Effects of antipsychotics,antidepressants and mood stabilizers on risk for physical diseases in people with schizophrenia,depression and bipolar disorder

People with severe mental illness have a considerably shorter lifespan than the general population. This excess mortality is mainly due to physical illness. Next to mental illness‐related factors, unhealthy lifestyle, and disparities in health care access and utilization, psychotropic medications can contribute to the risk of physical morbidity and mortality. We systematically reviewed the effects of antipsychotics, antidepressants and mood stabilizers on physical health outcomes in people with schizophrenia, depression and bipolar disorder. Updating and expanding our prior systematic review published in this journal, we searched MEDLINE (November 2009 ‐ November 2014), combining the MeSH terms of major physical disease categories (and/or relevant diseases within these categories) with schizophrenia, major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder, and the three major psychotropic classes which received regulatory approval for these disorders, i.e., antipsychotics, antidepressants and mood stabilizers. We gave precedence to results from (systematic) reviews and meta‐analyses wherever possible. Antipsychotics, and to a more restricted degree antidepressants and mood stabilizers, are associated with an increased risk for several physical diseases, including obesity, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, thyroid disorders, hyponatremia; cardiovascular, respiratory tract, gastrointestinal, haematological, musculoskeletal and renal diseases, as well as movement and seizure disorders. Higher dosages, polypharmacy, and treatment of vulnerable (e.g., old or young) individuals are associated with greater absolute (elderly) and relative (youth) risk for most of these physical diseases. To what degree medication‐specific and patient‐specific risk factors interact, and how adverse outcomes can be minimized, allowing patients to derive maximum benefits from these medications, requires adequate clinical attention and further research.     

A cost-effectiveness analysis of off-label atypical antipsychotic treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD who have failed stimulant therapy

The objectives of this study are: (1) to estimate the expected health outcomes of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) and other non-stimulant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications and (2) to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of AAPs compared to other non-stimulant ADHD medications. We used decision analysis to compare three alternatives for treating children and adolescents with ADHD who failed initial stimulant treatment: (1) AAPs, (2) a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (atomoxetine), and (3) selective α2-adrenergic agonists (clonidine and guanfacine). Probability estimates and quality-adjusted life year (QALY) weights were derived from a literature review. Cost-effectiveness was estimated using the expected health outcomes derived from the decision analysis and expected costs from the literature. The study was conducted from the third-party payer perspective, and the study period was 1 year. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and a Monte Carlo simulation were performed. Over the course of 1 year of ADHD pharmacotherapy, the highest QALY was for clonidine/guanfacine (expected QALY = 0.95) followed by atomoxetine (expected QALY = 0.94). Atypical antipsychotics yielded the lowest health outcome with an expected QALY of 0.84. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the AAP strategy was dominated as it was less effective and more costly than other two strategies. Compared to clonidine/guanfacine, AAPs provided lower QALYs (0.11 QALY lost) at an additional cost of $2186 on average. Compared to atomoxetine, AAPs resulted in 0.10 QALYs lost at an additional cost of $2186. In this decision analysis model, AAPs provide lower expected health outcomes than other ADHD medications in children and adolescents who failed prior stimulant therapy. Furthermore, AAPs were not a cost-effective option.     

An Evaluation on the Efficacy and Safety of Treatments for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents: a Comparison of Multiple Treatments

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the most common neurobehavioral disorders. We carried out this comparison of multiple treatments based on sufficient data in attempt to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ADHD medication for children and adolescents. PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Database were used to search for relevant articles. Changes in the ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD-RS) scores and the Conners’ Parent Rating Scale-Revised (CPRS) scores were used as outcomes for efficacy. Withdrawals due to all-cause, adverse effects and lack of efficacy were defined as primary outcomes evaluating the safety of such medications. Both pair-wise and network meta-analyses were performed. Efficacy and safety of atomoxetine (ATX), bupropion (BUP), clonidine hydrochloride (CLON), guanfacine extended release (GXR), lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), and methylphenidate (MPH) were evaluated. LDX has the highest efficacy and a relatively lower rate of adverse effects compared to BUP, CLON and GXR. MPH has the lowest incidence rate of adverse effects and takes second place concerning ADHD-RS scores and third place concerning CPRS scores. ATX has the lowest incidence rate of all-cause withdrawals. The efficacy of ATX seems, however, to be lower than CLON, GXR, LDX and MPH. Adversely, BUP has the highest incidence rate of withdrawals and the second highest probability of causing adverse effects as well as lack of efficacy; therefore it should not be recommended as a treatment for ADHD.     

