-
World Psychiatry : Official Journal of... Jun 2019Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are recommended for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. However, comparative long-term effectiveness among SGAs is unclear....
Long-term effectiveness of oral second-generation antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and related disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of direct head-to-head comparisons.
Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are recommended for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. However, comparative long-term effectiveness among SGAs is unclear. Here we provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials lasting ≥⃒6 months comparing SGAs head-to-head in schizophrenia and related disorders. The primary outcome was all-cause discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and tolerability, i.e., psychopathology, inefficacy-related and intolerability-related discontinuation, relapse, hospitalization, remission, functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. Pooled risk ratio and standardized mean difference were calculated using random-effects models. Across 59 studies (N=45,787), lasting 47.4±32.1 weeks (range 24-186), no consistent superiority of any SGA emerged across efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Regarding all-cause discontinuation, clozapine, olanzapine and risperidone were significantly (p<0.05) superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine was inferior to several other SGAs. As to psychopathology, clozapine and olanzapine were superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine and ziprasidone were inferior to several other SGAs. Data for other efficacy outcomes were sparse. Regarding intolerability-related discontinuation, risperidone was superior and clozapine was inferior to several other SGAs. Concerning weight gain, olanzapine was worse than all other compared non-clozapine SGAs, and risperidone was significantly worse than several other SGAs. As to prolactin increase, risperidone and amisulpride were significantly worse than several other SGAs. Regarding parkinsonism, olanzapine was superior to risperidone, without significant differences pertaining to akathisia. Concerning sedation and somnolence, clozapine and quetiapine were significantly worse than some other SGAs. In summary, different long-term SGA efficacy and tolerability patterns emerged. The long-term risk-benefit profiles of specific SGAs need to be tailored to individual patients to optimize maintenance treatment outcomes.
PubMed: 31059621
DOI: 10.1002/wps.20632 -
BMC Sports Science, Medicine &... 2017Overtraining syndrome (OTS), functional (FOR) and non-functional overreaching (NFOR) are conditions diagnosed in athletes with decreased performance and fatigue,...
BACKGROUND
Overtraining syndrome (OTS), functional (FOR) and non-functional overreaching (NFOR) are conditions diagnosed in athletes with decreased performance and fatigue, triggered by metabolic, immune, hormonal and other dysfunctions and resulted from an imbalance between training stress and proper recovery. Despite previous descriptions, there is a lack of a review that discloses all hormonal findings in OTS/FOR/NFOR. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate whether and which roles hormones play in OTS/FOR/NFOR.
METHODS
A systematic search up to June 15, 2017 was performed in the PUBMED, MEDLINE and Cochrane databases following PRISMA protocol, with the expressions: (1)overtraining, (2)overreaching, (3)overtrained, (4)overreached, or (5)underperformance, and (plus) (a)hormone, (b)hormonal, (c)endocrine, (d)adrenal, (e)cortisol, (f)GH, (g)ACTH, (h)testosterone, (i)IGF-1, (j)TSH, (k)T4, (l)T3, (m)LH, (n)FSH, (o)prolactin, (p) IGFBP-3 and related articles.
RESULTS
A total of 38 studies were selected. Basal levels of hormones were mostly normal in athletes with OTS/FOR/NFOR compared with healthy athletes. Distinctly, stimulation tests, mainly performed in maximal exercise conditions, showed blunted GH and ACTH responses in OTS/FOR/NFOR athletes, whereas cortisol and plasma catecholamines showed conflicting findings and the other hormones responded normally.
CONCLUSION
Basal hormone levels are not good predictor but blunted ACTH and GH responses to stimulation tests may be good predictors of OTS/FOR/NFOR.
PubMed: 28785411
DOI: 10.1186/s13102-017-0079-8 -
PloS One 2024Ramadan Intermittent Fasting (RIF) has the potential to alter hormonal levels in the body. This study investigates the impact of RIF on hormonal levels among healthy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Ramadan Intermittent Fasting (RIF) has the potential to alter hormonal levels in the body. This study investigates the impact of RIF on hormonal levels among healthy individuals during Ramadan.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of previously published studies were conducted, focusing on healthy non-athlete adults. The intervention examined was Ramadan Intermittent Fasting, and the primary outcomes assessed were changes in endocrine hormonal and biochemical parameters. The pooled effect measure was expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model.
