-
Sleep Medicine Clinics Sep 2019Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) is characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness despite normal or prolonged sleep. IH is distinguished from narcolepsy by the female... (Review)
Review
Idiopathic hypersomnia (IH) is characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness despite normal or prolonged sleep. IH is distinguished from narcolepsy by the female predominance, severe morning inertia, continuous drowsiness (rather than sleep attacks), unrefreshing naps, absence of cataplexy, sleep onset in REM periods, and hypocretin deficiency. In IH, the multiple sleep latency test demonstrates low sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility, compared with prolonged sleep monitoring. In some IH cases, an endogenous hypnotic peptide stimulating GABA receptors during wakefulness is suspected, which are improved by anti-GABA drugs. The benefits of modafinil, sodium oxybate, mazindol, and pitolisant were found in mostly retrospective studies.
Topics: Central Nervous System Stimulants; Clarithromycin; Flumazenil; GABA Modulators; Humans; Idiopathic Hypersomnia; Mazindol; Modafinil; Orexins; Piperidines; Polysomnography; Precision Medicine; Sleep; Sodium Oxybate; Wakefulness; Wakefulness-Promoting Agents
PubMed: 31375202
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsmc.2019.05.007 -
Acta Pharmaceutica (Zagreb, Croatia) Jun 2021The current study investigates the anorectic interaction and safety of the mazindol-metformin combination in rats. Isobologram and interaction index were used to... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study
The current study investigates the anorectic interaction and safety of the mazindol-metformin combination in rats. Isobologram and interaction index were used to determine anorectic interaction between mazindol and metformin in the sweetened milk model. The safety profile of the mazindol-metformin combination was determined by measuring anxiety, blood pressure, hematic biometry and blood chemistry. An acute dose of mazindol and metformin administered per os, individually or as a mixture, has reduced the milk consumption in rats in a dose-dependent manner. Theoretical effective dose 40 (ED40t) did not differ from the experimental effective dose 40 (ED40e) obtained with the mazindol-metformin mixture in the anorexia experiments, by Student's t-test. In addition, the interaction index confirmed the additive anorectic effect between both drugs. A single oral dose of ED40e mazindol-metformin mixture induced anxiolysis in the elevated plus-maze test. Moreover, oral administration of mazindol-metformin combination for 3 months significantly decreased glycemia, but not blood pressure nor other parameters of hematic biometry and blood chemistry. Results suggest that mazindol-metformin combination exerts an additive anorectic effect, as well as anxiolytic and hypoglycemic properties. Mazindol-metformin combination might be useful in obese patients with anxiety disorders or diabetes risk factors.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Animals; Appetite Depressants; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Therapy, Combination; Hypoglycemic Agents; Male; Maze Learning; Mazindol; Metformin; Rats; Rats, Wistar
PubMed: 33151165
DOI: 10.2478/acph-2021-0019 -
CNS Drugs Dec 2019This article provides an overview of the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for agents prescribed for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).... (Review)
Review
This article provides an overview of the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for agents prescribed for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Polypharmacy in the treatment of patients with ADHD leads to high exposures to DDIs and possibly adverse safety outcomes. We performed a systematic search of DDI reports for ADHD agents in Embase and Medline. We also searched for agents in the pharmacological pipeline, which include (1) mazindol, molindone and viloxazine, which were previously prescribed for other indications; (2) centanafadine and AR-08, never before approved; and (3) two extracts (Polygala tenuifolia extract and the French maritime pine bark extracts). The identified literature included case reports, cross-sectional, cross-over and placebo-controlled studies of patient cohorts and healthy volunteers. The DDIs were classified as follows: ADHD agents acting as perpetrators, i.e., affecting the clearance of co-prescribed agents (victim drugs), or ADHD agents being the victim drugs, being affected by other agents. Ratios for changes in pharmacokinetic parameters before and after the DDI were used as a rough estimate of the extent of the DDI. Alcohol may increase plasma dextroamphetamine concentrations by presystemic effects. Until studies are done to orient clinicians regarding dosing changes, clinicians need to be aware of the potential for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 inhibitors to increase amphetamine levels, which