-
The Journal of Family Practice Jul 2023Insomnia is a distinct disorder that is common, yet underrecognized and undertreated in primary care. Treating insomnia has been shown to improve outcomes, including... (Review)
Review
Insomnia is a distinct disorder that is common, yet underrecognized and undertreated in primary care. Treating insomnia has been shown to improve outcomes, including reduced risk of developing cardiovascular and mental health disorders. Insomnia is influenced by the brain's regulation of sleep and wake, which are mutually exclusive events. Insomnia should be treated as a distinct condition, even when occurring with a comorbid diagnosis such as depression or anxiety. Clinicians should implement a multimodal approach to insomnia management, including nonpharmacologic interventions and pharmacologic therapy (when indicated). Pharmacologic agents that are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for insomnia include benzodiazepine receptor agonists (zolpidem, eszopiclone, and zaleplon), low-dose doxepin (tricyclic antidepressant), ramelteon (melatonin receptor agonist), and dual orexin receptor agonists (DORAs, daridorexant, lemborexant, and suvorexant). Unlike other pharmacologic agents, DORAs inhibit wakefulness rather than induce sedation. Additionally, these medications have no evidence of rebound insomnia or withdrawal, and little to no abuse potential. Daridorexant is the newest DORA, has an ideal half-life of 8 hours, and has demonstrated continued efficacy over a 12-month period. Selection of pharmacologic agent should be based on the patient's comorbid conditions, treatment goals and preferences, and other clinical characteristics.
Topics: Humans; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Sleep; Zolpidem; Doxepin
PubMed: 37549414
DOI: 10.12788/jfp.0620 -
American Family Physician Jul 2017Insomnia accounts for more than 5.5 million visits to family physicians each year. Although behavioral interventions are the mainstay of treatment, pharmacologic therapy... (Review)
Review
Insomnia accounts for more than 5.5 million visits to family physicians each year. Although behavioral interventions are the mainstay of treatment, pharmacologic therapy may be necessary for some patients. Understanding the risks and benefits of insomnia medications is critical. Controlled-release melatonin and doxepin are recommended as first-line agents in older adults; the so-called z-drugs (zolpidem, eszopiclone, and zaleplon) should be reserved for use if the first-line agents are ineffective. For the general population with difficulty falling asleep, controlled-release melatonin and the z-drugs can be considered. For those who have difficulty staying asleep, low-dose doxepin and the z-drugs should be considered. Benzodiazepines are not recommended because of their high abuse potential and the availability of better alternatives. Although the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant appears to be relatively effective, it is no more effective than the z-drugs and much more expensive. Sedating antihistamines, antiepileptics, and atypical antipsychotics are not recommended unless they are used primarily to treat another condition. Persons with sleep apnea or chronic lung disease with nocturnal hypoxia should be evaluated by a sleep specialist before sedating medications are prescribed.
Topics: Benzodiazepines; Doxepin; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Melatonin; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 28671376
DOI: No ID Found -
Lancet (London, England) Jul 2022Behavioural, cognitive, and pharmacological interventions can all be effective for insomnia. However, because of inadequate resources, medications are more frequently... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Behavioural, cognitive, and pharmacological interventions can all be effective for insomnia. However, because of inadequate resources, medications are more frequently used worldwide. We aimed to estimate the comparative effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for the acute and long-term treatment of adults with insomnia disorder.
METHODS
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, and websites of regulatory agencies from database inception to Nov 25, 2021, to identify published and unpublished randomised controlled trials. We included studies comparing pharmacological treatments or placebo as monotherapy for the treatment of adults (≥18 year) with insomnia disorder. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the confidence in network meta-analysis (CINeMA) framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (ie, quality of sleep measured by any self-rated scale), treatment discontinuation for any reason and due to side-effects specifically, and safety (ie, number of patients with at least one adverse event) both for acute and long-term treatment. We estimated summary standardised mean differences (SMDs) and odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/PU4QJ.
