-
Brain Sciences Nov 2022cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES
we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS
we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Two authors screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes.
RESULTS
Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes.
LIMITATIONS
Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.
PubMed: 36421870
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci12111546 -
PCN Reports : Psychiatry and Clinical... Dec 2022This review aimed to clarify whether antimanic agents used in Japan are superior to placebo for the treatment of acute mania, based on reports of randomized controlled... (Review)
Review
This review aimed to clarify whether antimanic agents used in Japan are superior to placebo for the treatment of acute mania, based on reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in Japan and other East Asian countries. A literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Ichushi databases from their dates of inception to July 31, 2021, for studies written in English or Japanese with a primary diagnosis of bipolar I disorder, comparing any of the following active drugs to treat acute mania in adults: aripiprazole, carbamazepine, chlorpromazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, sultopride, timiperone, and zotepine. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed within a frequentist framework. The quality of each included study was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. The outcomes adopted were the response rate for efficacy and dropout rate for tolerability during 3 weeks from baseline. Eleven RCTs, totaling 1148 participants, were reviewed. The pooled odds ratio (OR) (±95% confidence interval [CI]) was calculated. Timiperone (OR = 4.53, CI 1.09-18.80), sultopride (OR = 3.76, CI 1.08-13.05), and aripiprazole (OR = 1.99, CI 1.22-3.24) were significantly more effective than placebo. Olanzapine (OR = 0.51, CI 0.29-0.90) was significantly superior in acceptability to placebo. The results showed no significant differences from placebo for carbamazepine, chlorpromazine, haloperidol, lithium, and olanzapine. These results suggest that noninferiority trials alone cannot always confirm the antimanic drug efficacy and that direct placebo-controlled trials are necessary to verify the antimanic efficacy of the drugs.
PubMed: 38868658
DOI: 10.1002/pcn5.60 -
Current Neuropharmacology 2023Serum prolactin levels are influenced by sex, physical development and medications among other factors. Antipsychotics usually increase serum prolactin levels in both... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Serum prolactin levels are influenced by sex, physical development and medications among other factors. Antipsychotics usually increase serum prolactin levels in both adults and younger patients, but no study has reviewed the potential association between sex and vulnerability for developing hyperprolactinemia among children and adolescents.
OBJECTIVE
Systematic review and meta-analysis of serum prolactin levels in children and adolescents on antipsychotic treatment for any psychiatric diagnosis to determine the effect of sex.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed in MEDLINE/PubMed/Web of Science and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials of antipsychotics in children and adolescents reporting serum prolactin levels by sex.
RESULTS
Of 1278 identified records, seven studies were included, comparing different single antipsychotics to placebo (risperidone N=4; lurasidone N=1; olanzapine N=1; queriapine N=1). Both male and female children and adolescents on antipsychotics presented a significant increase in prolactin levels relative to subjects receiving a placebo. (Male: 16.53 with 95% CI: 6.15-26.92; Female: 26.97 with 95% CI: 9.18-44.75). The four studies using risperidone had similar findings (Male: 26.49 with 95% CI: 17.55-35.43; Female: 37.72 with 95% CI: 9.41-66.03). In the direct comparison between sexes, females showed greater increases in prolactin, but the differences were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Serum prolactin levels are increased in children and adolescents of both sexes on antipsychotics, with females showing a slightly greater increase than males. Further research is needed to clarify the influence of sex and pubertal status on prolactin levels in children and adolescents taking antipsychotics.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Adolescent; Child; Antipsychotic Agents; Risperidone; Prolactin; Sex Characteristics; Olanzapine
PubMed: 36305138
DOI: 10.2174/1570159X21666221027143920 -
Clinical Psychopharmacology and... Nov 2022Anxiety symptoms and anxiety disorders are frequent in patients with schizophrenia and are associated with greater severity of both positive and negative symptoms,... (Review)
Review
Anxiety symptoms and anxiety disorders are frequent in patients with schizophrenia and are associated with greater severity of both positive and negative symptoms, cognitive impairment, poorer functioning and quality of life. Accumulating evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics may have a role in treating comorbid anxiety symptoms. A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines, selecting randomized control trials (RCTs) that evaluated efficacy of olanzapine on anxiety symptoms in patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and included anxiety evaluation scales. We searched PubMed and Web of Science databases for articles in English language available until September 2021. We selected 7 studies (3 with primary data analysis, 4 with secondary data analysis) regarding the use of olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia. In fours studies olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in improving anxiety symptoms. Four studies compared olanzapine versus risperidone: in two of them risperidone was superior to olanzapine, although one study was limited by a relatively small sample size. In the other two there were no significant differences between olanzapine and risperidone-treated patients. One study found that olanzapine and clozapine were comparable in terms of efficacy. Although olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in treating anxiety, this symptom was a secondary outcome measure in most of the considered studies. Future RCTs comparing different antipsychotics and larger sample sizes may allow to develop more solid treatment strategies.