is equivalent to increasing dosages. Atomoxetine is a wide therapeutic window drug. The CYP2D6 poor metabolizers who do not have CYP2D6 activity had better atomoxetine response, but also an increased risk of adverse effects. CYP2D6 inhibitors have been used to increase atomoxetine response in CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers. Guanfacine is mainly metabolized by CYP3A4, which can be induced and inhibited. The package insert recommends that in guanfacine-treated patients, after adding potent CYP3A4 inducers, the guanfacine dose should be doubled; after adding potent CYP3A4 inhibitors the guanfacine dose should be halved. Based on a phenobarbital case report and our experience with CYP3A4-metabolized antipsychotics, these correction factors may be too low. According to two case reports, carbamazepine is a clinically relevant inducer of methylphenidate (MPH). A case series study suggested that MPH may be associated with important elevations in imipramine concentrations. Due to the absence of or limitations in the data, no comments for clinicians can be provided on the pharmacokinetic DDIs for clonidine, centanafadine, mazindol, molindone, AR-08, P. tenuifolia extract and the French maritime pine bark extracts. According to currently available data, clinicians should not expect that ADHD drugs modify each other's serum concentrations. A summary table for clinicians provides our current recommendations on pharmacokinetic DDIs of ADHD agents based on our literature review and the package inserts; whenever it was possible, we provide information on serum concentrations and dose correction factors. There will be a need to periodically update these recommendations and these correction factors as new knowledge becomes available.
Topics: Animals; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cross-Sectional Studies; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Drug Interactions; Humans
PubMed: 31776871
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-019-00683-7 -
International Journal of Clinical... Aug 2022Obesity is the strongest risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to explore 7% weight reduction rates of mazindol alone or combined with metformin in... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVE
Obesity is the strongest risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aimed to explore 7% weight reduction rates of mazindol alone or combined with metformin in non-diabetic obese Mexican subjects who had additional risk factors for T2D.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
In this randomized double-blind study, 137 participants received 1 mg mazindol (n = 65) alone or combined with 500 mg metformin (n = 72), twice a day, for 6 months.
RESULTS
Mazindol and mazindol-metformin were similarly effective. However, when subjects were subclassified into non-diabetics and prediabetics, according to glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) - < 5.7% and 5.7 - 6.4%, respectively - and/or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) - < 100 mg/dL and 100 - 125 mg/dL, respectively -, differences were evident. Prediabetics in the mazindol-metformin group had a higher rate of 7% weight reduction (78.4%, n = 37) compared to prediabetics treated with mazindol (48.3%, n = 29). Furthermore, mazindol-metformin treatment induced significant reductions in fasting plasma insulin, HOMA-IR, and HbA1c in prediabetics compared to mazindol. No differences were found in any parameter between non-diabetics treated with mazindol (n = 36) and mazindol-metformin (n = 35).
CONCLUSION
Our results highlight the effectiveness of mazindol-metformin to achieve higher rates of 7% weight reduction and to improve the glycemic profile in prediabetic obese subjects, which could be useful to prevent or delay T2D in these subjects.
Topics: Blood Glucose; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Double-Blind Method; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Mazindol; Metformin; Obesity; Prediabetic State; Weight Loss
PubMed: 35770520
DOI: 10.5414/CP204180 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2019Fluoxetine is a serotonin reuptake inhibitor indicated for major depression. It is also thought to affect weight control: this seems to happen through appetite changes... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Fluoxetine is a serotonin reuptake inhibitor indicated for major depression. It is also thought to affect weight control: this seems to happen through appetite changes resulting in decreased food intake and normalisation of unusual eating behaviours. However, the benefit-risk ratio of this off-label medication is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of fluoxetine for overweight or obese adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, the ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization (WHO) ICTRP Search Portal. The last date of the search was December 2018 for all databases, to which we applied no language restrictions .
