Evaluation of Defined Daily Dose,percentage of British National Formulary maximum and chlorpromazine equivalents in antipsychotic drug utilization

Objective

The present study was carried out to investigate and compare the three methods for calculating total antipsychotic dose among outpatients with schizophrenia attending primary psychiatric health care centers. The three methods were: Defined Daily Doses (DDDs), chlorpromazine equivalents (CPZeq) and percentages of the British National Formulary (BNF) maximum.

Methodology

Antipsychotic drug dosing data for 250 patients with schizophrenia were investigated by calculating Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Factors associated with antipsychotic dose, expressed as DDDs, CPZeq and percentages of the BNF maximum recommended daily dose, were investigated by means of linear regression analysis.

Results

Spearman’s correlation showed that there is a significant relationship between all pairs of the three dosing methods. In all three methods, coherence was strongest when dealing with first generation antipsychotics (FGA). Linear regression analyses showed a high degree of coherence between antipsychotic doses expressed as DDDs, CPZeq and percentages of the BNF maximum recommended daily dose.

Conclusion

All three tested methods are reliable and coherent for calculating antipsychotic dosing.Abbreviations: %BNFmax, percentage of British National Formulary maximum; CPZeq, chlorpromazine equivalents; DDD, Defined Daily Dose (DDD); FGA, first generation antipsychotics; SGA, second generation antipsychotics     

Protection against Brain Atrophy by Anti-dementia Medication in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease: Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

Background:

There has not been conclusive evidence for prevention of brain atrophy by anti-dementia drugs in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease.

Methods:

Relevant studies were identified through searches of PubMed, databases of the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO citations up to 16 May, 2015. Only double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of anti-dementia drugs in patients with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s Disease were included. Primary outcomes were annualized percent change of total brain volume (%TBV/y), annualized percent change of hippocampal volume (%HV/y), and annualized percent change of ventricular volume (%VV/y) measured by magnetic resonance imaging. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for relevant outcomes.

Results:

Seven randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials (n=1708) were found to meet the inclusion criteria, including 4 mild cognitive impairment studies (n=1327) and 3 Alzheimer’s Disease studies (n=381) [3 donepezil studies (2 mild cognitive impairment studies and 1 Alzheimer’s Disease study), 1 galantaime study for mild cognitive impairment, 2 mementine studies for Alzheimer’s Disease, and 1 rivastigmine study for mild cognitive impairment]. Pooled anti-dementia drugs showed superior protective outcomes compared with placebo regarding %TBV/y (SMD=-0.21, 95%CI=-0.37 to -0.04, P=.01, N=4, n=624) and %VV/y (SMD=-0.79, 95%CI=-1.40 to -0.19, P=.01, N=3, n=851). However, %HV/y failed to show difference between both groups. Among anti-dementia drugs, donepezil showed significantly greater protective effects than placebo regarding %TBV/y (SMD=-0.43, 95%CI=-0.74 to -0.12, P=.007, N=1, n=164) and %VV/y (SMD=-0.51, 95%CI=-0.73 to -0.29, P<.00001, N=2, n=338). Rivastigmine was also superior to placebo regarding %VV/y (SMD=-1.33, 95%CI=-1.52 to -1.14, P<.00001).

Conclusions:

The results favored the hypothesis that anti-dementia drugs may prevent brain atrophy in patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s Disease.     

Ketamine’s Antidepressant Efficacy is Extended for at Least Four Weeks in Subjects with a Family History of an Alcohol Use Disorder

Background:

A single subanesthetic infusion of the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist ketamine has rapid and potent antidepressant properties in treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (TRD). As a family history of an alcohol use disorder is a positive predictor of ketamine’s antidepressant response and the strength of the association increases over time, we hypothesized that depressed subjects with a family history of an alcohol use disorder would have greater antidepressant durability and that riluzole would augment and/or extend ketamine’s antidepressant efficacy.

Methods:

Fifty-two TRD subjects received an open-label infusion of ketamine (0.5mg/kg over 40 minutes), and, four to six hours post-infusion, were randomized to either flexible-dose (100–200mg/day) riluzole or placebo in the following proportions: Family History Positive (FHP) riluzole (n = 10), FHP placebo (n = 9), Family History Negative (FHN) riluzole (n = 16), and FHN placebo (n = 17).