PubMed: 36263635
DOI: 10.9758/cpn.2022.20.4.592 -
EClinicalMedicine Dec 2022Acute mania is a psychiatric emergency requiring rapid management. However, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown considerable individual differences in...
Variability and efficacy in treatment effects on manic symptoms with lithium, anticonvulsants, and antipsychotics in acute bipolar mania: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Acute mania is a psychiatric emergency requiring rapid management. However, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown considerable individual differences in treatment effects on manic symptoms with antimanic drugs.
METHODS
We searched the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify RCTs without language restrictions from inception to April 19, 2022. We included double-blind RCTs of oral antimanic monotherapy versus placebo in adult patients. The primary outcome was variability in improvement of manic symptoms (assessed using the coefficient of variation ratio [CVR]). The secondary outcomes were overall improvement of manic symptoms and acceptability (i.e., discontinuation for any reason). The pooled effects of outcomes were calculated by random-effects meta-analyses using restricted maximum likelihood methods. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Assessment Tool. This study was registered with OSF (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/G4JNY).
FINDINGS
We included 39 RCTs (N=12150; mean age=39·9 years, interquartile range [IQR]=38·7-41·1; mean proportion of female=48·6%, IQR=42·3%-52·3%) and investigated 14 antimanic drugs. We found that eight antimanic drugs compared to placebo were associated with lower CVRs (95% confidence interval [CI]; I), including risperidone (0·51; 0·37-0·70; 0%), haloperidol (0·54; 0·44-0·67; 4%), olanzapine (0·59; 0·44-0·79; 47%), ziprasidone (0·61; 0·53-0·71; 0%), lithium (0·63; 0·52-0·76; 0%), quetiapine (0·65; 0·48-0·87; 2%), aripiprazole (0·68; 0·56-0·84; 25%), and cariprazine (0·70; 0·49-0·99; 28%). There were nine antimanic drugs associated with greater efficacy than placebo, including risperidone (reported as standardised mean difference; 95% CI; I: 0·64; 0·31-0·97; 15%), haloperidol (0·57; 0·29-0·85; 64%), cariprazine (0·51; 0·24-0·78; 0%), olanzapine (0·44; 0·30-0·58; 0%), lithium (0·42; 0·29-0·55; 0%), ziprasidone (0·42; 0·26-0·58; 0%), quetiapine (0·40; 0·13-0·67; 0%), asenapine (0·40; 0·13-0·67; 0%), and aripiprazole (0·32; 0·14-0·49; 53%). Ziprasidone (reported as risk ratio; 95% CI; I: 0·83; 0·79-0·89; 0%) and olanzapine (0·63; 0·49-0·80; 35%) were associated with better acceptability relative to placebo. Among the 39 RCTs, none had a high ROB.
INTERPRETATION
We demonstrated that eight antimanic drugs were associated with lower variability and better efficacy than placebo, suggesting that these antimanic drugs were associated with more homogenous and predictable improvements of manic symptoms in patients with acute mania.
FUNDING
The study was supported by from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST-110-2314-B-016-035, MOST-111-2314-B-016-054), Medical Affairs Bureau (MND-MAB-D-111102), and Tri-service General Hospital (TSGH-E-111229).
PubMed: 36247926
DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101690 -
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Jan 2023Drug-associated delirium is a common but potentially preventable neuropsychiatric syndrome associated with detrimental outcomes. Empirical evidence for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Drug-associated delirium is a common but potentially preventable neuropsychiatric syndrome associated with detrimental outcomes. Empirical evidence for delirium-associated medication is uncertain due to a lack of high-quality studies. We aimed to further investigate the body of evidence for drugs suspected to trigger delirium.