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the administration of fluoxetine versus placebo, other anti-obesity agents, non-pharmacological therapy or no treatment in overweight or obese adults without depression, mental illness or abnormal eating patterns.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened abstracts and titles for relevance. Screening for inclusion, data extraction and risk of bias assessment was performed by one author and checked by the second. We assessed trials for the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. For additional information we contacted trial authors by email. We performed random-effects meta-analyses and calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for dichotomous outcomes and the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 1036 records, scrutinized 52 full-text articles and included 19 completed RCTs (one trial is awaiting assessment). A total of 2216 participants entered the trials, 1280 participants were randomly assigned to fluoxetine (60 mg/d, 40 mg/d, 20 mg/d and 10 mg/d) and 936 participants were randomly assigned to various comparison groups (placebo; the anti-obesity agents diethylpropion, fenproporex, mazindol, sibutramine, metformin, fenfluramine, dexfenfluramine, fluvoxamine, 5-hydroxy-tryptophan; no treatment; and omega-3 gel). Within the 19 RCTs there were 56 trial arms. Fifteen trials were parallel RCTs and four were cross-over RCTs. The participants in the included trials were followed up for periods between three weeks and one year. The certainty of the evidence was low or very low: the majority of trials had a high risk of bias in one or more of the risk of bias domains.For our main comparison group - fluoxetine versus placebo - and across all fluoxetine dosages and durations of treatment, the MD was -2.7 kg (95% CI -4 to -1.4; P < 0.001; 10 trials, 956 participants; low-certainty evidence). The 95% prediction interval ranged between -7.1 kg and 1.7 kg. The MD in body mass index (BMI) reduction across all fluoxetine dosages compared with placebo was -1.1 kg/m² (95% CI -3.7 to 1.4; 3 trials, 97 participants; very low certainty evidence). Only nine placebo-controlled trials reported adverse events. A total of 399 out of 627 participants (63.6%) receiving fluoxetine compared with 352 out of 626 participants (56.2%) receiving placebo experienced an adverse event. Random-effects meta-analysis showed an increase in the risk of having at least one adverse event of any type in the fluoxetine groups compared with placebo (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.42; P = 0.07; 9 trials, 1253 participants; low-certainty evidence). The 95% prediction interval ranged between 0.74 and 1.88. Following fluoxetine treatment the adverse events of dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, insomnia and nausea were observed approximately twice as often compared to placebo. A total of 15 out of 197 participants (7.6%) receiving fluoxetine compared with 12 out of 196 participants (6.1%) receiving placebo experienced depression. The RR across all fluoxetine doses compared with placebo was 1.20 (95% CI 0.57 to 2.52; P = 0.62; 3 trials, 393 participants; very low certainty evidence). All-cause mortality, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects were not reported.The comparisons of fluoxetine with other anti-obesity agents (3 trials, 234 participants), omega-3 gel (1 trial, 48 participants) and no treatment (1 trial, 60 participants) showed inconclusive results (very low certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-certainty evidence suggests that off-label fluoxetine may decrease weight compared with placebo. However, low-certainty evidence suggests an increase in the risk for dizziness, drowsiness, fatigue, insomnia and nausea following fluoxetine treatment.
PubMed: 31613390
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011688.pub2 -
Journal of Analytical Toxicology May 2022Considering that the use of psychoactive substances (PSs) is a risk factor to either higher intensity or frequency of suicidal behavior, hair analysis was conducted to...
Considering that the use of psychoactive substances (PSs) is a risk factor to either higher intensity or frequency of suicidal behavior, hair analysis was conducted to investigate the most consumed PSs (opiates, amphetamine stimulants, marijuana, cocaine and heroin) in patients who attempted suicide and received urgent care at emergency service. Hair samples were extracted using methanol and sonicated under heating and then analyzed using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. During validation, the method complied with international recommended criteria, with limits of detection between 0.0025 and 0.05 ng/mg and linearity between 0.1 and 4 ng/mg for methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), morphine, amphetamine, 6-acetylmorphine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), fenproporex, diethylpropion and codeine; between 0.025 and 1 ng/mg for tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), benzoylecgonine and cocaethylene and between 0.25 and 10 ng/mg for cocaine and mazindol. A total of 109 hair samples were analyzed and segmented in 404 parts. Among all analyzed samples, 30.3% were positive for at least one PS (n = 33), such as cocaine (90.9%), codeine (12.1%), morphine (3.0%), MDMA (3.0%) and THC (3.0%). In segmental analysis of cocaine positive samples (n = 30), 76.7% of the samples indicated recent exposure to cocaine (<1 month). This same behavior was observed when analyzing codeine (n = 4) and morphine (n = 1). THC positive samples indicated exposure dated ∼4 months prior. In conclusion, the method was validated following international recommendations for the 12 most consumed PSs in Brazil, as well as two of the most common found metabolites.
