21 resultados para antipsychotic drugs
Resumo:
5-Methoxy-N,N-dimethyltryptamine (5-MeO-DMT) is a natural hallucinogen component of Ayahuasca, an Amazonian beverage traditionally used for ritual, religious and healing purposes that is being increasingly used for recreational purposes in US and Europe. 5MeO-DMT is of potential interest for schizophrenia research owing to its hallucinogenic properties. Two other psychotomimetic agents, phencyclidine and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodo-phenylisopropylamine (DOI), markedly disrupt neuronal activity and reduce the power of low frequency cortical oscillations (<4 Hz, LFCO) in rodent medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). Here we examined the effect of 5-MeO-DMT on cortical function and its potential reversal by antipsychotic drugs. Moreover, regional brain activity was assessed by blood-oxygen level dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). 5-MeO-DMT disrupted mPFC activity, increasing and decreasing the discharge of 51 and 35% of the recorded pyramidal neurons, and reducing (−31%) the power of LFCO. The latter effect depended on 5-HT1A and 5-HT2A receptor activation and was reversed by haloperidol, clozapine, risperidone, and the mGlu2/3 agonist LY379268. Likewise, 5-MeO-DMT decreased BOLD responses in visual cortex (V1) and mPFC. The disruption of cortical activity induced by 5-MeO-DMT resembles that produced by phencyclidine and DOI. This, together with the reversal by antipsychotic drugs, suggests that the observed cortical alterations are related to the psychotomimetic action of 5-MeO-DMT. Overall, the present model may help to understand the neurobiological basis of hallucinations and to identify new targets in antipsychotic drug development.
Resumo:
Background: Atypical antipsychotics provide better control of the negative and affective symptoms of schizophrenia when compared with conventional neuroleptics; nevertheless, their heightened ability to improve cognitive dysfunction remains a matter of debate. This study aimed to examine the changes in cognition associated with long-term antipsychotic treatment and to evaluate the effect of the type of antipsychotic (conventional versus novel antipsychotic drugs) on cognitive performance over time. Methods: In this naturalistic study, we used a comprehensive neuropsychological battery of tests to assess a sample of schizophrenia patients taking either conventional (n = 13) or novel antipsychotics (n = 26) at baseline and at two years after. Results: Continuous antipsychotic treatment regardless of class was associated with improvement on verbal fluency, executive functions, and visual and verbal memory. Patients taking atypical antipsychotics did not show greater cognitive enhancement over two years than patients taking conventional antipsychotics. Conclusions Although long-term antipsychotic treatment slightly improved cognitive function, the switch from conventional to atypical antipsychotic treatment should not be based exclusively on the presence of these cognitive deficits.
Resumo:
Background To analyse the extent and profile of outpatient regular dispensation of antipsychotics, both in combination and monotherapy, in the Barcelona Health Region (Spain), focusing on the use of clozapine and long-acting injections (LAI). Methods Antipsychotic drugs dispensed for people older than 18 and processed by the Catalan Health Service during 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. First and second generation antipsychotic drugs (FGA and SGA) from the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification (ATC) code N05A (except lithium) were included. A patient selection algorithm was designed to identify prescriptions regularly dispensed. Variables included were age, gender, antipsychotic type, route of administration and number of packages dispensed. Results A total of 117,811 patients were given any antipsychotic, of whom 71,004 regularly received such drugs. Among the latter, 9,855 (13.9%) corresponded to an antipsychotic combination, 47,386 (66.7%) to monotherapy and 13,763 (19.4%) to unspecified combinations. Of the patients given antipsychotics in association, 58% were men. Olanzapine (37.1%) and oral risperidone (36.4%) were the most common dispensations. Analysis of the patients dispensed two antipsychotics (57.8%) revealed 198 different combinations, the most frequent being the association of FGA and SGA (62.0%). Clozapine was dispensed to 2.3% of patients. Of those who were receiving antipsychotics in combination, 6.6% were given clozapine, being clozapine plus amisulpride the most frequent association (22.8%). A total of 3.800 patients (5.4%) were given LAI antipsychotics, and 2.662 of these (70.1%) were in combination. Risperidone was the most widely used LAI. Conclusions The scant evidence available regarding the efficacy of combining different antipsychotics contrasts with the high number and variety of combinations prescribed to outpatients, as well as with the limited use of clozapine. Background To analyse the extent and profile of outpatient regular dispensation of antipsychotics, both in combination and monotherapy, in the Barcelona Health Region (Spain), focusing on the use of clozapine and long-acting injections (LAI). Methods Antipsychotic drugs dispensed for people older than 18 and processed by the Catalan Health Service during 