Results:

FHP subjects randomized to placebo had a greater antidepressant response than FHN subjects; however, contrary to our initial hypothesis, there was no significant difference in antidepressant efficacy with riluzole. Although potentially underpowered, there was no difference in overall time-to-relapse based on randomization status (riluzole responders: n = 15, placebo responders: n = 17). Yet, time-to-relapse was longer in FHP placebo responders (n = 8) compared to FHN placebo responders (n = 9) with, again, no significant difference in time-to-relapse in FHP riluzole responders (n = 6) compared to FHN riluzole responders (n = 9).

Conclusions:

Ketamine’s extended antidepressant durability in FHP TRD should be considered in the design and analysis of ketamine depression trials.     

Randomized Controlled Trials of Add-On Antidepressants in Schizophrenia

Background:

Despite adequate treatment with antipsychotics, a substantial number of patients with schizophrenia demonstrate only suboptimal clinical outcome. To overcome this challenge, various psychopharmacological combination strategies have been used, including antidepressants added to antipsychotics.

Methods:

To analyze the efficacy of add-on antidepressants for the treatment of negative, positive, cognitive, depressive, and antipsychotic-induced extrapyramidal symptoms in schizophrenia, published randomized controlled trials assessing the efficacy of adjunctive antidepressants in schizophrenia were reviewed using the following parameters: baseline clinical characteristics and number of patients, their on-going antipsychotic treatment, dosage of the add-on antidepressants, duration of the trial, efficacy measures, and outcomes.

Results:

There were 36 randomized controlled trials reported in 41 journal publications (n=1582). The antidepressants used were the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, duloxetine, imipramine, mianserin, mirtazapine, nefazodone, reboxetin, trazodone, and bupropion. Mirtazapine and mianserin showed somewhat consistent efficacy for negative symptoms and both seemed to enhance neurocognition. Trazodone and nefazodone appeared to improve the antipsychotics-induced extrapyramidal symptoms. Imipramine and duloxetine tended to improve depressive symptoms. No clear evidence supporting selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors’ efficacy on any clinical domain of schizophrenia was found. Add-on antidepressants did not worsen psychosis.

Conclusions:

Despite a substantial number of randomized controlled trials, the overall efficacy of add-on antidepressants in schizophrenia remains uncertain mainly due to methodological issues. Some differences in efficacy on several schizophrenia domains seem, however, to exist and to vary by the antidepressant subgroups—plausibly due to differences in the mechanisms of action. Antidepressants may not worsen the course of psychosis. Better designed, larger, and longer randomized controlled trials are needed.     

Atypical Antipsychotic Augmentation for Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background:

Previous meta-analyses of atypical antipsychotics for depression were limited by few trials with direct comparisons between two treatments. We performed a network meta-analysis, which integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), to investigate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive atypical antipsychotics for treatment-resistant depression (TRD).

Methods:

Systematic searches resulted in 18 RCTs (total n = 4422) of seven different types and different dosages of atypical antipsychotics and a placebo that were included in the review.

Results:

All standard-dose atypical antipsychotics were significantly more efficacious than placebo in the efficacy (standardized mean differences [SMDs] ranged from -0.27 to -0.43). There were no significant differences between these drugs. Low-dose atypical antipsychotics were not significantly more efficacious than the placebo. In terms of tolerability, all standard-dose atypical antipsychotics, apart from risperidone, had significantly more side-effect discontinuations than placebo (odds ratios [ORs] ranged from 2.72 to 6.40). In terms of acceptability, only quetiapine (mean 250–350mg daily) had significantly more all-cause discontinuation than placebo (OR = 1.89). In terms of quality of life/functioning, standard-dose risperidone and standard-dose aripiprazole were more beneficial than placebo (SMD = -0.38; SMD = -0.26, respectively), and standard-dose risperidone was superior to quetiapine (mean 250–350mg daily).

Conclusions:

All standard-dose atypical antipsychotics for the adjunctive treatment of TRD are efficacious in reducing depressive symptoms. Risperidone and aripiprazole also showed benefits in improving the quality of life of patients. Atypical antipsychotics should be prescribed with caution due to abundant evidence of side effects.     