Inhibition of monoamine oxidase activity by antidepressants and mood stabilizers

OBJECTIVE: Monoamine oxidase (MAO), the enzyme responsible for metabolism of monoamine neurotransmitters, has an important role in the brain development and function, and MAO inhibitors have a range of potential therapeutic uses. We investigated systematically in vitro effects of pharmacologically different antidepressants and mood stabilizers on MAO activity. Methods: Effects of drugs on the activity of MAO were measured in crude mitochondrial fraction isolated from cortex of pig brain, when radiolabeled serotonin (for MAO-A) or phenylethylamine (for MAO-B) was used as substrate. The several antidepressants and mood stabilizers were compared with effects of well known MAO inhibitors such as moclobemide, iproniazid, pargyline, and clorgyline. Results: In general, the effect of tested drugs was found to be inhibitory. The half maximal inhibitory concentration, parameters of enzyme kinetic, and mechanism of inhibition were determined. MAO-A was inhibited by the following drugs: pargyline > clorgyline > iproniazid > fluoxetine > desipramine > amitriptyline > imipramine > citalopram > venlafaxine > reboxetine > olanzapine > mirtazapine > tianeptine > moclobemide, cocaine > lithium, valproate. MAO-B was inhibited by the following drugs: pargyline > clorgyline > iproniazid > fluoxetine > venlafaxine > amitriptyline > olanzapine > citalopram > desipramine > reboxetine > imipramine > tianeptine > mirtazapine, cocaine > moclobemide, lithium, valproate. The mechanism of inhibition of MAOs by several antidepressants was found various. Conclusions: It was concluded that MAO activity is acutely affected by pharmacologically different antidepressants at relatively high drug concentrations; this effect is inhibitory. There are differences both in inhibitory potency and in mechanism of inhibition between both several drugs and the two MAO isoforms. While MAO inhibition is not primary biochemical effect related to their therapeutic action, it can be supposed that decrease of MAO activity may be concerned in some effects of these drugs on serotonergic, noradrenergic, and dopaminergic neurotransmission.     

The efficacy and safety of nutrient supplements in the treatment of mental disorders: a meta‐review of meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials

The role of nutrition in mental health is becoming increasingly acknowledged. Along with dietary intake, nutrition can also be obtained from “nutrient supplements”, such as polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, amino acids and pre/probiotic supplements. Recently, a large number of meta‐analyses have emerged examining nutrient supplements in the treatment of mental disorders. To produce a meta‐review of this top‐tier evidence, we identified, synthesized and appraised all meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the efficacy and safety of nutrient supplements in common and severe mental disorders. Our systematic search identified 33 meta‐analyses of placebo‐controlled RCTs, with primary analyses including outcome data from 10,951 individuals. The strongest evidence was found for PUFAs (particularly as eicosapentaenoic acid) as an adjunctive treatment for depression. More nascent evidence suggested that PUFAs may also be beneficial for attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder, whereas there was no evidence for schizophrenia. Folate‐based supplements were widely researched as adjunctive treatments for depression and schizophrenia, with positive effects from RCTs of high‐dose methylfolate in major depressive disorder. There was emergent evidence for N‐acetylcysteine as a useful adjunctive treatment in mood disorders and schizophrenia. All nutrient supplements had good safety profiles, with no evidence of serious adverse effects or contraindications with psychiatric medications. In conclusion, clinicians should be informed of the nutrient supplements with established efficacy for certain conditions (such as eicosapentaenoic acid in depression), but also made aware of those currently lacking evidentiary support. Future research should aim to determine which individuals may benefit most from evidence‐based supplements, to further elucidate the underlying mechanisms.     

Tardive dyskinesia risk with first‐ and second‐generation antipsychotics in comparative randomized controlled trials: a meta‐analysis

Tardive dyskinesia (TD) risk with D2/serotonin receptor antagonists or D2 receptor partial agonists (second‐generation antipsychotics, SGAs) is considered significantly lower than with D2 antagonists (first‐generation antipsychotics, FGAs). As some reports questioned this notion, we meta‐analyzed randomized controlled studies (RCTs) to estimate the risk ratio (RR) and annualized rate ratio (RaR) of TD comparing SGAs vs. FGAs and SGAs vs. SGAs. Additionally, we calculated raw and annualized pooled TD rates for each antipsychotic. Data from 57 head‐to‐head RCTs, including 32 FGA and 86 SGA arms, were meta‐analyzed, yielding 32 FGA‐SGA pairs and 35 SGA‐SGA pairs. The annualized TD incidence across FGA arms was 6.5% (95% CI: 5.3‐7.8%) vs. 2.6% (95% CI: 2.0‐3.1%) across SGA arms. TD risk and annualized rates were lower with SGAs vs. FGAs (RR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.39‐0.57, p<0.0001, k=28; RaR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.28‐0.45, p<0.0001, number‐needed‐to‐treat, NNT=20). Meta‐regression showed no FGA dose effect on FGA‐SGA comparisons (Z=?1.03, p=0.30). FGA‐SGA TD RaRs differed by SGA comparator (Q=21.8, df=7, p=0.003), with a significant advantage of olanzapine and aripiprazole over other non‐clozapine SGAs in exploratory pairwise comparisons. SGA‐SGA comparisons confirmed the olanzapine advantage vs. non‐clozapine SGAs (RaR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.49‐0.88, p=0.006, k=17, NNT=100). This meta‐analysis confirms a clinically meaningfully lower TD risk with SGAs vs. FGAs, which is not driven by high dose FGA comparators, and documents significant differences with respect to this risk between individual SGAs.     

Efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological,psychosocial, and brain stimulation interventions in children and adolescents with mental disorders: an umbrella review

Top‐tier evidence on the safety/tolerability of 80 medications in children/adolescents with mental disorders has recently been reviewed in this jour­nal. To guide clinical practice, such data must be combined with evidence on efficacy and acceptability. Besides medications, psychosocial inter­ventions and brain stimulation techniques are treatment options for children/adolescents with mental disorders. For this umbrella review, we systematically searched network meta‐analyses (NMAs) and meta‐analyses (MAs) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating 48 medications, 20 psychosocial interventions, and four brain stimulation techniques in children/adolescents with 52 different mental disorders or groups of mental disorders, reporting on 20 different efficacy/acceptability outcomes. Co‐primary outcomes were disease‐specific symptom reduction and all‐cause discontinuation (“acceptability”). We included 14 NMAs and 90 MAs, reporting on 15 mental disorders or groups of mental disorders. Overall, 21 medications outperformed placebo regarding the co‐primary outcomes, and three psychosocial interventions did so (while seven outperformed waiting list/no treatment). Based on the meta‐analytic evidence, the most convincing efficacy profile emerged for amphetamines, methylphenidate and, to a smaller extent, behavioral therapy in attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder; aripiprazole, risperidone and several psychosocial interventions in autism; risperidone and behavioral interventions in disruptive behavior disorders; several antipsychotics in schizophrenia spectrum disorders; fluoxetine, the combination of fluoxetine and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and interpersonal therapy in depression; aripiprazole in mania; fluoxetine and group CBT in anxiety disorders; fluoxetine/selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, CBT, and behavioral therapy with exposure and response prevention in obsessive‐compulsive disorder; CBT in post‐traumatic stress disorder; imipramine and alarm behavioral intervention in enuresis; behavioral therapy in encopresis; and family therapy in anorexia nervosa. Results from this umbrella review of interventions for mental disorders in children/adolescents provide evidence‐based information for clinical decision making.     

Adverse Renal,Endocrine, Hepatic,and Metabolic Events during Maintenance Mood Stabilizer Treatment for Bipolar Disorder: A Population-Based Cohort Study

BackgroundThere is limited, poorly characterized information about adverse events occurring during maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. We aimed to determine adverse event rates during treatment with lithium, valproate, olanzapine, and quetiapine.ConclusionsLithium use is associated with more renal and endocrine adverse events but less weight gain than commonly used alternative mood stabilizers. Risks need to be offset with the effectiveness and anti-suicidal benefits of lithium and the potential metabolic side effects of alternative treatment options.     

Mood stabilizers target cellular plasticity and resilience cascades

Bipolar disorder is a devastating disease with a lifetime incidence of about 1% in the general population. Suicide is the cause of death in 10 to 15% of patients and in addition to suicide, mood disorders are associated with many other harmful health effects. Mood stabilizers are medications used to treat bipolar disorder. In addition to their therapeutic effects for the treatment of acute manic episodes, mood stabilizers are useful as prophylaxis against future episodes and as adjunctive antidepressant medications. The most established and investigated mood-stabilizing drugs are lithium and valproate but other anticonvulsants (such as carbamazepine and lamotrigine) and antipsychotics are also considered as mood stabilizers. Despite the efficacy of these diverse medications, their mechanisms of action remain, to a great extent, unknown. Lithium’s inhibition of some enzymes, such as inositol monophosphatase and gycogen synthase kinase-3, probably results in its mood-stabilizing effects. Valproate may share its anticonvulsant target with its mood-stabilizing target or may act through other mechanisms. It has been shown that lithium, valproate, and/or carbamazepine regulate numerous factors involved in cell survival pathways, including cyclic adenine monophospate response element-binding protein, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, bcl-2, and mitogen-activated protein kinases. These drugs have been suggested to have neurotrophic and neuroprotective properties that ameliorate impairments of cellular plasticity and resilience underlying the pathophysiology of mood disorders. This article also discusses approaches to develop novel treatments specifically for bipolar disorder.     

