-
Progress in Neuro-psychopharmacology &... Apr 2021Childhood maltreatment (CM) is a predictor of poor outcome across treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD), while its potential role as a predictor of differential...
Childhood maltreatment (CM) is a predictor of poor outcome across treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD), while its potential role as a predictor of differential responses to specific antidepressants has received little attention. The present systematic review examined pharmacological studies (published up to June 30th, 2020) that included head-to-head comparisons of antidepressant treatments among adult MDD patients with a reported history of CM or no history to evaluate if CM may help clinicians choose antidepressants with greatest likelihood of successful outcome. Only three studies were included, providing limited and provisional results. These preliminary findings suggest that sustained-release bupropion (alone or in combination) or aripiprazole-augmentation as next-step intervention did not demonstrate differential outcome among MDD patients with or without a history of childhood adversity. Further, sertraline and the group of antidepressants with low affinity for the serotonin transporter may be less suitable for MDD patients with childhood abuse history than escitalopram, venlafaxine-XR, or antidepressants with high affinity for the serotonin transporter. The critical question of the most potentially efficacious treatment regimens for adult MDD with CM history requires further large-sample studies involving a greater number of medications, specifically designed to analyse the moderating effects of different types of CM, and possibly including objective biomarkers.
Topics: Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Aripiprazole; Child; Child Abuse; Clinical Decision-Making; Clinical Trials as Topic; Depressive Disorder, Major; Escitalopram; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Precision Medicine; Serotonin Plasma Membrane Transport Proteins; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors
PubMed: 33338557
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2020.110208 -
Arquivos de Neuro-psiquiatria 2020Central neuropathic pain (CNP) is often refractory to available therapeutic strategies and there are few evidence-based treatment options. Many patients with neuropathic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Central neuropathic pain (CNP) is often refractory to available therapeutic strategies and there are few evidence-based treatment options. Many patients with neuropathic pain are not diagnosed or treated properly. Thus, consensus-based recommendations, adapted to the available drugs in the country, are necessary to guide clinical decisions.
OBJECTIVE
To develop recommendations for the treatment of CNP in Brazil.
METHODS
Systematic review, meta-analysis, and specialists opinions considering efficacy, adverse events profile, cost, and drug availability in public health.
RESULTS
Forty-four studies on CNP treatment were found, 20 were included in the qualitative analysis, and 15 in the quantitative analysis. Medications were classified as first-, second-, and third-line treatment based on systematic review, meta-analysis, and expert opinion. As first-line treatment, gabapentin, duloxetine, and tricyclic antidepressants were included. As second-line, venlafaxine, pregabalin for CND secondary to spinal cord injury, lamotrigine for CNP after stroke, and, in association with first-line drugs, weak opioids, in particular tramadol. For refractory patients, strong opioids (methadone and oxycodone), cannabidiol/delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, were classified as third-line of treatment, in combination with first or second-line drugs and, for central nervous system (CNS) in multiple sclerosis, dronabinol.
CONCLUSIONS
Studies that address the treatment of CNS are scarce and heterogeneous, and a significant part of the recommendations is based on experts opinions. The CNP approach must be individualized, taking into account the availability of medication, the profile of adverse effects, including addiction risk, and patients' comorbidities.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Brazil; Consensus; Humans; Neuralgia; Neurology
PubMed: 33331468
DOI: 10.1590/0004-282X20200166 -
JAMA Psychiatry Mar 2021Precise estimation of the drug metabolism capacity for individual patients is crucial for adequate dose personalization. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Precise estimation of the drug metabolism capacity for individual patients is crucial for adequate dose personalization.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the difference in the antipsychotic and antidepressant exposure among patients with genetically associated CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 poor (PM), intermediate (IM), and normal (NM) metabolizers.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Clinicaltrialsregister.eu, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and CENTRAL databases were screened for studies from January 1, 1990, to June 30, 2020, with no language restrictions.
STUDY SELECTION
Two independent reviewers performed study screening and assessed the following inclusion criteria: (1) appropriate CYP2C19 or CYP2D6 genotyping was performed, (2) genotype-based classification into CYP2C19 or CYP2D6 NM, IM, and PM categories was possible, and (3) 3 patients per metabolizer category were available.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines were followed for extracting data and quality, validity, and risk of bias assessments. A fixed-effects model was used for pooling the effect sizes of the included studies.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Drug exposure was measured as (1) dose-normalized area under the plasma level (time) curve, (2) dose-normalized steady-state plasma level, or (3) reciprocal apparent total drug clearance. The ratio of means (RoM) was calculated by dividing the mean drug exposure for PM, IM, or pooled PM plus IM categories by the mean drug exposure for the NM category.