Efficacy of a Non-Hormonal Treatment,BRN-01, on Menopausal Hot Flashes: A Multicenter,Randomized, Double-Blind,Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background

Homeopathic medicines have a place among the non-hormonal therapies for the treatment of hot flashes during the menopause.

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the non-hormonal treatment BRN-01 in reducing hot flashes in menopausal women.

Study Design

This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study carried out between June 2010 and July 2011.

Setting

The study was conducted in 35 active centers in France (gynecologists in private practice).

Patients

One hundred and eight menopausal women, ≥50 years of age, were enrolled in the study. The eligibility criteria included menopause for <24 months and ≥5 hot flashes per day with a significant negative effect on the women’s professional and/or personal life.

Intervention

Treatment was either BRN-01 tablets, a registered homeopathic medicine containing Actaea racemosa (4 centesimal dilutions [4CH]), Arnica montana (4CH), Glonoinum (4CH), Lachesis mutus (5CH), and Sanguinaria canadensis (4CH), or identical placebo tablets, prepared by Laboratoires Boiron according to European Pharmacopoeia standards. Oral treatment (2 to 4 tablets per day) was started on day 3 after study enrollment and was continued for 12 weeks.

Main Outcome Measure

The main outcome measure was the hot flash score (HFS) compared before, during, and after treatment. Secondary outcome criteria were the quality of life (QoL) [measured using the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS)], severity of symptoms (measured using the Menopause Rating Scale), evolution of the mean dosage, and compliance. All adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

Results

One hundred and one women were included in the final analysis (intent-to-treat population: BRN-01, n = 50; placebo, n = 51). The global HFS over the 12 weeks, assessed as the area under the curve (AUC) adjusted for baseline values, was significantly lower in the BRN-01 group than in the placebo group (mean ± SD 88.2 ± 6.5 versus 107.2 ± 6.4; p = 0.0411). BRN-01 was well tolerated; the frequency of AEs was similar in the two treatment groups, and no serious AEs were attributable to BRN-01.

Conclusion

BRN-01 seemed to have a significant effect on the HFS, compared with placebo. According to the results of this clinical trial, BRN-01 may be considered a new therapeutic option with a safe profile for hot flashes in menopausal women who do not want or are not able to take hormone replacement therapy or other recognized treatments for this indication.Trial registration number (EudraCT): 2009-016959–21.     

A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Dextromethorphan as an Adjunct in Opioid-Dependent Patients Undergoing Methadone Maintenance Treatment

Background:

Low-dose dextromethorphan (DM) might have anti-inflammatory and neurotrophic effects mechanistically remote from an NMDA receptor. In a randomized, double-blind, controlled 12 week study, we investigated whether add-on dextromethorphan reduced cytokine levels and benefitted opioid-dependent patients undergoing methadone maintenance therapy (MMT).

Methods:

Patients were randomly assigned to a group: DM60 (60mg/day dextromethorphan; n = 65), DM120 (120mg/day dextromethorphan; n = 65), or placebo (n = 66). Primary outcomes were the methadone dose required, plasma morphine level, and retention in treatment. Plasma tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, transforming growth factor–β1, and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) levels were examined during weeks 0, 1, 4, 8, and 12. Multiple linear regressions with generalized estimating equation methods were used to examine the therapeutic effect.

Results:

After 12 weeks, the DM60 group had significantly longer treatment retention and lower plasma morphine levels than did the placebo group. Plasma TNF-α was significantly decreased in the DM60 group compared to the placebo group. However, changes in plasma cytokine levels, BDNF levels, and the methadone dose required in the three groups were not significantly different.

Conclusions:

We provide evidence—decreased concomitant heroin use—of low-dose add-on DM’s efficacy for treating opioid-dependent patients undergoing MMT.     

The Effectiveness of Treatments for Cocaine Dependence in Schizophrenic Patients: A Systematic Review

Objectives:

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of available treatments for cocaine dependence in schizophrenic patients.

Method:

We searched articles published between May 2002 and June 2012 in the following databases: Scopus, Pubmed and Web of Knowledge. The key words utilised were “schizophrenia”, "dementia praecox", "schizophrenic disorder", "cocaine related disorder", "cocaine abuse", "cocaine addiction", "cocaine dependence", “treatment”, “therapeutic”, and "drug therapy”.