FINDINGS
We included 170 trials (36 interventions and 47 950 participants) in the systematic review and 154 double-blind, randomised controlled trials (30 interventions and 44 089 participants) were eligible for the network meta-analysis. In terms of acute treatment, benzodiazepines, doxylamine, eszopiclone, lemborexant, seltorexant, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than placebo (SMD range: 0·36-0·83 [CINeMA estimates of certainty: high to moderate]). Benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were more efficacious than melatonin, ramelteon, and zaleplon (SMD 0·27-0·71 [moderate to very low]). Intermediate-acting benzodiazepines, long-acting benzodiazepines, and eszopiclone had fewer discontinuations due to any cause than ramelteon (OR 0·72 [95% CI 0·52-0·99; moderate], 0·70 [0·51-0·95; moderate] and 0·71 [0·52-0·98; moderate], respectively). Zopiclone and zolpidem caused more dropouts due to adverse events than did placebo (zopiclone: OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·28-3·13; very low]; zolpidem: 1·79 [1·25-2·50; moderate]); and zopiclone caused more dropouts than did eszopiclone (OR 1·82 [95% CI 1·01-3·33; low]), daridorexant (3·45 [1·41-8·33; low), and suvorexant (3·13 [1·47-6·67; low]). For the number of individuals with side-effects at study endpoint, benzodiazepines, eszopiclone, zolpidem, and zopiclone were worse than placebo, doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon (OR range 1·27-2·78 [high to very low]). For long-term treatment, eszopiclone and lemborexant were more effective than placebo (eszopiclone: SMD 0·63 [95% CI 0·36-0·90; very low]; lemborexant: 0·41 [0·04-0·78; very low]) and eszopiclone was more effective than ramelteon (0.63 [0·16-1·10; very low]) and zolpidem (0·60 [0·00-1·20; very low]). Compared with ramelteon, eszopiclone and zolpidem had a lower rate of all-cause discontinuations (eszopiclone: OR 0·43 [95% CI 0·20-0·93; very low]; zolpidem: 0·43 [0·19-0·95; very low]); however, zolpidem was associated with a higher number of dropouts due to side-effects than placebo (OR 2·00 [95% CI 1·11-3·70; very low]).
INTERPRETATION
Overall, eszopiclone and lemborexant had a favorable profile, but eszopiclone might cause substantial adverse events and safety data on lemborexant were inconclusive. Doxepin, seltorexant, and zaleplon were well tolerated, but data on efficacy and other important outcomes were scarce and do not allow firm conclusions. Many licensed drugs (including benzodiazepines, daridorexant, suvorexant, and trazodone) can be effective in the acute treatment of insomnia but are associated with poor tolerability, or information about long-term effects is not available. Melatonin, ramelteon, and non-licensed drugs did not show overall material benefits. These results should serve evidence-based clinical practice.
FUNDING
UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre.
Topics: Adult; Benzodiazepines; Doxepin; Eszopiclone; Humans; Melatonin; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Zolpidem
PubMed: 35843245
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00878-9 -
CNS Drug Reviews 2001The novel antidepressant mirtazapine has a dual mode of action. It is a noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant (NaSSA) that acts by antagonizing the... (Review)
Review
The novel antidepressant mirtazapine has a dual mode of action. It is a noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant (NaSSA) that acts by antagonizing the adrenergic alpha2-autoreceptors and alpha2-heteroreceptors as well as by blocking 5-HT2 and 5-HT3 receptors. It enhances, therefore, the release of norepinephrine and 5-HT1A-mediated serotonergic transmission. This dual mode of action may conceivably be responsible for mirtazapine's rapid onset of action. Mirtazapine is extensively metabolized in the liver. The cytochrome (CYP) P450 isoenzymes CYP1A2, CYP2D6, and CYP3A4 are mainly responsible for its metabolism. Using once daily dosing, steady-state concentrations are reached after 4 days in adults and 6 days in the elderly. In vitro studies suggest that mirtazapine is unlikely to cause clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Dry mouth, sedation, and increases in appetite and body weight are the most common adverse effects. In contrast to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), mirtazapine has no sexual side effects. The antidepressant efficacy of mirtazapine was established in several placebo-controlled trials. In major depression, its efficacy is comparable to that of amitriptyline, clomipramine, doxepin, fluoxetine, paroxetine, citalopram, or venlafaxine. Mirtazapine also appears to be useful in patients suffering from depression comorbid with anxiety symptoms and sleep disturbance. It seems to be safe and effective during long-term use.