METHODS
A systematic update review and meta-analyses of prospective studies presenting drug associations with incident delirium in adult study populations was conducted. Two authors independently searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and Google Scholar dated from October 1, 2009 to June 23, 2020, after screening a previous review published in 2011. The most reliable results on drug-delirium associations were pooled in meta-analyses using the random-effects model. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE-approach. This study is preregistered with OSF (DOI https://doi.org.10.17605/OSF.IO/4PUHY).
RESULTS
The 31 eligible studies, presenting results for 24 medication classes were identified. Meta-analyses and GRADE level of evidence ratings show no increased delirium risk for Haloperidol (OR: 0.96, 95% CI 0.72-1.28; high-quality evidence), Olanzapine (OR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.15-0.40), Ketamine (OR: 0.72, 95% CI 0.35-1.46) or corticosteroids (OR: 0.69, 95% CI 0.32-1.50; moderate quality evidence, respectively). Low-level evidence suggests a three-fold increased risk for anticholinergics (OR: 3.11, 95% CI 1.04-9.26). Opioids, benzodiazepines, H -antihistamines, and antidepressants did not reach reliable evidence levels in our analyses.
CONCLUSION
We investigated the retrievable body of evidence for delirium-associated medication. The results of this systematic review were then interpreted in conjunction with other evidence-based works and guidelines providing conclusions for clinical decision-making.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Prospective Studies; Haloperidol; Delirium
PubMed: 36168988
DOI: 10.1111/acps.13505 -
Molecular Psychiatry Jan 2023People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical...
The impact of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on physical health outcomes in people with mood disorders across the lifespan: An umbrella review of the evidence from randomised controlled trials.
OBJECTIVE
People with mood disorders have increased risk of comorbid medical diseases versus the general population. It is paramount to identify interventions to improve physical health in this population.
METHODS
Umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on pharmacological/non-pharmacological interventions for physical health outcomes/intolerability-related discontinuation in mood disorders (any age).
RESULTS
Ninety-seven meta-analyses were included. Among youths, against placebo, in depression, antidepressants/antipsychotics had higher discontinuation rates; in bipolar depression, olanzapine+fluoxetine worsened total cholesterol (TC)/triglycerides/weight gain (WG) (large ES). In adults with bipolar disorder, olanzapine worsened HbA1c/TC/WG (moderate/large ES); asenapine increased fasting glucose (small ES); quetiapine/cariprazine/risperidone induced WG (small/moderate ES). In bipolar depression, lurasidone was metabolically neutral. In depression, psychological interventions improved physical health-related quality of life (PHQoL) (small ES), fasting glucose/HbA1c (medium/large ES); SSRIs improved fasting glucose/HbA1c, readmission for coronary disease, pain (small ES); quetiapine/aripiprazole/olanzapine induced WG (small to large ES). Exercise improved cardiorespiratory fitness (moderate ES). In the elderly, fluoxetine yielded more detrimental cardiovascular effects than sertraline/escitalopram (large ES); antidepressants were neutral on exercise tolerance and PHQoL. In mixed age groups, in bipolar disorder aripiprazole was metabolically neutral; in depression, SSRIs lowered blood pressure versus placebo and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (small ES); brexpiprazole augmentation caused WG and was less tolerated (small ES); exercise improved PHQoL (moderate ES).
CONCLUSIONS
Some interventions (psychological therapies, exercise and SSRIs) improve certain physical health outcomes in mood disorders, few are neutral, but various pharmacological interventions are associated with negative effects. Evidence from this umbrella review has limitations, should consider evidence from other disorders and should be integrated with recent evidence from individual RCTs, and observational evidence. Effective treatments with either beneficial or physically neutral profiles should be prioritized.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Aged; Adolescent; Fluoxetine; Olanzapine; Quetiapine Fumarate; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Aripiprazole; Longevity; Glycated Hemoglobin; Antipsychotic Agents; Antidepressive Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36138129
DOI: 10.1038/s41380-022-01770-w -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2022Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pharmacological interventions for disordered and problem gambling have been employed in clinical practice. Despite the availability of several reviews of the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling, few have employed systematic search strategies or compared different categories of pharmacological interventions. Systematic reviews of high-quality evidence are therefore essential to provide guidance regarding the efficacy of different pharmacological interventions for disordered or problem gambling.