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. First and second generation antipsychotic drugs (FGA and SGA) from the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification (ATC) code N05A (except lithium) were included. A patient selection algorithm was designed to identify prescriptions regularly dispensed. Variables included were age, gender, antipsychotic type, route of administration and number of packages dispensed. Results A total of 117,811 patients were given any antipsychotic, of whom 71,004 regularly received such drugs. Among the latter, 9,855 (13.9%) corresponded to an antipsychotic combination, 47,386 (66.7%) to monotherapy and 13,763 (19.4%) to unspecified combinations. Of the patients given antipsychotics in association, 58% were men. Olanzapine (37.1%) and oral risperidone (36.4%) were the most common dispensations. Analysis of the patients dispensed two antipsychotics (57.8%) revealed 198 different combinations, the most frequent being the association of FGA and SGA (62.0%). Clozapine was dispensed to 2.3% of patients. Of those who were receiving antipsychotics in combination, 6.6% were given clozapine, being clozapine plus amisulpride the most frequent association (22.8%). A total of 3.800 patients (5.4%) were given LAI antipsychotics, and 2.662 of these (70.1%) were in combination. Risperidone was the most widely used LAI. Conclusions The scant evidence available regarding the efficacy of combining different antipsychotics contrasts with the high number and variety of combinations prescribed to outpatients, as well as with the limited use of clozapine.
Resumo:
Purpose: To describe (1) the clinical profiles and the patterns of use of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia at risk of nonadherence with oral antipsychotics, and in those who started treatment with LAI antipsychotics, (2) health care resource utilization and associated costs. Patients and methods: A total of 597 outpatients with schizophrenia at risk of nonadherence, according to the psychiatrist's clinical judgment, were recruited at 59 centers in a noninterventional prospective observational study of 1-year follow-up when their treatment was modified. In a post hoc analysis, the profiles of patients starting LAI or continuing with oral antipsychotics were described, and descriptive analyses of treatments, health resource utilization, and direct costs were performed in those who started an LAI antipsychotic. Results: Therapy modifications involved the antipsychotic medications in 84.8% of patients, mostly because of insufficient efficacy of prior regimen. Ninety-two (15.4%) patients started an LAI antipsychotic at recruitment. Of these, only 13 (14.1%) were prescribed with first-generation antipsychotics. During 1 year, 16.3% of patients who started and 14.9% of patients who did not start an LAI antipsychotic at recruitment relapsed, contrasting with the 20.9% who had been hospitalized only within the prior 6 months. After 1 year, 74.3% of patients who started an LAI antipsychotic continued concomitant treatment with oral antipsychotics. The mean (median) total direct health care cost per patient per month during the study year among the patients starting any LAI antipsychotic at baseline was 1,407 ( 897.7). Medication costs (including oral and LAI antipsychotics and concomitant medication) represented almost 44%, whereas nonmedication costs accounted for more than 55% of the mean total direct health care costs. Conclusion: LAI antipsychotics were infrequently prescribed in spite of a psychiatrist-perceived risk of nonadherence to oral antipsychotics. Mean medication costs were lower than nonmedication costs.
Resumo:
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of maintenance treatments for bipolar disorder. Placebo-controlled or active comparator bipolar maintenance clinical trials of ≥6 months' duration with at least 15 patients/treatment group were identified using Medline, EMBASE, clinicaltrials.gov, and Cochrane databases (1993 to July 2010). The main outcome measure was relative risk for relapse for patients in remission. Twenty trials (5,364 patients) were identified. Overall, lithium and quetiapine were the most studied agents (eight and five trials, respectively). The majority of studies included patients who had previously responded to treatment for an acute episode. All interventions, with the exception of perphenazine+mood stabilizer, showed a relative risk for manic/mixed or depressive relapse below 1.0, although there was variation in the statistical significance of the findings vs. placebo. No monotherapy was associated with a significantly reduced risk for both manic/mixed and depressed relapse. Of the combination treatments, only quetiapine+lithium/divalproex, was associated with a significantly reduced risk vs. comparator (placebo+lithium/valproate) for relapse at both the manic/mixed and depressed poles of bipolar illness. Limitations for the analysis include differences in study durations and definitions of relapse. In conclusion, available maintenance therapies show considerable variation in efficacy. The efficacy of lithium and divalproex has been confirmed, but newer therapies, such as a number of atypical antipsychotics were also shown to be effective in bipolar disorder. Efficacy of all maintenance interventions needs to be balanced against the safety and tolerability profiles of individual agents.