Topics: Animals; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Drug Interactions; Humans; Mianserin; Mirtazapine
PubMed: 11607047
DOI: 10.1111/j.1527-3458.2001.tb00198.x -
Current Psychiatry Reports Aug 2017The aim of this review article was to summarize recent publications on effects of antidepressants on sleep and to show that these effects not only depend on the kind of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
The aim of this review article was to summarize recent publications on effects of antidepressants on sleep and to show that these effects not only depend on the kind of antidepressant drugs but are also related to the dose, the time of drug administration, and the duration of the treatment.
RECENT FINDINGS
Complaints of disrupted sleep are very common in patients suffering from depression, and they are listed among diagnostic criteria for this disorder. Moreover, midnocturnal insomnia is the most frequent residual symptom of depression. Thus, all antidepressants should normalize sleep. However, at least in short-term treatment, many antidepressants with so-called activating effects (e.g. fluoxetine, venlafaxine) may disrupt sleep, while others with sedative properties (e.g., doxepin, mirtazapine, trazodone) rapidly improve sleep, but may cause problems in long-term treatment due to oversedation.For sleep-promoting action, the best effects can frequently be achieved with a very low dose, administered early enough before bedtime and importantly, always as a part of more complex interventions based on the cognitive-behavioral protocol to treat insomnia (CBT-I). For successful treatment of depression, it is necessary to understand the effects of antidepressants on sleep. Each physician should also be aware that some antidepressants may worsen or induce primary sleep disorders like restless legs syndrome, sleep bruxism, REM sleep behavior disorder, nightmares, and sleep apnea, which may result from an antidepressant-induced weight gain.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depressive Disorder; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Sleep; Sleep Wake Disorders; Time Factors
PubMed: 28791566
DOI: 10.1007/s11920-017-0816-4 -
Acta Dermatovenerologica Alpina,... Sep 2020Chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) is a common inflammatory skin condition characterized by the recurrence of itchy wheals and/or angioedema that lasts more than 6... (Review)
Review
Chronic inducible urticaria (CIndU) is a common inflammatory skin condition characterized by the recurrence of itchy wheals and/or angioedema that lasts more than 6 weeks and is induced by specific physical or environmental stimuli (cold, heat, exercise, pressure, sunlight, vibration, water, etc.). According to the current international classification, it includes physical urticarias (dermographism, delayed-pressure urticaria, exercise-induced urticaria, cold urticaria, heat urticaria, solar urticaria, and vibratory urticaria) and non-physical urticarias caused by exposure to specific stimuli (cholinergic urticaria, contact urticaria, and aquagenic urticaria). In terms of frequency, more common types of CIndU are dermographism, cholinergic urticaria, and delayed-pressure urticaria. In clinical practice, it is often difficult to define the exact type of CIndU; management thus begins with accurate identification of a possible trigger and its avoidance. The definite diagnosis for CIndU requires obtaining a detailed medical history of a patient with comprehensive information about predisposing factors, physical examination, and provocation testing (challenge tests). It is always necessary to recognize the prophylactic options for all the types and to have access to different therapies (primarily second-generation H1 antihistamines, but also H2 antihistamines, hydroxyzine, doxepin, oral glucocorticoids, omalizumab/anti-IgE therapy, phototherapy, physical desensitization, immunomodulatory agents, etc.) individualized for each patient.
