discovery; Enzyme Inhibitors
PubMed: 38014919
DOI: 10.1002/med.22000