Selection of studies and data extraction:

Original articles in English, Portuguese and Spanish were selected. Controlled, double-blind and open-label studies involving only human subjects were included in this review.

Data Synthesis:

We found studies on typical and atypical antipsychotics and one monoamine transporter antagonist. There were few indications of the effectiveness of atypical antipsychotic medications for the treatment of cocaine dependence in patients with schizophrenia.

Conclusions:

We suggest that further studies be conducted with atypical antipsychotic medicationsand greater methodological strictness, including using a placebo group in the studies, so that health professionals can determine the real effectiveness of this class of medication for the treatment of cocaine dependence in schizophrenic patients.     

A phase II,randomized, placebo-controlled,double-blind,multi-dose study of SRT2104, a SIRT1 activator,in subjects with type 2 diabetes

Aim

SRT2104 is a selective activator of SIRT1. In animal models, SRT2104 improves glucose homeostasis and increases insulin sensitivity. We evaluated the tolerability and pharmacokinetics of SRT2104, and its effects on glycaemic control, in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Method

Type 2 diabetics with glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% and ≤10.5%, fasting glucose ≥160 and ≤240 mg dl⁻¹, and on stable doses of metformin were evenly randomized to placebo or SRT2104 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g or 2.0 g, administered orally once daily for 28 days. Changes in fasting and post-prandial glucose and insulin were analyzed.

Results

Safety evaluation found no major differences between groups in the frequency of adverse events. SRT2104 concentrations did not increase in a dose-proportional fashion. Significant variability in exposure was observed. Treatment with SRT2104 did not lead to any consistent, dose-related changes in glucose or insulin. Day 28 change from baseline (mean (SD)): fasting glucose (mmol l⁻¹) = −1.17 (2.42), −1.11 (3.45), −0.52 (2.60), −0.97 (2.83) and −0.15 (2.38) for placebo, 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g and 2.0 g, respectively. Day 28 change from baseline (mean (SD)): fasting insulin (mmol l⁻¹) = 1.0 (51.66), 8.9 (95.04), −6.9 (41.45), 4.1 (57.16) and 15.2 (138.79) for placebo, 0.25 g, 0.5 g, 1.0 g and 2.0 g, respectively) Treatment with SRT2104 was associated with improvement in lipid profiles.

Conclusion

Treatment with SRT2104 for 28 days did not result in improved glucose or insulin control which is likely due to the observed pharmacokinetics which were not dose proportional and had large between subject variability.     

Interaction Between 5-HTTLPR Genotype and Cognitive Stress Vulnerability on Sleep Quality: Effects of Sub-Chronic Tryptophan Administration

Background:

Abundant evidence suggests that allelic variation in the serotonin transporter-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) influences susceptibility to stress and its affective consequences due to brain serotonergic vulnerability. Based on recent assumptions, the present study examined whether the 5-HTTLPR genotype may also interact with a vulnerability to chronic stress experience (conceptualized by trait neuroticism) in order to influence sleep quality and, additionally, whether this is influenced by brain serotonergic manipulations.

Methods:

In a well-balanced experimental design, homozygous S-allele (n = 57) and L-allele (n = 54) genotypes with high and low chronic stress vulnerability (neuroticism) were first assessed for general past sleep quality during a month before onset of the experiment. Then subjects were assessed for sleep quality following 7 days of tryptophan (3.0g/day) or placebo intake.

Results:

Although high neuroticism was significantly related to a higher frequency of stressful life events and daily hassles, it did not interact with the 5-HTTLPR genotype on general past sleep quality. However, as expected, a 7 day period of tryptophan administration was exclusively associated with better sleep quality scores in the S’/S’ genotype with high trait neuroticism.

Conclusions:

Current findings suggest that 5-HTTLPR does not directly interact with stress vulnerability in order to influence sleep quality. Instead, based on current and previous findings, it is suggested that the S’/S’ 5-HTTLPR genotype promotes the risk for stress-related sleep disturbances because of an increased susceptibility to the depressogenic consequences of stress. Accordingly, by way of reducing depressive symptomatology, tryptophan augmentation may particularly improve sleep quality in stress-vulnerable individuals carrying the 5-HTTLPR S-allele.     