RESULTS
Based on the data derived from 94 unique studies and 8379 unique individuals, the most profound differences were observed in the patients treated with aripiprazole (CYP2D6 PM plus IM vs NM RoM, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.41-1.57; 12 studies; 1038 patients), haloperidol lactate (CYP2D6 PM vs NM RoM, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.40-2.02; 9 studies; 423 patients), risperidone (CYP2D6 PM plus IM vs NM RoM, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.28-1.44; 23 studies; 1492 patients), escitalopram oxalate (CYP2C19 PM vs NM, RoM, 2.63; 95% CI, 2.40-2.89; 4 studies; 1262 patients), and sertraline hydrochloride (CYP2C19 IM vs NM RoM, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.27-1.51; 3 studies; 917 patients). Exposure differences were also observed for clozapine, quetiapine fumarate, amitriptyline hydrochloride, mirtazapine, nortriptyline hydrochloride, fluoxetine hydrochloride, fluvoxamine maleate, paroxetine hydrochloride, and venlafaxine hydrochloride; however, these differences were marginal, ambiguous, or based on less than 3 independent studies.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the association between CYP2C19/CYP2D6 genotype and drug levels of several psychiatric drugs was quantified with sufficient precision as to be useful as a scientific foundation for CYP2D6/CYP2C19 genotype-based dosing recommendations.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6; Humans; Pharmacogenomic Variants
PubMed: 33237321
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.3643 -
Pain and Therapy Jun 2021Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Peripheral neuropathic pain (PNP) arises either acutely or in the chronic phase of a lesion or disease of the peripheral nervous system and is associated with a notable disease burden. The management of PNP is often challenging. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate current evidence, derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have assessed pharmacological interventions for the treatment of PNP due to polyneuropathy (PN).
METHODS
A systematic search of the PubMed database led to the identification of 538 papers, of which 457 were excluded due to not meeting the eligibility criteria, and two articles were identified through screening of the reference lists of the 81 eligible studies. Ultimately, 83 papers were included in this systematic review.
RESULTS
The best available evidence for the management of painful diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is for amitriptyline, duloxetine, gabapentin, pregabalin and venlafaxine as monotherapies and oxycodone as add-on therapy (level II of evidence). Tramadol appears to be effective when used as a monotherapy and add-on therapy in patients with PN of various etiologies (level II of evidence). Weaker evidence (level III) is available on the effectiveness of several other agents discussed in this review for the management of PNP due to PN.
DISCUSSION
Response to treatment may be affected by the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms that are involved in the pathogenesis of the PN and, therefore, it is very important to thoroughly investigate patients presenting with PNP to determine the causes of this neuropathy. Future RCTs should be conducted to shed more light on the use of pharmacological approaches in patients with other forms of PNP and to design specific treatment algorithms.
PubMed: 33145709
DOI: 10.1007/s40122-020-00210-3 -
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience :... Oct 2020The type and quantities of antidepressants are increasing, but the efficacy and safety of first-line and emerging drugs vary between studies. In this article, we... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The type and quantities of antidepressants are increasing, but the efficacy and safety of first-line and emerging drugs vary between studies. In this article, we estimated the efficacy and safety of first-line and emerging antidepressants (anti-inflammatory drugs and ketamine).
METHOD
ystematic search of EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, psycARTICLES, and psycINFO without language restriction for studies on the depression, depressive symptoms, antidepressants, fluoxetine (Prozac), paroxetine, escitalopram, sertraline, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine, duloxetine, NSAIDs, anti-cytokine drugs or pioglitazone published before May 1st, 2019. Information on study characteristics, depression or depressive symptoms, antidepressants and the descriptive statistics (including efficacy and safety of antidepressants) was extracted independently by 2 investigators. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Differences by study-level characteristics were estimated using stratified meta-analysis and meta-regression. The response and remission of antidepressants were used as clinical evaluation indicators, and the evaluation criteria were clinical depression scales. OR value of antidepressants as assessed by meta-analysis.
RESULTS
The literature search retrieved 5529 potentially relevant articles of which 49 studies were finally included. We compared the efficacy of antidepressants (seven first-line antidepressants (fluoxetine, paroxetine, escitalopram, sertraline, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine, duloxetine), there kinds of anti-inflammatory drugs(NASIDs, cytokine-inhibitor, pioglitazone) and ketamine) by comparing the OR values.