Resumo:
Abstract BACKGROUND: The current article is a systematic review concerning the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole in the treatment of bipolar disorder. METHODS: A systematic Medline and repositories search concerning the usefulness of aripiprazole in bipolar disorder was performed, with the combination of the words 'aripiprazole' and 'bipolar'. RESULTS: The search returned 184 articles and was last updated on 15 April 2009. An additional search included repositories of clinical trials and previous systematic reviews specifically in order to trace unpublished trials. There were seven placebo-controlled randomised controlled trials (RCTs), six with comparator studies and one with add-on studies. They assessed the usefulness of aripiprazole in acute mania, acute bipolar depression and during the maintenance phase in comparison to placebo, lithium or haloperidol. CONCLUSION: Aripiprazole appears effective for the treatment and prophylaxis against mania. The data on bipolar depression are so far negative, however there is a need for further study at lower dosages. The most frequent adverse effects are extrapyramidal signs and symptoms, especially akathisia, without any significant weight gain, hyperprolactinaemia or laboratory test changes.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Anecdotal reports suggests that most clinicians treat medications as belonging to a class with regard to all therapeutic indications; this means that the whole 'class' of drugs is considered to possesses a specific therapeutic action. The present article explores the possible existence of a true 'class effect' for agents available for the treatment of bipolar disorder. METHODS: We reviewed the available treatment data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and explored 16 'agent class'/'treatment issue' cases for bipolar disorder. Four classes of agents were examined: first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs), second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), antiepileptics and antidepressants, with respect to their efficacy on four treatment issues of bipolar disorder (BD) (acute mania, acute bipolar depression, maintenance against mania, maintenance against depression). RESULTS: From the 16 'agent class'/' treatment issue' cases, only 3 possible class effects were detected, and they all concerned acute mania and antipsychotics. Four effect cases have not been adequately studied (FGAs against acute bipolar depression and in maintenance protection from depression, and antidepressants against acute mania and protection from mania) and they all concern treatment cases with a high risk of switching to the opposite pole, thus research in these areas is poor. There is no 'class effect' at all concerning antiepileptics. CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggest that a 'class effect' is the exception rather than the rule in the treatment of BD. However, the possible presence of a 'class effect' concept discourages clinicians from continued scientific training and reading. Focused educational intervention might be necessary to change this attitude.
Resumo:
Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.
Resumo:
Purpose: To describe (1) the clinical profiles and the patterns of use of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia at risk of nonadherence with oral antipsychotics, and in those who started treatment with LAI antipsychotics, (2) health care resource utilization and associated costs. Patients and methods: A total of 597 outpatients with schizophrenia at risk of nonadherence, according to the psychiatrist's clinical judgment, were recruited at 59 centers in a noninterventional prospective observational study of 1-year follow-up when their treatment was modified. In a post hoc analysis, the profiles of patients starting LAI or continuing with oral antipsychotics were described, and descriptive analyses of treatments, health resource utilization, and direct costs were performed in those who started an LAI antipsychotic. Results: Therapy modifications involved the antipsychotic medications in 84.8% of patients, mostly because of insufficient efficacy of prior regimen. Ninety-two (15.4%) patients started an LAI antipsychotic at recruitment. Of these, only 13 (14.1%) were prescribed with first-generation antipsychotics. During 1 year, 16.3% of patients who started and 14.9% of patients who did not start an LAI antipsychotic at recruitment relapsed, contrasting with the 20.9% who had been hospitalized only within the prior 6 months. After 1 year, 74.3% of patients who started an LAI antipsychotic continued concomitant treatment with oral antipsychotics. The mean (median) total direct health care cost per patient per month during the study year among the patients starting any LAI antipsychotic at baseline was 1,407 ( 897.7). Medication costs (including oral and LAI antipsychotics and concomitant medication) represented almost 44%, whereas nonmedication costs accounted for more than 55% of the mean total direct health care costs. Conclusion: LAI antipsychotics were infrequently prescribed in spite of a psychiatrist-perceived risk of nonadherence to oral antipsychotics. Mean medication costs were lower than nonmedication costs.