RESULTS
A total of 35 original articles were retrieved, with a combined sample size of 1,107 participants eligible for the meta-analysis. No significant relationship was found between pre- and post-Ramadan hormonal levels of T3, T4, TSH, FT3, FT4, Testosterone, LH, FSH, Prolactin, PTH, Calcium, and Phosphorus (P-value<0.05). However, a substantial decrease in morning cortisol levels was observed across the studies (P-value: 0.08, Hedges' g = -2.14, 95% CI: -4.54, 0.27).
CONCLUSIONS
Ramadan Intermittent Fasting results in minimal hormonal changes and is a safe practice for healthy individuals. The fasting regimen appears to disrupt the circadian rhythm, leading to a decrease in morning cortisol levels.
Topics: Humans; Fasting; Islam; Adult; Hormones; Testosterone; Male; Hydrocortisone
PubMed: 38781203
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299695 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2011In many countries of the industrialised world second-generation ("atypical") antipsychotics (SGAs) have become the first line drug treatment for people with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In many countries of the industrialised world second-generation ("atypical") antipsychotics (SGAs) have become the first line drug treatment for people with schizophrenia. The question as to whether and if so how much the effects of the various SGAs differ is a matter of debate. In this review we examined how the efficacy and tolerability of risperidone differs from that of other SGAs.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of risperidone compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychosis.
SEARCH STRATEGY
1. Electronic searching We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (April 2007) which is based on regular searches of BIOSIS, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO.2. Reference searching We inspected the references of all identified studies for more trials.3. Personal contact We contacted the first author of each included study for missing information.4. Drug companies We contacted the manufacturers of all atypical antipsychotics included for additional data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised, blinded trials comparing oral risperidone with oral forms of amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine in people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychosis.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
The review currently includes 45 blinded RCTs with 7760 participants. The number of RCTs available for each comparison varied: four studies compared risperidone with amisulpride, two with aripiprazole, 11 with clozapine, 23 with olanzapine, eleven with quetiapine, two with sertindole, three with ziprasidone and none with zotepine. Attrition from these studies was high (46.9%), leaving the interpretation of results problematic. Furthermore, 60% were industry sponsored, which can be a source of bias.There were few significant differences in overall acceptability of treatment as measured by leaving the studies early. Risperidone was slightly less acceptable than olanzapine, and slightly more acceptable than ziprasidone in this regard.Risperidone improved the general mental state (PANSS total score) slightly less than olanzapine (15 RCTs, n = 2390, MD 1.94 CI 0.58 to 3.31), but slightly more than quetiapine (9 RCTs, n = 1953, MD -3.09 CI -5.16 to -1.01) and ziprasidone (3 RCTs, n = 1016, MD -3.91 CI -7.55 to -0.27). The comparisons with the other SGA drugs were equivocal. Risperidone was also less efficacious than olanzapine and clozapine in terms of leaving the studies early due to inefficacy, but more efficacious than ziprasidone in the same outcome.Risperidone produced somewhat more extrapyramidal side effects than a number of other SGAs (use of antiparkinson medication versus clozapine 6 RCTs, n = 304, RR 2.57 CI 1.47 to 4.48, NNH 6 CI 33 to 3; versus olanzapine 13 RCTs, n = 2599, RR 1.28 CI 1.06 to 1.55, NNH 17 CI 9 to 100; versus quetiapine 6 RCTs, n = 1715, RR 1.98 CI 1.16 to 3.39, NNH 20 CI 10 to 100; versus ziprasidone 2 RCTs, n = 822, RR 1.42 CI 1.03 to 1.96, NNH not estimable; parkinsonism versus sertindole 1 RCT, n = 321, RR 4.11 CI 1.44 to 11.73, NNH 14 CI 100 to 8). Risperidone also increased prolactin levels clearly more than all comparators, except for amisulpride and sertindole for which no data were available.Other adverse events were less consistently reported, but risperidone may well produce more weight gain and/or associated metabolic problems than amisulpride (weight gain: 3 RCTs, n = 585, MD 0.99 CI 0.37 to 1.61), aripiprazole (cholesterol increase: 1 RCT, n = 83, MD 22.30 CI 4.91 to 39.69) and ziprasidone (cholesterol increase 2 RCTs, n = 767, MD 8.58 CI 1.11 to 16.04) but less than clozapine (weight gain 3 RCTs n = 373, MD -3.30 CI -5.65 to -0.95), olanzapine (weight gain 13 RCTs, n = 2116, MD -2.61 CI -3.74 to -1.48), quetiapine (cholesterol increase: 5 RCTs, n = 1433, MD -8.49 CI -12. 