CONCLUSION
The three drugs with the highest OR value in response were NASID (OR = 3.62(1.58, 8.32)), venlafaxin (OR = 3.50(1.83, 6.70)) and ketamine (OR = 3.28(1.89, 5.68)), while the highest OR value in remission were NASID (OR = 3.17(1.60, 6.29)), ketamine (OR = 2.99(1.58, 5.67)) and venlafaxin (OR = 2.55(1.72, 3.78)). Through reading the literature, we found 69 SNPs associated with depression. Major depression was a debilitating disorder that could ultimately lead to enormous societal and economical challenge [1]. The number of person which affected by depression was up to 16% of the population worldwide. More than 300 million individuals were estimated to suffer depression these days [1,2]. Therefore, it is apparent that safety and effective treatments for depression are necessary. In the 1930 s, the first drug for schizophrenia was discovered. This finding was a landmark for the emerging of biological psychiatry. In the 1950 s, pharmacologists had stumbled upon the antidepressant effect of imipramine. Since then, every 30 years, the use of antidepressants had made a pulsatile leap. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are the most widely-prescribed psychiatric drugs for the treatment of depression. However, the efficacy was variable and incomplete: 60%-70% of the patients do not experience remission, while 30%-40% do not show a significant response [3,4]. Nevertheless, SSRIs, SNRIs (selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, which can block norepinephrine at the same time) and NaSSAs (norepinephrine and selective serotonin receptor agonist), constituted the first-line clinical drugs. Nearly 30 years after the outbreak of SSRIs, antidepressants have ushered in a new chapter. It has been found that anti-inflammatory drugs could also have the small and moderate antidepressant effect and it's widely discussed [5]. More than 40 anti-inflammatory drugs have been certificated to have antidepressant effects in preclinical and clinical studies [6]. The antidepressant that has been approved for use recently is ketamine. There is no comprehensive comparison of the efficacy of all these drugs. In this review, we tried to estimate the efficacy and safety of first-line antidepressants, anti-inflammatory drugs and ketamine. On the other hand, with the development of GWAS, SNPs related to depression have been reported, and the corresponding mechanisms have been elaborated, respectively. However, patients with these SNPs have not been treated with individualized drugs according to the mechanisms. We hope to push this process forward through the summary of this article.
METHODS
Search Strategy and Study Eligibility.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Humans
PubMed: 33099342
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2020.08.013 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2020Antidepressants are prescribed for the treatment of a number of psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents, however there is still controversy about whether they...
Antidepressants are prescribed for the treatment of a number of psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents, however there is still controversy about whether they should be used in this population. This meta-review aimed to assess the effects of antidepressants for the acute treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), anxiety disorders (ADs), autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), enuresis, major depressive disorder (MDD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents. Efficacy was measured as response to treatment (either as mean overall change in symptoms or as a dichotomous outcome) and tolerability was measured as the proportion of patients discontinuing treatment due to adverse events. Suicidality was measured as suicidal ideation, behavior (including suicide attempts) and completed suicide. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically searched (until 31 October 2019) for existing systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses of double-blind randomized controlled trials. The quality of the included reviews was appraised using AMSTAR-2. Our meta-review included nine systematic reviews/meta-analyses (2 on ADHD; 1 on AD; 2 on ASD; 1 on enuresis; 1 on MDD, 1 on OCD and 1 on PTSD). In terms of efficacy this review found that, compared to placebo: fluoxetine was more efficacious in the treatment of MDD, fluvoxamine and paroxetine were better in the treatment of AD; fluoxetine and sertraline were more efficacious in the treatment of OCD; bupropion and desipramine improved clinician and teacher-rated ADHD symptoms; clomipramine and tianeptine were superior on some of the core symptoms of ASD; and no antidepressant was more efficacious for PTSD and enuresis. With regard to tolerability: imipramine, venlafaxine, and duloxetine were less well tolerated in MDD; no differences were found for any of the antidepressants in the treatment of anxiety disorders (ADs), ADHD, and PTSD; tianeptine and citalopram, but not clomipramine, were less well tolerated in children and adolescents with ASD. For suicidal behavior/ideation, venlafaxine (in MDD) and paroxetine (in AD) were associated with a significantly increased risk; by contrast, sertraline (in AD) was associated with a reduced risk. The majority of included systematic reviews/meta-analyses were rated as being of high or moderate in quality by the AMSTAR-2 critical appraisal tool (one and five, respectively). One included study was of low quality and two were of critically low quality. Compared to placebo, selected antidepressants can be efficacious in the acute treatment of some common psychiatric disorders, although statistically significant differences do not always translate into clinically significant results. Little information was available about tolerability of antidepressants in RCTs of OCD and in the treatment of ADHD, ASD, MDD, and PTSD. There is a paucity of data on suicidal ideation/behavior, but paroxetine may increase the risk of suicidality in the treatment of AD and venlafaxine for MDD. Findings from this review must be considered in light of potential limitations, such as the lack of comparative information about many antidepressants, the short-term outcomes and the quality of the available evidence.