Antidepressants but not antipsychotics have antiepileptogenic effects with limited effects on comorbid depressive-like behaviour in the WAG/Rij rat model of absence epilepsy

Background and Purpose

Two of the most relevant unmet needs in epilepsy are represented by the development of disease-modifying drugs able to affect epileptogenesis and/or the study of related neuropsychiatric comorbidities. No systematic study has investigated the effects of chronic treatment with antipsychotics or antidepressants on epileptogenesis. However, such drugs are known to influence seizure threshold.

Experimental Approach

We evaluated the effects of an early long-term treatment (ELTT; 17 weeks), started before seizure onset (P45), with fluoxetine (selective 5-HT-reuptake inhibitor), duloxetine (dual-acting 5-HT-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor), haloperidol (typical antipsychotic drug), risperidone and quetiapine (atypical antipsychotic drugs) on the development of absence seizures and comorbid depressive-like behaviour in the WAG/Rij rat model. Furthermore, we studied the effects of these drugs on established absence seizures in adult (6-month-old) rats after a chronic 7 weeks treatment.

Key Results

ELTT with all antipsychotics did not affect the development of seizures, whereas, both ELTT haloperidol (1 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹) and risperidone (0.5 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹) increased immobility time in the forced swimming test and increased absence seizures only in adult rats (7 weeks treatment). In contrast, both fluoxetine (30 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹) and duloxetine (10–30 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹) exhibited clear antiepileptogenic effects. Duloxetine decreased and fluoxetine increased absence seizures in adult rats. Duloxetine did not affect immobility time; fluoxetine 30 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹ reduced immobility time while at 10 mg·kg⁻¹ day⁻¹ an increase was observed.

Conclusions and Implications

In this animal model, antipsychotics had no antiepileptogenic effects and might worsen depressive-like comorbidity, while antidepressants have potential antiepileptogenic effects even though they have limited effects on comorbid depressive-like behaviour.     

Glutamatergic Neurometabolites in Clozapine-Responsive and -Resistant Schizophrenia

Background:

According to the current schizophrenia treatment guidelines, 3 levels of responsiveness to antipsychotic medication exist: those who respond to first-line antipsychotics, those with treatment-resistant schizophrenia who respond to clozapine, and those with clozapine-resistant or ultra-treatment resistant schizophrenia. Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy studies indicate that antipsychotic medication decreases glutamate or total glutamate + glutamine in the brains of patients with schizophrenia and may represent a biomarker of treatment response; however, the 3 levels of treatment responsiveness have not been evaluated.

Methods:

Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy spectra were acquired at 3 Tesla from patients taking a second generation non-clozapine antipsychotic (first-line responders), patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia taking clozapine, patients with ultra-treatment resistant schizophrenia taking a combination of antipsychotics, and healthy comparison subjects.

Results:

Group differences in cerebrospinal fluid-corrected total glutamate + glutamine levels scaled to creatine were detected in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [df(3,48); F = 3.07, P = .04, partial η² = 0.16] and the putamen [df(3,32); F = 2.93, P = .05, partial η² = 0.22]. The first-line responder group had higher dorsolateral prefrontal cortex total glutamate + glutamine levels scaled to creatine than those with ultra-treatment resistant schizophrenia [mean difference = 0.25, standard error = 0.09, P = .04, family-wise error-corrected]. Those with treatment-resistant schizophrenia had higher total glutamate + glutamine levels scaled to creatine in the putamen than the first-line responders (mean difference = 0.31, standard error = 0.12, P = .05, family-wise error-corrected) and those with ultra-treatment-resistant schizophrenia (mean difference = 0.39, standard error = 0.12, P = .02, family-wise error-corrected).

Conclusions:

Total glutamate + glutamine levels scaled to creatine in the putamen may represent a marker of response to clozapine. Future studies should investigate glutamatergic anomalies prior to clozapine initiation and following successful treatment.     

Combination Therapy with Cholinesterase Inhibitors and Memantine for Alzheimer’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background:

We performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of combination therapy with cholinesterase inhibitors and memantine in patients with Alzheimer’s disease.

Methods:

We reviewed cognitive function, activities of daily living, behavioral disturbance, global assessment, discontinuation rate, and individual side effects.