OBJECTIVES
The primary aims of the review were to: (1) examine the efficacy of major categories of pharmacological-only interventions (antidepressants, opioid antagonists, mood stabilisers, atypical antipsychotics) for disordered or problem gambling, relative to placebo control conditions; and (2) examine the efficacy of these major categories relative to each other. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (all years to 11 January 2022).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised trials evaluating a pharmacological intervention for the treatment of disordered or problem gambling. Eligible control conditions included placebo control groups or comparisons with another category of pharmacological intervention.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures, including systematic extraction of included study characteristics and results and risk of bias assessment. Our primary outcome was reduction in gambling symptom severity. Our secondary outcomes were reduction in gambling expenditure, gambling frequency, time spent gambling, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and functional impairment; and responder status. We evaluated treatment effects for continuous and dichotomous outcomes using standardised mean difference (SMD) and risk ratios (RR), respectively, employing random-effects meta-analyses. A minimum of two independent treatment effects were required for a meta-analysis to be conducted (with only meta-analytic findings reported in this abstract).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 17 studies in the review (n = 1193 randomised) that reported outcome data scheduled for end of treatment. Length of treatment ranged from 7 to 96 weeks. Antidepressants: Six studies (n = 268) evaluated antidepressants, with very low to low certainty evidence suggesting that antidepressants were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.74 to 0.09, n = 225), gambling expenditure (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.06, n = 144), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.19, 95% CI -0.60 to 0.23, n = 90), functional impairment (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.22, n = 110), and responder status (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.66, n = 268). Opioid antagonists: Four studies (n = 562) evaluated opioid antagonists, with very low to low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.19, n = 259), but no difference between groups in responder status (RR 1.65, 95% CI 0.86 to 3.14, n = 562). Mood stabilisers: Two studies (n = 71) evaluated mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence suggesting that mood stabilisers were no more effective than placebo at post-treatment: gambling symptom severity (SMD -0.92, 95% CI -2.24 to 0.39, n = 71), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -1.14 to 0.83, n = 71), and anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.30, n = 71). Atypical antipsychotics:Two studies (n = 63) evaluated the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine, with very low certainty evidence showing a medium beneficial effect of treatment on gambling symptom severity relative to placebo at post-treatment (SMD -0.59, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.08, n = 63). Comparative effectiveness: Two studies (n = 62) compared antidepressants with opioid antagonists, with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than opioid antagonists on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.22, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.21, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.72, n = 62) at post-treatment. Two studies (n = 58) compared antidepressants with mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants), with very low certainty evidence indicating that antidepressants were no more effective than mood stabilisers on depressive symptoms (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.56, n = 58) or anxiety symptoms (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.70, n = 58) at post-treatment. Tolerability and adverse events: Several common adverse effects were reported by participants receiving antidepressants (e.g. headaches, nausea, diarrhoea/gastrointestinal issues) and opioid antagonists (e.g. nausea, dry mouth, constipation). There was little consistency in the types of adverse effects experienced by participants receiving mood stabilisers (e.g. tiredness, headaches, concentration difficulties) or atypical antipsychotics (e.g. pneumonia, sedation, increased hypomania). Discontinuation of treatment due to these adverse events was highest for opioid antagonists (10% to 32%), followed by antidepressants (4% to 31%), atypical antipsychotics (14%), and mood stabilisers (13%).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review provides preliminary support for the use of opioid antagonists (naltrexone, nalmefene) and atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine) to produce short-term improvements in gambling symptom severity, although a lack of available evidence precludes a conclusion regarding the degree to which these pharmacological agents can improve other gambling or psychological functioning indices. In contrast, the findings are inconclusive with regard to the effects of mood stabilisers (including anticonvulsants) in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, and there is limited evidence to support the efficacy of antidepressants. However, these conclusions are based on very low to low certainty evidence characterised by a small number of included studies, high risk of bias, modest pooled sample sizes, imprecise estimates, moderate between-study heterogeneity, and exclusion of participants with psychiatric comorbidities. Moreover, there were insufficient studies to conduct meta-analyses on many outcome measures; to compare efficacy across and within major categories of interventions; to explore dosage effects; or to examine effects beyond post-treatment. These limitations suggest that, despite recommendations related to the administration of opioid antagonists in the treatment of disordered or problem gambling, pharmacological interventions should be administered with caution and with careful consideration of patient needs. A larger and more methodologically rigorous evidence base with longer-term evaluation periods is required before definitive conclusions can be drawn about the effectiveness and durability of pharmacological treatments for disordered or problem gambling.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Antidepressive Agents; Antipsychotic Agents; Gambling; Headache; Humans; Naltrexone; Narcotic Antagonists; Nausea; Olanzapine
PubMed: 36130734
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008936.pub2 -
Case Reports in Obstetrics and... 2022Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a rare condition (1.1%) characterized by excessive vomiting, malnutrition, dehydration, and laboratorial alterations. Herein, we describe...