PubMed: 32982805
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00717 -
Journal of Psychiatric Research Nov 2020The purpose of this study was to compare efficacy and acceptability among drug treatments for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) through a systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to compare efficacy and acceptability among drug treatments for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) through a systematic review, random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses.
METHODS
Double-blind randomized controlled trials comparing pharmacological interventions for adults with PTSD were searched from database inception through Aug. 28, 2018, on Cochrane (Central), Embase, LILACS, PILOTS, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Clinical trial registries and the websites of pharmaceutical companies were also searched. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of the evidence.
RESULTS
The systematic review included 58 studies comprising 6766 patients randomized to 26 different interventions. Regarding efficacy, topiramate (SMD = -0.57; 95%CrI: -1.07,-0.10), risperidone (SMD = -0.53; 95%CrI: -0.93,-0.15), quetiapine (SMD = -0.59; 95%CrI: -1.06,-0.11), paroxetine (SMD = -0.35; 95%CrI: -0.48,-0.21), venlafaxine (SMD = -0.25; 95%CrI: -0.44,-0.05), fluoxetine (SMD = -0.28; 95%CrI: -0.46,-0.08), and sertraline (SMD = -0.21; 95%CrI: -0.33,-0.09) outperformed placebo. Moreover, phenelzine (RR = 3.39; 95%CrI: 1.43,11.09), lamotrigine (RR = 4.39; 95%CrI: 1.18,26.38), and fluoxetine (RR = 1.28%CrI: 1.01,1.59) outperformed placebo in terms of acceptability.
CONCLUSIONS
The NMA supports topiramate, risperidone, quetiapine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, fluoxetine and sertraline as effective pharmacological choices for the treatment of PTSD. Quetiapine and topiramate have the shortcoming of relying on a few small studies, but the clinically meaningful change in symptoms is noteworthy and merits further investigation. Among the pharmacological treatments with evidence of efficacy compared to placebo, fluoxetine achieved a relatively high rank regarding acceptability. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest contemporary NMA on the subject and the addition of new medications is an important extension of previous meta-analyses, enabling a larger number of drug comparisons.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Paroxetine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sertraline; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Venlafaxine Hydrochloride
PubMed: 32891916
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.07.046 -
Journal of Child Psychology and... Jun 2021Clinically significant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms are common and impairing in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder(ASD). The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Practitioner Review: Pharmacological treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Clinically significant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms are common and impairing in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder(ASD). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to (a) evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of ADHD symptoms in ASD and (b) distil findings for clinical translation.
METHODS
We searched electronic databases and clinical trial registries (1992 onwards). We selected randomized controlled trials conducted in participants <25 years of age, diagnosed with ASD that evaluated ADHD outcomes (hyperactivity/impulsivity and inattention) following treatment with stimulants (methylphenidate or amphetamines), atomoxetine, alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonists, antipsychotics, tricyclic antidepressants, bupropion, modafinil, venlafaxine, or a combination, in comparison with placebo, any of the listed medications, or behavioral therapies. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies (4 methylphenidate, 4 atomoxetine, 1 guanfacine, 14 antipsychotic, 1 venlafaxine, and 1 tianeptine) were included. Methylphenidate reduced hyperactivity (parent-rated: standardized mean difference [SMD] = -.63, 95%CI = -.95,-.30; teacher-rated: SMD = -.81, 95%CI = -1.43,-.19) and inattention (parent-rated: SMD = -.36, 95%CI = -.64,-.07; teacher-rated: SMD = -.30, 95%CI = -.49,-.11). Atomoxetine reduced inattention (parent-rated: SMD = -.54, 95%CI = -.98,-.09; teacher/investigator-rated: SMD = -0.38, 95%CI = -0.75, -0.01) and parent-rated hyperactivity (parent-rated: SMD = -.49, 95%CI = -.76,-.23; teacher-rated: SMD = -.43, 95%CI = -.92, .06). Indirect evidence for significant reductions in hyperactivity with second-generation antipsychotics was also found. Quality of evidence for all interventions was low/very low. Methylphenidate was associated with a nonsignificant elevated risk of dropout due to adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS
Direct pooled evidence supports the efficacy and tolerability of methylphenidate or atomoxetine for treatment of ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD. The current review highlights the efficacy of standard ADHD pharmacotherapy for treatment of ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD. Consideration of the benefits weighed against the limitations of safety/efficacy data and lack of data evaluating long-term continuation is undertaken to help guide clinical decision-making regarding treatment of co-occurring ADHD symptoms in children and youth with ASD.