23 to -4.75) and sertindole (weight gain: 2 RCTs, n = 328, MD -0.99 CI -1.86 to -0.12). It may be less sedating than clozapine and quetiapine, lengthen the QTc interval less than sertindole (QTc change: 2 RCTs, n = 495, MD -18.60 CI -22.37 to 14.83), produce fewer seizures than clozapine (2 RCTs, n = 354, RR 0.22 CI 0.07 to 0.70, NNT 14 CI 8 to 33) and less sexual dysfunction in men than sertindole (2 RCTs, n = 437, RR 0.34 CI 0.16 to 0.76, NNT 13 CI 8 to 33).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Risperidone seems to produce somewhat more extrapyramidal side effects and clearly more prolactin increase than most other SGAs. It may also differ from other compounds in efficacy and in the occurrence of other adverse effects such as weight gain, metabolic problems, cardiac effects, sedation and seizures. Nevertheless, the large proportion of participants leaving studies early and incomplete reporting of outcomes makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Further large trials, especially comparing risperidone with those other new drugs for which only a few RCTs are available, are needed.
Topics: Amisulpride; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Clozapine; Dibenzothiazepines; Humans; Imidazoles; Indoles; Olanzapine; Piperazines; Quetiapine Fumarate; Quinolones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risperidone; Schizophrenia; Sulpiride; Thiazoles
PubMed: 21249678
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006626.pub2 -
Obstetrics & Gynecology Science Mar 2021The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide. It is still a pandemic and poses major health problem across the globe. In our review, clinical...
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread worldwide. It is still a pandemic and poses major health problem across the globe. In our review, clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters of COVID-19 patients were compiled systematically, with special reference to pregnant women in order to understand the disease course. An extensive literature search on various scientific databases for relevant manuscripts was conducted, which yielded 7 manuscripts for final analysis. The most common symptoms were fever (85%), cough (70.63%), chest tightness (37.36%), expectoration (33.27%), fatigue (32%), dyspnea (31.95%), and shortness of breath (31.19%), while hemoptysis (1.0%) was the least common. The associated comorbidities were hypertension (21.6%) and diabetes (10.0%). In terms of hematological parameters, lower total leukocyte counts were observed in 65% of cases and biochemical parameters, patients demonstrated elevated levels of albumin (53.72%), lactate dehydrogenase (45.71%), and natriuretic peptide (34.84%); however, total bilirubin was elevated in only 8% of cases. In the acute inflammatory cytokine profile, C-reactive protein (59.0%), tumor necrosis factor (58.0%), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (57.0%), interleukin-2 (IL- 2, 54.0%), and IL-6 (52.0%) levels were increased, while prolactin levels (6.5%) were minimally elevated. The recovery rate was approximately 41%, and mortality was about 6.5%. The study also concluded that the clinical symptoms of COVID-19 were similar among pregnant and non-pregnant women. There was no evidence of vertical transmission of COVID-19 infection. This review critically analyzed COVID-19 as a public health hazard in order to help policy makers, health care givers, and primary physicians to promote early diagnosis and prevention.
PubMed: 33499580
DOI: 10.5468/ogs.20174 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are the main safety concerns of clinically used medications. Accumulating evidence has shown that ADRs can affect men and women...
Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are the main safety concerns of clinically used medications. Accumulating evidence has shown that ADRs can affect men and women differently, which suggests sex as a biological predictor in the risk of ADRs. This review aims to summarize the current state of knowledge on sex differences in ADRs with the focus on the commonly used psychotropic, cardiovascular, and analgesic medications, and to aid clinical decision making and future mechanistic investigations on this topic. PubMed search was performed with combinations of the following terms: over 1,800 drugs of interests, sex difference (and its related terms), and side effects (and its related terms), which yielded over 400 unique articles. Articles related to psychotropic, cardiovascular, and analgesic medications were included in the subsequent full-text review. Characteristics and the main findings (male-biased, female-biased, or not sex biased ADRs) of each included article were collected, and the results were summarized by drug class and/or individual drug. Twenty-six articles studying sex differences in ADRs of six psychotropic medications, ten cardiovascular medications, and one analgesic medication were included in this review. The main findings of these articles suggested that more than half of the ADRs being evaluated showed sex difference pattern in occurrence rate. For instance, lithium was found to cause more thyroid dysfunction in women, and amisulpride induced prolactin increase was more pronounced in women than in men. Some serious ADRs were also found to exert sex difference pattern, such as clozapine induced neutropenia was more prevalent in women whereas simvastatin/atorvastatin-related abnormal liver functions were more pronounced in men.
PubMed: 37201021
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1096366 -
Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and... Jun 2024This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pyridoxine compared to Dopaminergic agonists (cabergoline and bromocriptine) in post-partum lactation... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pyridoxine compared to Dopaminergic agonists (cabergoline and bromocriptine) in post-partum lactation inhibition. Cochrane Central, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, ScienceDirect, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar, covering the period from inception to November 2023. Additionally, the bibliographies of included articles and previous meta-analyses were screened for any relevant articles. The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The outcomes of interest encompassed inhibition of lactation, breast pain/tenderness, breast engorgement, milk secretion, fever, mastitis, prolactin level and adverse events related to pyridoxine, cabergoline and bromocriptine. Methodological quality assessment was conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for rigorous evaluation. Three clinical trials assessed the effectiveness of pyridoxine and dopaminergic agents (cabergoline and bromocriptine) for lactation inhibition. It was assessed by using different assessment methods such as a scale for milk secretion, serum prolactin levels, and questionnaires for assessing breast engorgement, breast pain, and milk leakage. On the global assessment of the therapeutic efficacy of dopaminergic agents, it was found that there was significant inhibition of lactation as compared to pyridoxine (p < 0.001). In conclusion, this systematic review contributes significant insights into lactation inhibition interventions. Dopaminergic agonists, specifically cabergoline and bromocriptine, stand out as more effective and tolerable choices compared to Pyridoxine. These findings provide a foundation for informed clinical decisions and underscore the need for careful consideration of lactation inhibition strategies in diverse clinical contexts.
Topics: Humans; Bromocriptine; Female; Pyridoxine; Cabergoline; Dopamine Agonists; Lactation; Lactation Disorders; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38554942
DOI: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2024.102783 -
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2021A considerable body of literature reports that individuals with psychotic disorders often suffer from sexual dysfunctions (SDs), with these representing a major unmet... (Review)
Review
A considerable body of literature reports that individuals with psychotic disorders often suffer from sexual dysfunctions (SDs), with these representing a major unmet need. Long-term antipsychotic drug treatment may be the main cause for SDs in psychotic patients, through a plethora of different mechanisms, including prolactin dyscrasia, histamine-mediated sedation, and serotonin-induced sexual demotivation. However, a few pieces of evidence treat sexuality in patients at risk or the onset of psychosis. For this purpose, we systematically reviewed literature of the last 10 years in order to investigate sexuality in ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis and first-episode psychosis (FEP). We included in our review 34 articles fitting our research criteria on SDs in UHR and FEP. Evidence of SDs in the transition from UHR to FEP emerges through the selected studies. In FEP, sexuality is affected by the severity of the psychotic symptoms and, in some cases, by the iatrogenic effects of psychopharmacological treatment. Further experimental and clinical studies should systematically investigate the role of sexual functioning in the transition from UHR to FEP and, consequently, clarify whether or not SDs could be considered a possible marker for the onset of psychosis in at-risk populations. Moreover, psychiatrists and clinical psychologists should take into consideration the role of sexual life in young people with prodromal mental symptoms or at the onset of psychosis. Focusing on a thorough sexual evaluation might be a major challenge that could break down barriers of mental health promotion among young people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders and therefore achieve better clinical outcomes.