Topics: Amphetamines; Chromatography, Liquid; Cocaine; Codeine; Dronabinol; Hair; Humans; Morphine; Morphine Derivatives; N-Methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine; Substance Abuse Detection; Suicide, Attempted; Tandem Mass Spectrometry
PubMed: 34050658
DOI: 10.1093/jat/bkab058 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2022The weight loss response to anti-obesity drugs is highly variable and poorly understood, which does not allow us to know, in advance, in which subjects the drug will be...
The weight loss response to anti-obesity drugs is highly variable and poorly understood, which does not allow us to know, in advance, in which subjects the drug will be effective and in which it will not. The objective of this study was to explore the body weight reduction in kilograms in the first month (1mo-BWRkg) and the development of tolerance as predictors of 6-month efficacy for treatment with 1 mg mazindol twice a day. One hundred ninety-six obese subjects were individually or jointly analyzed. Approximately 60% of subjects developed tolerance to mazindol and achieved increasing proportional levels of 6-month efficacy according to 1mo-BWRkg intervals (<1 kg, 1 to <2 kg, 2 to <4 kg and ≥4 kg). Both moT and 1mo-BWRkg were significantly correlated with the mean percentage body weight reduction (BWR%) after 6-months of treatment. The qualitative analysis of both predictors on the progressive efficacy of mazindol was used to classify patients according to expected efficacy (inefficient, slightly effective, partially effective, or fully effective), based on the mean percentage efficacy and the number of subjects reaching a BWR% of <5%, 5 to <10%, 10 to <15% or ≥15%. In conclusion, combined 1mo-BWRkg and moT were early predictors for the progressive efficacy of 6-month mazindol anti-obesity therapy. This finding represents progress in predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine which could serve for estimating the expectations of individual efficacy with the use of the drug. and highlights the basic principle of personalized medicine, “one size does not fit all”.
PubMed: 35683598
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11113211 -
Clinical Therapeutics Sep 2019Obesity is a chronic clinical condition that is considered one of the most serious health problems in the world because it can cause other chronic metabolic disorders. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Obesity is a chronic clinical condition that is considered one of the most serious health problems in the world because it can cause other chronic metabolic disorders. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 4 central-acting drugs, all approved in Brazil's market for weight loss.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched from inception until January 2018 to retrieve randomized controlled trials comparing sibutramine, diethylpropion, mazindol, and fenproporex versus placebo in overweight or obese patients. Language was not a restriction for the database searches. We extracted and combined data from studies that reported adverse drug events and weight change. A random effects meta-analytic model was applied in all calculations. The Cochrane Collaboration tool was used to assess the quality and bias of all included studies. Quality of evidence was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria.
FINDINGS
Fifty-three studies were included, with a total of 16,903 patients with a median follow-up of 12 weeks (2-260 weeks). The appetite suppressants showed a significant weight loss compared with placebo (mean difference [MD], -4.70 kg; 95% CI, -5.25 to -4.15; I = 100%; 43 studies). There was an increased total number of adverse events, dry mouth, constipation, insomnia, dizziness, and tachycardia reported in the intervention group (risk ratio [RR], 1.06; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.10; I = 20% [22 studies]; RR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.76 to 2.47; I = 34% [25 studies]; RR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.88 to 2.84; I = 0% [25 studies]; RR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.40 to 2.39; I = 0% [17 studies]; RR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.24 to 2.58; I = 0% [13 studies]; and RR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.86; I = 0% [10 studies], respectively). Sibutramine showed a significant increase in heart rate and mean diastolic pressure compared with placebo (MD, 4.17 beats/min [95% CI, 3.60 to 4.74; I = 99%; 23 studies]; MD, 1.68 mm Hg [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.07; I = 98%; 22 studies]).
IMPLICATIONS
These drugs are effective for weight loss in overweight and obese patients; however, they increase the risk of adverse events. In fact, the evidence is of low quality, the data availability of studied agents (especially for cardiovascular outcomes) are limited, and the studies are of short duration. PROSPERO identifier: CRD42018091083.