Topics: Adolescent; Atomoxetine Hydrochloride; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Central Nervous System Stimulants; Child; Guanfacine; Humans; Methylphenidate
PubMed: 32845025
DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.13305 -
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy Oct 2020A substantial number of patients with PD experience relapse after the discontinuation of effective pharmacotherapy, leading to detrimental effects on the individuals...
A substantial number of patients with PD experience relapse after the discontinuation of effective pharmacotherapy, leading to detrimental effects on the individuals and considerable societal costs. This suggests the need to optimize pharmacotherapy to minimize relapse risk. The present systematic review examines randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled relapse prevention studies published over the last 20 years involving recommended medications. The authors aim to provide an overview of this topic and evaluate whether recent advances were achieved. Only seven studies were included, providing limited results. One-year maintenance pharmacotherapy with constant doses had protective effects against relapse in patients who had previously exhibited satisfactory responses to the same medication at the same doses. The duration of maintenance treatment did not influence relapse risk. No data were available concerning the use of lower doses or the predictors of relapse. Relapse prevention in PD has received limited attention. Recent progress and conclusive indications are lacking. Rethinking pharmacological research in PD may be productive. Collecting a wide range of clinical and individual features/biomarkers in large-scale, multicenter long-term naturalistic studies, and implementing recent technological innovations (e.g., electronic medical records/'big data' platforms, wearable devices, and machine learning techniques) may help identify reliable predictive models.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Panic Disorder; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Secondary Prevention; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32543949
DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2020.1779220 -
World Psychiatry : Official Journal of... Jun 2020Mental disorders frequently begin in childhood or adolescence. Psychotropic medications have various indications for the treatment of mental dis-orders in this age...
Safety of 80 antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-attention-deficit/hyperactivity medications and mood stabilizers in children and adolescents with psychiatric disorders: a large scale systematic meta-review of 78 adverse effects.
Mental disorders frequently begin in childhood or adolescence. Psychotropic medications have various indications for the treatment of mental dis-orders in this age group and are used not infrequently off-label. However, the adverse effects of these medications require special attention during developmentally sensitive periods of life. For this meta-review, we systematically searched network meta-analyses and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), individual RCTs, and cohort studies reporting on 78 a priori selected adverse events across 19 categories of 80 psychotropic medications - including antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications and mood stabilizers - in children and adolescents with mental disorders. We included data from nine network meta-analyses, 39 meta-analyses, 90 individual RCTs, and eight cohort studies, including 337,686 children and adolescents. Data on ≥20% of the 78 adverse events were available for six antidepressants (sertraline, escitalopram, paroxetine, fluoxetine, venlafaxine and vilazodone), eight antipsychotics (risperidone, quetiapine, aripiprazole, lurasidone, paliperidone, ziprasidone, olanzapine and asenapine), three anti-ADHD medications (methylphenidate, atomoxetine and guanfacine), and two mood stabilizers (valproate and lithium). Among these medications with data on ≥20% of the 78 adverse events, a safer profile emerged for escitalopram and fluoxetine among antidepressants, lurasidone for antipsychotics, methylphenidate among anti-ADHD medications, and lithium among mood stabilizers. The available literature raised most concerns about the safety of venlafaxine, olanzapine, atomoxetine, guanfacine and valproate. Nausea/vomiting and discontinuation due to adverse event were most frequently associated with antidepressants; sedation, extrapyramidal side effects, and weight gain with antipsychotics; anorexia and insomnia with anti-ADHD medications; sedation and weight gain with mood stabilizers. The results of this comprehensive and updated quantitative systematic meta-review of top-tier evidence regarding the safety of antidepressants, antipsychotics, anti-ADHD medications and mood stabilizers in children and adolescents can inform clinical practice, research and treatment guidelines.
PubMed: 32394557
DOI: 10.1002/wps.20765