Topics: Chronic Urticaria; Humans
PubMed: 32975301
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2018Insomnia disorder is a subjective condition of unsatisfactory sleep (e.g. sleep onset, maintenance, early waking, impairment of daytime functioning). Insomnia disorder... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Insomnia disorder is a subjective condition of unsatisfactory sleep (e.g. sleep onset, maintenance, early waking, impairment of daytime functioning). Insomnia disorder impairs quality of life and is associated with an increased risk of physical and mental health problems including anxiety, depression, drug and alcohol abuse, and increased health service use. hypnotic medications (e.g. benzodiazepines and 'Z' drugs) are licensed for sleep promotion, but can induce tolerance and dependence, although many people remain on long-term treatment. Antidepressant use for insomnia is widespread, but none is licensed for insomnia and the evidence for their efficacy is unclear. This use of unlicensed medications may be driven by concern over longer-term use of hypnotics and the limited availability of psychological treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness, safety and tolerability of antidepressants for insomnia in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
This review incorporated the results of searches to July 2015 conducted on electronic bibliographic databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2015, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1950 to 2015), Embase (1980 to 2015) and PsycINFO (1806 to 2015). We updated the searches to December 2017, but these results have not yet been incorporated into the review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults (aged 18 years or older) with a primary diagnosis of insomnia and all participant types including people with comorbidities. Any antidepressant as monotherapy at any dose whether compared with placebo, other medications for insomnia (e.g. benzodiazepines and 'Z' drugs), a different antidepressant, waiting list control or treatment as usual.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility and extracted data using a data extraction form. A third review author resolved disagreements on inclusion or data extraction.
MAIN RESULTS
The search identified 23 RCTs (2806 participants).Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared with placebo: three studies (135 participants) compared SSRIs with placebo. Combining results was not possible. Two paroxetine studies showed significant improvements in subjective sleep measures at six (60 participants, P = 0.03) and 12 weeks (27 participants, P < 0.001). There was no difference in the fluoxetine study (low quality evidence).There were either no adverse events or they were not reported (very low quality evidence).Tricyclic antidepressants (TCA) compared with placebo: six studies (812 participants) compared TCA with placebo; five used doxepin and one used trimipramine. We found no studies of amitriptyline. Four studies (518 participants) could be pooled, showing a moderate improvement in subjective sleep quality over placebo (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.56 to -0.21) (moderate quality evidence). Moderate quality evidence suggested that TCAs possibly improved sleep efficiency (mean difference (MD) 6.29 percentage points, 95% CI 3.17 to 9.41; 4 studies; 510 participants) and increased sleep time (MD 22.88 minutes, 95% CI 13.17 to 32.59; 4 studies; 510 participants). There may have been little or no impact on sleep latency (MD -4.27 minutes, 95% CI -9.01 to 0.48; 4 studies; 510 participants).There may have been little or no difference in adverse events between TCAs and placebo (risk ratio (RR) 1.02, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.21; 6 studies; 812 participants) (low quality evidence).'Other' antidepressants with placebo: eight studies compared other antidepressants with placebo (one used mianserin and seven used trazodone). Three studies (370 participants) of trazodone could be pooled, indicating a moderate improvement in subjective sleep outcomes over placebo (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.66 to -0.02). Two studies of trazodone measured polysomnography and found little or no difference in sleep efficiency (MD 1.38 percentage points, 95% CI -2.87 to 5.63; 169 participants) (low quality evidence).There was low quality evidence from two studies of more adverse effects with trazodone than placebo (i.e. morning grogginess, increased dry mouth and thirst).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We identified relatively few, mostly small studies with short-term follow-up and design limitations. The effects of SSRIs compared with placebo are uncertain with too few studies to draw clear conclusions. There may be a small improvement in sleep quality with short-term use of low-dose doxepin and trazodone compared with placebo. The tolerability and safety of antidepressants for insomnia is uncertain due to limited reporting of adverse events. There was no evidence for amitriptyline (despite common use in clinical practice) or for long-term antidepressant use for insomnia. High-quality trials of antidepressants for insomnia are needed.