Hyperemesis gravidarum (HG) is a rare condition (1.1%) characterized by excessive vomiting, malnutrition, dehydration, and laboratorial alterations. Herein, we describe the even rarer and serious presentation of refractoriness to the usual treatment of antiemetics and parenteral nutrition, with improvement only after the use of olanzapine and mirtazapine. Two subsequent pregnancies of the same woman with HG are described, which were associated with severe weight loss, anemia, hyponatremia, hypokalemia, and mild dysfunction of liver enzymes. In the third pregnancy, the usual treatment for HG was not successful, requiring enteral nutrition and the introduction of olanzapine. In the fourth pregnancy, the patient refused to use enteral nutrition for refractory HG. Hence, the patient was started on mirtazapine at an initial dose of 15 mg/day, which was gradually increased to 30 mg/day. The patient responded well to the new regimen, as demonstrated by the decrease in symptoms, the gain of 10 kg in the pregnancy, and delivering a healthy newborn. A systematic review of literature showed 11 articles and 30 cases that successfully used mirtazapine in HG. Good clinical outcomes were seen with 4 days of the treatment and at an initial dose of 15 mg/day. However, most of these reports were from psychiatric profiles, with a predominance of depression and anxiety symptoms, and a poor description of the obstetric conditions and the disease progression itself. Pulmonary hypertension was described in one case and neonatal hyperexcitability in another. The case described in this paper reinforces the idea that mirtazapine and olanzapine can be considered in refractory HG, with good results. In the world literature, this is the second case of HG that has been successfully treated with olanzapine and the first in Latin America treated with mirtazapine.
PubMed: 36105926
DOI: 10.1155/2022/7324627 -
The Mental Health Clinician Aug 2022Olanzapine (OLZ) is a second generation antipsychotic that is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder type 1 as monotherapy (acute manic or mixed... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Olanzapine (OLZ) is a second generation antipsychotic that is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder type 1 as monotherapy (acute manic or mixed episodes, maintenance), or as an add-on to lithium or valproate (manic or mixed episodes). It is one of the most effective antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia, but concerns remain due to its significant metabolic adverse effects. Notably, OLZ has one of the highest rates of weight gain among all antipsychotic drugs. Previous studies report on potential mitigation of weight gain with opioid antagonists. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the impact of these agents on weight and BMI when used as adjuncts to OLZ.
METHODS
A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was conducted with 3 searches between March 2, 2021 and March 27, 2022.
RESULTS
Six studies met inclusion criteria, 5 of which assessed OLZ and samidorphan (SAM) and 1 of which assessed OLZ and naltrexone compared with OLZ monotherapy. A total of 1752 patients were included with 952 receiving SAM and 14 receiving naltrexone as an adjunct to OLZ. SAM was shown to mitigate OLZ-induced weight gain by 1.0 kg. Only 1 study assessed naltrexone with no statistically significant results for weight gain.
DISCUSSION
SAM is effective at reducing OLZ-induced weight gain. Naltrexone did not reduce OLZ-induced increases in weight or BMI. However, there is a paucity of data on other opioid antagonists as adjuncts to OLZ treatment to prevent increases in weight or BMI.
PubMed: 36071739
DOI: 10.9740/mhc.2022.08.254