Resumo:
Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. Comment in The following popper user interface control may not be accessible. Tab to the next button to revert the control to an accessible version.Destroy user interface controlEfficacy of modern antipsychotics in placebo-controlled trials in bipolar depression: a meta-analysis--results to be interpreted with caution.
Resumo:
Clinical trials today are conducted in multiple countries to enhance patient recruitment and improve efficiency of trials. However, the demographic and cultural diversity may contribute to variations in study outcomes. Here we conducted post-hoc analyses for a placebo-controlled study with ziprasidone and haloperidol for the treatment of acute mania to address the demographic, dosing, and outcome disparities in India, Russia and the USA. We compared the baseline characteristics, outcomes and discontinuations in patients and explored the relationship between the outcome measures across these countries. We found substantial differences in baseline characteristics of subjects, administered dosage and disease severity in India compared to the USA and Russia. Conversely, US subjects had a higher placebo response compared to subjects in Russia and India. These results are probably due to demographic differences in patient populations and psychiatric clinical practice across countries. While we offer initial ideas to address the disparities identified in this analysis, it is clear that further research to improve our understanding of geographical differences is essential to ensure globally applicable results for clinical trials in psychiatry.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Hospitalization is a costly and distressing event associated with relapse during schizophrenia treatment. No information is available on the predictors of psychiatric hospitalization during maintenance treatment with olanzapine long-acting injection (olanzapine-LAI) or how the risk of hospitalization differs between olanzapine-LAI and oral olanzapine. This study aimed to identify the predictors of psychiatric hospitalization during maintenance treatment with olanzapine-LAI and assessed four parameters: hospitalization prevalence, incidence rate, duration, and the time to first hospitalization. Olanzapine-LAI was also compared with a sub-therapeutic dose of olanzapine-LAI and with oral olanzapine. METHODS: This was a post hoc exploratory analysis of data from a randomized, double-blind study comparing the safety and efficacy of olanzapine-LAI (pooled active depot groups: 405 mg/4 weeks, 300 mg/2 weeks, and 150 mg/2 weeks) with oral olanzapine and sub-therapeutic olanzapine-LAI (45 mg/4 weeks) during 6 months' maintenance treatment of clinically stable schizophrenia outpatients (n=1064). The four psychiatric hospitalization parameters were analyzed for each treatment group. Within the olanzapine-LAI group, patients with and without hospitalization were compared on baseline characteristics. Logistic regression and Cox's proportional hazards models were used to identify the best predictors of hospitalization. Comparisons between the treatment groups employed descriptive statistics, the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox's proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Psychiatric hospitalization was best predicted by suicide threats in the 12 months before baseline and by prior hospitalization. Compared with sub-therapeutic olanzapine-LAI, olanzapine-LAI was associated with a significantly lower hospitalization rate (5.2% versus 11.1%, p < 0.01), a lower mean number of hospitalizations (0.1 versus 0.2, p = 0.01), a shorter mean duration of hospitalization (1.5 days versus 2.9 days, p < 0.01), and a similar median time to first hospitalization (35 versus 60 days, p = 0.48). Olanzapine-LAI did not differ significantly from oral olanzapine on the studied hospitalization parameters. CONCLUSIONS: In clinically stable schizophrenia outpatients receiving olanzapine-LAI maintenance treatment, psychiatric hospitalization was best predicted by a history of suicide threats and prior psychiatric hospitalization. Olanzapine-LAI was associated with a significantly lower incidence of psychiatric hospitalization and shorter duration of hospitalization compared with sub-therapeutic olanzapine-LAI. Olanzapine-LAI did not differ significantly from oral olanzapine on hospitalization parameters.