Results:

Seven studies (total n=2182) were identified. Combination therapy significantly affected behavioral disturbance scores (standardized mean difference=−0.13), activity of daily living scores (standardized mean difference=−0.10), and global assessment scores (standardized mean difference=−0.15). In addition, cognitive function scores (standardized mean difference=−0.13, P=.06) exhibited favorable trends with combination therapy. The effects of combination therapy were more significant in the moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease subgroup in terms of all efficacy outcome scores. The discontinuation rate was similar in both groups, and there were no significant differences in individual side effects.

Conclusions:

Combination therapy was beneficial for the treatment of moderate-to-severe Alzheimer’s disease in terms of cognition, behavioral disturbances, activities of daily living, and global assessment was well tolerated.     

Sustained-release methylphenidate in methamphetamine dependence treatment: a double-blind and placebo-controlled trial

Background

The objective of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the efficacy of sustained-release methylphenidate (MPH-SR) in treatment of methamphetamine dependence.

Methods

Fifty-six individuals who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for methamphetamine dependence participated in this 10-week trial. The participants were randomly allocated into two groups and received 18 to 54 mg/day sustained-released methylphenidate or placebo for 10 weeks. Craving was evaluated by a visual analogue craving scale every week. Urinary screening test for methamphetamine was carried out each week. The Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) was used to monitor participant depressive symptoms at baseline and bi-weekly during the treatment period.

Results

At the end of the trial, the MPH-SR group was less methamphetamine positive compared to the placebo group and the difference was significant (p = 0.03). By the end of the study, MPH-SR group showed significantly less craving scores compared to the placebo group [MD (95% CI) = -10.28(0.88-19.18), t(54) = 2.19, p = 0.03]. There was greater improvement in the depressive symptoms scores in the intervention group compared to the placebo group [MD (95% CI) =2.03(0.31-3.75), t (54) =2.37, p = 0.02].

Conclusion

Sustained-released methylphenidate was safe and well tolerated among active methamphetamine users and significantly reduced methamphetamine use, craving and depressive symptoms.

Trial registration

IRCT201202281556N38     

Extended Release Quetiapine Fumarate (Quetiapine XR) as Adjunct Therapy in Patients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder and a History of Inadequate Treatment Response: A Randomized,Double-Blind Study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of adjunct extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and inadequate response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/ serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SSRI/SNRIs).

Methods

11-week (1-week single-blind placebo run-in; 8-week randomized treatment; 2-week post-treatment period), double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR or placebo adjunct to SSRI/SNRI. 50 mg initial dose; 150 mg/day, Day 3; 300 mg/day, Weeks × and 4 if indicated (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness [CGI-S] ≥ 4; 150 mg/day tolerated). Primary endpoint: change from randomization to Week 8 in HAM-A total score. Secondary variables: Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) psychic/somatic clusters, response and remission; and CGI-S.

Results

409 patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (n = 209) or placebo (n = 200); 41% and 55% of patients, respectively, had dose increases (300 mg/day). Week 8 mean change in HAM-A total score was not statistically significant for quetiapine XR (–10.74; p = 0.079) versus placebo (–9.61). Secondary variables were generally consistent with the primary analysis, except a significant reduction in HAM-A total score at Week 1 (–6.45, quetiapine XR versus –4.47, placebo; p < 0.001); significant improvements in HAM-A psychic cluster (p < 0.05) and CGI-S total (p < 0.05) scores at Week 8. Adverse events (.10% either group) were dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, headache, and dizziness.

Conclusions

In patients with GAD and inadequate response to SSRI/SNRI, adjunct quetiapine XR did not show a statistically significant effect for the primary endpoint at Week 8, although some secondary endpoints were statistically significant versus placebo. Quetiapine XR was generally well tolerated.     

Sudden death in patients receiving drugs tending to prolong the QT interval

AIMS

To examine risks of sudden death in the community associated with drugs grouped by their risk of causing torsades de pointes (TdP) and to explore the risks for individual drugs.

METHODS

Case–control study comparing prior drug intakes and morbidities, using the Arizona classification of drugs causing TdP. Participants included 1010 patients dying suddenly where post-mortem examination did not identify a clear cause of death, and 3030 matched living controls from primary care.