Topics: Adult; Appetite Depressants; Central Nervous System; Humans; Overweight; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31351676
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.06.005 -
Current Diabetes Reviews 2020Obesity shows a multifactorial disease and presents a serious public health problem, with an alarming epidemic character. According to NHANES (National Health and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Obesity shows a multifactorial disease and presents a serious public health problem, with an alarming epidemic character. According to NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) from 2015 to 2016, 39.6% of American adults and 18.5% of young people were obese and 7.7% of adults and 5.6% of young people had severe obesity. Brazil ranks fifth in the world ranking, with about 18 million people reaching up to 70 million overweight individuals. Despite shortterm weight loss with diet and exercise, weight regain continues to be a concern. Anti-obesity drugs, such as Sibutramine (SIB), Phentermine (PHEN), Fenproporex (FEN), Mazindol (MAZ), Amfepramone (AMFE) and Orlistat (ORL) may play a role in weight reduction in patients whose condition is refractory to non- and maintenance of weight loss.
OBJECTIVE
A systematic review followed by meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials over the past five years to explore the efficacy and safety of anorexigenic drugs for weight reduction and consequent treatment of obesity.
METHODS
The search strategy in MEDLINE / Pubmed, Web of Science, ScienceDirect Journals (Elsevier), Scopus (Elsevier), OneFile (Gale) is as follows : - search for mesh terms (Sibutramine, Phentermine, Fenproporex, Mazindol, Amfepramone , Orlistat, Weight loss, Safety), and the use of booleans "and" between mesh terms and "or" among historical findings.
RESULTS
It was observed that in the last five years of randomized studies no significant general complications were found, with only 5.7%. The mean overall weight loss was 6.18 (± 2.8) kg in the mean time of 12 months. The overall success rate among these drugs was 80.18%. The p-value values did not present a significant statistical difference, being p <0.05 within each drug group analyzed, for both weight and success rates.
CONCLUSION
The scientific findings of randomized studies on the use of anorexigenic drugs to treat obesity have shown safety and efficiency in the last five years, with a reasonable weight loss and no significant complications.
Topics: Appetite Depressants; Humans; Obesity; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Weight Loss
PubMed: 31729302
DOI: 10.2174/1573399815666191113125247 -
Drug and Alcohol Dependence Nov 2020Stimulant (cocaine and/or methamphetamine) use has increased among people with opioid use disorder. We conducted a systematic review of medications for stimulant use... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Stimulant (cocaine and/or methamphetamine) use has increased among people with opioid use disorder. We conducted a systematic review of medications for stimulant use disorders in this population.
METHODS
We searched for randomized controlled trials in multiple databases through April 2019, and dual-screened studies using pre-specified inclusion criteria. Primary outcomes were abstinence defined as stimulant-negative urine screens for ≥3 consecutive weeks; overall use as the proportion of stimulant-negative urine specimens; and retention as the proportion of participants who completed treatment. We rated strength of evidence using established criteria and conducted meta-analyses of comparable interventions and outcomes.
RESULTS
Thirty-four trials of 22 medications focused on cocaine use disorder in patients with opioid use disorder. Most studies enrolled participants stabilized on opioid maintenence therapy, generally methadone. None of the six studies that assessed abstinence found significant differences between groups. We found moderate-strength evidence that antidepressants (desipramine, bupropion, and fluoxetine) worsened retention. There was moderate-strength evidence that disulfiram worsened treatment retention (N = 605, RR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.77 to 0.95). We found low-strength evidence that psychostimulants (mazindol and dexamphetamine) may reduce cocaine use, though the difference was not statistically significant (standard mean difference 0.35 [95 % CI -0.05 to 0.74]). There was only 1 trial for methamphetamine use disorder, which showed insufficient-strength evidence for naltrexone.
CONCLUSIONS
Co-occurring stimulant/opioid use disorder is an important problem for targeting future research. Medication trials for methamphetamine use disorder are lacking in this population. Most of the medications studied for cocaine use were ineffective, although psychostimulants warrant further study.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Antidepressive Agents; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Cocaine; Cocaine-Related Disorders; Female; Humans; Methadone; Naltrexone; Opioid-Related Disorders
PubMed: 32861136
DOI: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108193