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: With many atypical antipsychotics now available in the market, it has become a common clinical practice to switch between atypical agents as a means of achieving the best clinical outcomes. This study aimed to examine the impact of switching from olanzapine to risperidone and vice versa on clinical status and tolerability outcomes in outpatients with schizophrenia in a naturalistic setting. METHODS: W-SOHO was a 3-year observational study that involved over 17,000 outpatients with schizophrenia from 37 countries worldwide. The present post hoc study focused on the subgroup of patients who started taking olanzapine at baseline and subsequently made the first switch to risperidone (n=162) and vice versa (n=136). Clinical status was assessed at the visit when the first switch was made (i.e. before switching) and after switching. Logistic regression models examined the impact of medication switch on tolerability outcomes, and linear regression models assessed the association between medication switch and change in the Clinical Global Impression-Schizophrenia (CGI-SCH) overall score or change in weight. In addition, Kaplan-Meier survival curves and Cox-proportional hazards models were used to analyze the time to medication switch as well as time to relapse (symptom worsening as assessed by the CGI-SCH scale or hospitalization). RESULTS: 48% and 39% of patients switching to olanzapine and risperidone, respectively, remained on the medication without further switches (p=0.019). Patients switching to olanzapine were significantly less likely to experience relapse (hazard ratio: 3.43, 95% CI: 1.43, 8.26), extrapyramidal symptoms (odds ratio [OR]: 4.02, 95% CI: 1.49, 10.89) and amenorrhea/galactorrhea (OR: 8.99, 95% CI: 2.30, 35.13). No significant difference in weight change was, however, found between the two groups. While the CGI-SCH overall score improved in both groups after switching, there was a significantly greater change in those who switched to olanzapine (difference of 0.29 points, p=0.013). CONCLUSION: Our study showed that patients who switched from risperidone to olanzapine were likely to experience a more favorable treatment course than those who switched from olanzapine to risperidone. Given the nature of observational study design and small sample size, additional studies are warranted.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the long-term changes in the functioning of schizophrenia patients receiving maintenance therapy with olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI), and whether observed changes differ from those seen with oral olanzapine. METHODS: This study describes changes in the levels of functioning among outpatients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine-LAI compared with oral olanzapine over 2 years. This was a secondary analysis of data from a multicenter, randomized, open-label, 2-year study comparing the long-term treatment effectiveness of monthly olanzapine-LAI (405 mg/4 weeks; n=264) with daily oral olanzapine (10 mg/day; n=260). Levels of functioning were assessed with the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale. Functional status was also classified as 'good', 'moderate', or 'poor', using a previous data-driven approach. Changes in functional levels were assessed with McNemar's test and comparisons between olanzapine-LAI and oral olanzapine employed the Student's t-test. RESULTS: Over the 2-year study, the patients treated with olanzapine-LAI improved their level of functioning (per Quality of Life total score) from 64.0-70.8 (P<0.001). Patients on oral olanzapine also increased their level of functioning from 62.1-70.1 (P<0.001). At baseline, 19.2% of the olanzapine-LAI-treated patients had a 'good' level of functioning, which increased to 27.5% (P<0.05). The figures for oral olanzapine were 14.2% and 24.5%, respectively (P<0.001). Results did not significantly differ between olanzapine-LAI and oral olanzapine. CONCLUSION: In this 2-year, open-label, randomized study of olanzapine-LAI, outpatients with schizophrenia maintained or improved their favorable baseline level of functioning over time. Results did not significantly differ between olanzapine-LAI and oral olanzapine.
Resumo:
This paper examines competition between generic and brand-name drugs in the regulated Spanish pharmaceutical market. A nested logit demand model is specified for the three most consumed therapeutic subgroups in Spain: statins (anticholesterol), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (antidepressants) and proton pump inhibitors (antiulcers). The model is estimated with instrumental variables from a panel of monthly prescription data from 1999 to 2005. The dataset distinguishes between three different levels of patients’ copayments within the prescriptions and the results show that the greater the level of insurance that the patient has (and therefore the lower the patient’s copayment), the lower the proportion of generic prescriptions made by physicians. It seems that the low level of copayment has delayed the penetration of generics into the Spanish market. Additionally, the estimation of the demand model suggests that the substitution rules and promotional efforts associated with the reference pricing system have increased generic market share, and that being among the first generic entrants has an additional positive effect.