RESULTS

Noncardiac drug risk was posed by antipsychotics and antidepressants. Significantly raised odds ratios (ORs) were found for takers of typical and atypical antipsychotics, ORs [95% confidence interval] 3.94 (2.05, 7.55) and 4.36 (2.54, 7.51), and of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs] rather than tricyclic antidepressants, ORs 2.21 (1.61, 3.05) and 1.44 (0.96, 2.13). No significant risk was associated with other, noncardiac or psychiatric drugs, OR 1.09 (0.85, 1.41). Arizona classified drugs considered to raise risk of TdP were associated with raised risk of sudden death, as were those only weakly associated with TdP and not considered to pose a risk in normal use, ORs 2.08 (1.45, 3.00) and 1.74 (1.33, 2.28), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Atypical and typical antipsychotic drug use were both strongly associated with raised risks, as were SSRIs. Tricyclic antidepressants were not associated with raised risks. The Arizona classification of risk of TdP was a poor predictor of likelihood of noncardiac drug-associated sudden death.     

Measuring Adherence to Medication in Schizophrenia: The Relationship between Attitudes toward Drug Therapy and Plasma Levels of New-Generation Antipsychotics

Background:

Nonadherence to medication is still a major problem in the treatment of schizophrenia. The current longitudinal study investigated whether the patients’ attitudes toward treatment correlated with the ratio of observed vs expected plasma levels of antipsychotic drugs as an objective measurement of adherence.

Methods:

Data of patients starting monotherapy with a new-generation antipsychotic were collected 2, 4, and 12 weeks after the initiation of treatment. Next to the assessment of patients’ attitudes toward medication by means of the Drug Attitude Inventory, the ratio of the observed vs expected plasma level was calculated. Antipsychotic-induced side effects were evaluated by means of the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser Side Effect Rating Scale.

Results:

A total of 93 patients were eligible for statistical analysis. About one-half of the ratios of observed vs expected plasma levels ranged from 0.5 to 2 and were considered normal, whereas the other ratios were considered either too low (<0.5) or too high (>2). No consistent correlation between patients’ attitude toward drug therapy and the individual ratios of observed vs expected plasma levels of medication was detected. This finding was not affected by side effects.

Conclusions:

Our results highlight the importance of recognizing the complex nature of adherence to medication in schizophrenia patients. Importantly, we found no consistent correlation between subjective and objective measures of medication adherence. Therefore, monitoring adherence to medication remains a challenge in clinical practice.     

Low doses of fludrocortisone and hydrocortisone,alone or in combination,on vascular responsiveness to phenylephrine in healthy volunteers

Aims

A single administration of hydrocortisone has been shown to enhance the pressor response to phenylephrine in healthy volunteers and to norepinephrine in septic shock patients. Similar data do not exist for fludrocortisone. Since there continues to be disagreement about the utility of fludrocortisone in septic shock, we assessed the effects of a single administration of low doses of hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenously) and fludrocortisone (50 μg orally), given either alone or in combination, on phenylephrine mean arterial pressure and cardiac systolic and diastolic function dose–response relationships in 12 healthy male volunteers with hypo-aldosteronism induced by intravenous sodium loading.

Methods

This was a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, crossover study performed according to a 2 × 2 factorial design. Subjects received first a 2000 ml infusion of NaCl 0.9% during 2 h. Then fludrocortisone 50 μg (or its placebo) was administered orally and hydrocortisone 50 mg (or its placebo) was injected intravenously. At 1.5 h after treatment administration, incremental doses of phenylephrine were infused (from 0.01 to 3 μg kg⁻¹ min⁻¹), each dose being infused during 5 min.

Results

Both fludrocortisone (P < 0.001) and hydrocortisone (P = 0.002) induced a significant decrease in pressor response to phenylephrine, their effects being additive (fludrocortisone × hydrocortisone interaction, P = 0.792). The two drugs did not induce any detectable cardiac effect.

Conclusions

Single administrations of fludrocortisone and hydrocortisone decreased the pressor response to phenylephrine in healthy volunteers with hypo-aldosteronism. These similar effects of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone probably express a rapid non-genomic vasodilating effect of the two steroids in the context of acute volume loading.