Topics: Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic; Fluoxetine; Humans; Mianserin; Paroxetine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders; Trazodone
PubMed: 29761479
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010753.pub2 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Jul 2015Dose equivalence of antidepressants is critically important for clinical practice and for research. There are several methods to define and calculate dose equivalence...
BACKGROUND
Dose equivalence of antidepressants is critically important for clinical practice and for research. There are several methods to define and calculate dose equivalence but for antidepressants, only daily defined dose and consensus methods have been applied to date. The purpose of the present study is to examine dose equivalence of antidepressants by a less arbitrary and more systematic method.
METHODS
We used data from all randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose trials comparing fluoxetine or paroxetine as standard drugs with any other active antidepressants as monotherapy in the acute phase treatment of unipolar depression. We calculated the ratio of the mean doses for each study and weighted it by the total sample size to find the weighted mean ratio for each drug, which was then used to define the drug׳s dosage equivalent to fluoxetine 40mg/d.
RESULTS
We included 83 studies (14 131 participants). In the primary analysis, fluoxetine 40mg/day was equivalent to paroxetine dosage of 34.0mg/day, agomelatine 53.2mg/day, amitriptyline, 122.3mg/day, bupropion 348.5mg/day, clomipramine 116.1mg/day, desipramine 196.3mg/day, dothiepin 154.8mg/day, doxepin 140.1mg/day, escitalopram 18.0mg/day, fluvoxamine 143.3mg/day, imipramine 137.2mg/day, lofepramine 250.2mg/day, maprotiline 118.0mg/day, mianserin, 101.1mg/day, mirtazapine 50.9mg/day, moclobemide 575.2mg/day, nefazodone 535.2mg/day, nortriptyline 100.9mg/day, reboxetine 11.5mg/day, sertraline 98.5mg/day, trazodone 401.4mg/day, and venlafaxine 149.4mg/day. Sensitivity analyses corroborated the results except for doxepin.
LIMITATIONS
The number of studies for some drugs was small. The current method assumes dose response relationship of antidepressants.
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings can be useful for clinicians when they switch antidepressants and for researchers when they compare various antidepressants in their research.
Topics: Adult; Amitriptyline; Antidepressive Agents; Bupropion; Citalopram; Depressive Disorder, Major; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Fluoxetine; Fluvoxamine; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Moclobemide; Nortriptyline; Paroxetine; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors; Sertraline; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25911132
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.03.021 -
Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) Mar 2018The comprehensive treatment of pain is multidimodal, with pharmacotherapy playing a key role. An effective therapy for pain depends on the intensity and type of pain,... (Review)
Review
The comprehensive treatment of pain is multidimodal, with pharmacotherapy playing a key role. An effective therapy for pain depends on the intensity and type of pain, the patients' age, comorbidities, and appropriate choice of analgesic, its dose and route of administration. This review is aimed at presenting current knowledge on analgesics administered by transdermal and topical routes for physicians, nurses, pharmacists, and other health care professionals dealing with patients suffering from pain. Analgesics administered transdermally or topically act through different mechanisms. Opioids administered transdermally are absorbed into vessels located in subcutaneous tissue and, subsequently, are conveyed in the blood to opioid receptors localized in the central and peripheral nervous system. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) applied topically render analgesia mainly through a high concentration in the structures of the joint and a provision of local anti-inflammatory effects. Topically administered drugs such as lidocaine and capsaicin in patches, capsaicin in cream, EMLA cream, and creams containing antidepressants (i.e., doxepin, amitriptyline) act mainly locally in tissues through receptors and/or ion channels. Transdermal and topical routes offer some advantages over systemic analgesic administration. Analgesics administered topically have a much better profile for adverse effects as they relieve local pain with minimal systemic effects. The transdermal route apart from the above-mentioned advantages and provision of long period of analgesia may be more convenient, especially for patients who are unable to take drugs orally. Topically and transdermally administered opioids are characterised by a lower risk of addiction compared to oral and parenteral routes.
Topics: Administration, Cutaneous; Administration, Topical; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Animals; Humans; Pain
PubMed: 29562618
DOI: 10.3390/molecules23030681