PubMed: 34777053
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.750033 -
World Psychiatry : Official Journal of... Feb 2017Antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia is much debated, since it is common and costly with unclear evidence for its efficacy and safety. We conducted a systematic...
Antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia is much debated, since it is common and costly with unclear evidence for its efficacy and safety. We conducted a systematic literature search and a random effects meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing augmentation with a second antipsychotic vs. continued antipsychotic monotherapy in schizophrenia. Co-primary outcomes were total symptom reduction and study-defined response. Antipsychotic augmentation was superior to monotherapy regarding total symptom reduction (16 studies, N=694, standardized mean difference, SMD=-0.53, 95% CI: -0.87 to -0.19, p=0.002). However, superiority was only apparent in open-label and low-quality trials (both p<0.001), but not in double-blind and high-quality ones (p=0.120 and 0.226, respectively). Study-defined response was similar between antipsychotic augmentation and monotherapy (14 studies, N=938, risk ratio = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.42, p=0.061), being clearly non-significant in double-blind and high-quality studies (both p=0.990). Findings were replicated in clozapine and non-clozapine augmentation studies. No differences emerged regarding all-cause/specific-cause discontinuation, global clinical impression, as well as positive, general and depressive symptoms. Negative symptoms improved more with augmentation treatment (18 studies, N=931, SMD=-0.38, 95% CI: -0.63 to -0.13, p<0.003), but only in studies augmenting with aripiprazole (8 studies, N=532, SMD=-0.41, 95% CI: -0.79 to -0.03, p=0.036). Few adverse effect differences emerged: D2 antagonist augmentation was associated with less insomnia (p=0.028), but more prolactin elevation (p=0.015), while aripiprazole augmentation was associated with reduced prolactin levels (p<0.001) and body weight (p=0.030). These data suggest that the common practice of antipsychotic augmentation in schizophrenia lacks double-blind/high-quality evidence for efficacy, except for negative symptom reduction with aripiprazole augmentation.
PubMed: 28127934
DOI: 10.1002/wps.20387 -
Bipolar Disorders Dec 2018Non-adherence is a significant problem in bipolar disorder. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) long-acting injections (LAIs) may improve adherence in bipolar... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Non-adherence is a significant problem in bipolar disorder. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) long-acting injections (LAIs) may improve adherence in bipolar disorder and may prevent relapses. However, the evidence is limited and conflicting.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of SGA LAIs in bipolar disorder.
METHOD
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (≥6 months duration) investigating safety and efficacy of SGA LAIs for bipolar disorder. We searched Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, LiLACS, www.clinicaltrials.gov up to October 2016. We also contacted the manufacturers of SGA LAIs. Primary efficacy and safety outcomes were relapse rate and all-cause discontinuation respectively.
RESULTS
Total of seven RCTs (n = 1192) were included. SGA LAIs show superiority over placebo for study-defined relapse rate (RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.49-0.68, P < 0.00001) and all-cause discontinuation (RR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.64-0.82, P < 0.00001). However, no significant difference was found between SGA LAIs and oral active control for relapse rate (RR = 0.92, P = 0.79) and all-cause discontinuation (RR = 1.2, P = 0.31). In terms of secondary outcomes, SGA LAIs performed better than placebo in relapse to mania/hypomania, young mania rating scales (YMRS), clinical global impression-severity (CGI-S), montgomery-asberg depression rating scale (MADRS). There was no significant difference between SGA LAIs and oral active control regarding relapse to mania/hypomania, YMRS, CGI-S, extra-pyramidal side effects (EPSEs), weight gain. However, the active control performed better than SGA LAIs in relapse to depression, MADRS, and prolactin-related AEs.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence is very limited to support the use of SGA LAIs (compared to oral medication) in bipolar disorder. Further high-quality studies, particularly comparing SGA LAIs with active control, are warranted.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Bipolar Disorder; Delayed-Action Preparations; Depression; Humans; Injections; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia
PubMed: 30417552
DOI: 10.1111/bdi.12707