Co-prescription of medication for bipolar disorder and diabetes mellitus : a nationwide population based study with focus on gender differences

Background
Studies have shown a correlation between bipolar disorder and diabetes mellitus. It is unclear if this correlation is a part of common pathophysiological pathways, or if medication for bipolar disorder has negative effects on blood sugar regulation.
Methods
The Norwegian prescription database was analyzed. Prescriptions for lithium, lamotrigine, carbamazepine and valproate were used as proxies for bipolar disorder. Prescriptions for insulin and oral anti-diabetic agents were used as proxies for diabetes mellitus. We explored the association between medication for bipolar disorder and diabetes medication by logistic regression
Results
We found a strong association between concomitant use of medication to treat diabetes mellitus and mood stabilizers for the treatment of bipolar disorder. Females had a 30% higher risk compared to men of being treated for both disorders. Persons using oral anti-diabetic agents had higher odds of receiving valproate than either lithium or lamotrigine. Use of insulin as monotherapy seemed to have lower odds than oral anti-diabetic agents of co-prescription of mood stabilizers, compared to the general population.
Conclusions
This study showed a strong association between the use of mood stabilizers and anti-diabetic agents. The association was stronger among women than men.

Atypical antipsychotic agents; peas in a pod or chalk and cheese?

With escalating health expenditure and a shrinking purse, there is increased focus on the cost efficacy of still patented versus generic medications in general, and for atypical antipsychotics in particular. In a recent BMC Medicine article, Godman and colleagues presented data indicating poor uptake of the off patent atypical antipsychotic risperidone, arguing for authorities to mandate its greater use. This is under the assumption of clinical equivalence of atypical antipsychotics. This commentary argues that there are clinically meaningful differences between atypical antipsychotics and important inter-individual heterogeneity in clinical response and tolerability. Access to a broad range of atypical antipsychotics enables clinicians to tailor care, taking consideration of differential efficacy and adverse effects profile in order to meet the needs of individual patients with improved real world effectiveness of treatment. Restriction of agent choice risks detracting from optimal clinical care, with possible poorer outcomes and greater costs of care. A balance between encouraging use of cheapest in class agent and allowing access to various atypical agents for tailored care is likely to produce optimal health outcomes.Please see related article: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/98.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of augmentation with lamotrigine or placebo in patients concomitantly treated with fluoxetine for resistant major depressive episodes.

Evidence of the antidepressant efficacy of lamotrigine is increasing, although there are no placebo-controlled trials of lamotrigine augmentation in depression. The aim of this study was to assess if augmentation with lamotrigine was superior to placebo in patients who were receiving fluoxetine for resistant major depressive episodes.

Associations of obsessive-compulsive symptoms with clinical and neurocognitive features in schizophrenia according to stage of illness

This study aimed to investigate the association of obsessive-compulsive symptoms with clinical and neurocognitive features in patients with schizophrenia. This study enrolled 163 people with schizophrenia who were receiving risperidone monotherapy. Comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms were assessed using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, and subjects with a score≥10 constituted the obsessive-compulsive symptom group (n=30, 18.4%). The learning index was significantly higher in patients with obsessive-compulsive symptoms than in those without such symptoms after adjusting for age, stage (early and chronic), duration of illness, and CDSS score. However, there was no significant interaction between obsessive-compulsive symptoms and stage of illness. Scores on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, and Beck Depression Inventory were significantly higher in the obsessive-compulsive symptom group. In addition, the Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic Treatment score was significantly lower in the obsessive-compulsive symptom group. In conclusion, comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia were associated with a higher learning ability without a significant interaction with stage of illness. However, schizophrenia patients with obsessive-compulsive symptoms had more severe psychotic and depressive symptoms and poorer quality of life.

Associations of obsessive-compulsive symptoms with clinical and neurocognitive features in schizophrenia according to stage of illness

This study aimed to investigate the association of obsessive-compulsive symptoms with clinical and neurocognitive features in patients with schizophrenia. This study enrolled 163 people with schizophrenia who were receiving risperidone monotherapy. Comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms were assessed using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, and subjects with a score ≥ 10 constituted the obsessive-compulsive symptom group (n=30, 18.4%). The learning index was significantly higher in patients with obsessive-compulsive symptoms than in those without such symptoms after adjusting for age, stage (early and chronic), duration of illness, and CDSS score. However, there was no significant interaction between obsessive-compulsive symptoms and stage of illness. Scores on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, and Beck Depression Inventory were significantly higher in the obsessive-compulsive symptom group. In addition, the Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic Treatment score was significantly lower in the obsessive-compulsive symptom group. In conclusion, comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia were associated with a higher learning ability without a significant interaction with stage of illness. However, schizophrenia patients with obsessive-compulsive symptoms had more severe psychotic and depressive symptoms and poorer quality of life.

Clinical pharmacology of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are a class of oral antidiabetic drugs that improve glycaemic control without causing weight gain or increasing hypoglycaemic risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The eight available DPP-4 inhibitors, including alogliptin, anagliptin, gemigliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, teneligliptin, and vildagliptin, are small molecules used orally with identical mechanism of action and similar safety profiles in patients with T2DM. DPP-4 inhibitors may be used as monotherapy or in double or triple combination with other oral glucose-lowering agents such as metformin, thiazolidinediones, or sulfonylureas. Although DPP-4 inhibitors have the same mode of action, they differ by some important pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties that may be clinically relevant in some patients. The main differences between the eight gliptins include: potency, target selectivity, oral bioavailability, elimination half-life, binding to plasma proteins, metabolic pathways, formation of active metabolite(s), main excretion routes, dosage adjustment for renal and liver insufficiency, and potential drug-drug interactions. The off-target inhibition of selective DPP-4 inhibitors is responsible for multiorgan toxicities such as immune dysfunction, impaired healing, and skin reactions. As a drug class, the DPP-4 inhibitors have become accepted in clinical practice due to their excellent tolerability profile, with a low risk of hypoglycaemia, a neutral effect on body weight, and once-daily dosing. It is unknown if DPP-4 inhibitors can prevent disease progression. More clinical studies are needed to validate the optimal regimens of DPP-4 inhibitors for the management of T2DM when their potential toxicities are closely monitored.

An update on the clinical pharmacology of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor alogliptin used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Alogliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor that is a class of relatively new oral hypoglycaemic drugs used in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), can be used as monotherapy or in combination with other anti-diabetic agents, including metformin, pioglitazone, sulfonylureas and insulin with a considerable therapeutic effect. Alogliptin exhibits favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles in humans. Alogliptin is mainly metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP2D6) and CYP3A4. Dose reduction is recommended for patients with moderate or worse renal impairment. Side effects of alogliptin include nasopharyngitis, upper-respiratory tract infections and headache. Hypoglycaemia is seen in about 1.5% of the T2DM patients. Rare but severe adverse reactions such as acute pancreatitis, serious hypersensitivity including anaphylaxis, angioedema and severe cutaneous reactions such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome have been reported from post-marketing monitoring. Pharmacokinetic interactions have not been observed between alogliptin and other drugs including glyburide, metformin, pioglitazone, insulin and warfarin. The present review aimed to update the clinical information on pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, adverse effects and drug interactions, and to discuss the future directions of alogliptin.