Risk of metabolic syndrome and its components in people with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders,bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components are highly predictive of cardiovascular diseases. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to assess the prevalence of MetS and its components in people with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders, bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder, comparing subjects with different disorders and taking into account demographic variables and psychotropic medication use. The secondary aim was to compare the MetS prevalence in persons with any of the selected disorders versus matched general population controls. The pooled MetS prevalence in people with severe mental illness was 32.6% (95% CI: 30.8%‐34.4%; N = 198; n = 52,678). Relative risk meta‐analyses established that there was no significant difference in MetS prevalence in studies directly comparing schizophrenia versus bipolar disorder, and in those directly comparing bipolar disorder versus major depressive disorder. Only two studies directly compared people with schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, precluding meta‐analytic calculations. Older age and a higher body mass index were significant moderators in the final demographic regression model (z = ?3.6, p = 0.0003, r² = 0.19). People treated with all individual antipsychotic medications had a significantly (p<0.001) higher MetS risk compared to antipsychotic‐naïve participants. MetS risk was significantly higher with clozapine and olanzapine (except vs. clozapine) than other antipsychotics, and significantly lower with aripiprazole than other antipsychotics (except vs. amisulpride). Compared with matched general population controls, people with severe mental illness had a significantly increased risk for MetS (RR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.35‐1.86; p<0.001) and all its components, except for hypertension (p = 0.07). These data suggest that the risk for MetS is similarly elevated in the diagnostic subgroups of severe mental illness. Routine screening and multidisciplinary management of medical and behavioral conditions is needed in these patients. Risks of individual antipsychotics should be considered when making treatment choices.     

Lithium vs. valproate vs. olanzapine vs. quetiapine as maintenance monotherapy for bipolar disorder: a population‐based UK cohort study using electronic health records

It is unclear which maintenance treatment for bipolar disorder is superior in clinical practice. Randomized controlled head‐to‐head trials of available drugs either do not exist or are inconclusive. We aimed to compare rates of monotherapy treatment failure in individuals prescribed lithium, valproate, olanzapine or quetiapine by a population‐based cohort study using electronic health records. 5,089 patients with bipolar disorder were prescribed lithium (N=1,505), valproate (N=1,173) olanzapine (N=1,366) or quetiapine (N=1,075) as monotherapy. Treatment failure was defined as time to stopping medication or add‐on of another mood stabilizer, antipsychotic, antidepressant or benzodiazepine. In unadjusted analyses, the duration of successful monotherapy was longest in individuals treated with lithium. Treatment failure had occurred in 75% of those prescribed lithium by 2.05 years (95% CI: 1.63‐2.51), compared to 0.76 years (95% CI: 0.64‐0.84) for those prescribed quetiapine, 0.98 years (95% CI: 0.84‐1.18) for those prescribed valproate, and 1.13 years for those prescribed olanzapine (95% CI: 1.00‐1.31). Lithium's superiority remained in a propensity score matched analysis; when treatment failure was defined as stopping medication or add‐on of a mood stabilizer or antipsychotic; and when treatment failure was restricted to more than three months after commencing the study drug. Lithium appears to be more successful as monotherapy maintenance treatment than valproate, olanzapine or quetiapine. Lithium is often avoided because of its side effect profile, but alternative treatments may reduce the time to being prescribed more than one drug, with potential additive side effects of these treatments.     

Long‐term effectiveness of oral second‐generation antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and related disorders: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of direct head‐to‐head comparisons

Second‐generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are recommended for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. However, comparative long‐term effectiveness among SGAs is unclear. Here we provide a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized trials lasting ≥?6 months comparing SGAs head‐to‐head in schizophrenia and related disorders. The primary outcome was all‐cause discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and tolerability, i.e., psychopathology, inefficacy‐related and intolerability‐related discontinuation, relapse, hospitalization, remission, functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. Pooled risk ratio and standardized mean difference were calculated using random‐effects models. Across 59 studies (N=45,787), lasting 47.4±32.1 weeks (range 24‐186), no consistent superiority of any SGA emerged across efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Regarding all‐cause discontinuation, clozapine, olanzapine and risperidone were significantly (p<0.05) superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine was inferior to several other SGAs. As to psychopathology, clozapine and olanzapine were superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine and ziprasidone were inferior to several other SGAs. Data for other efficacy outcomes were sparse. Regarding intolerability‐related discontinuation, risperidone was superior and clozapine was inferior to several other SGAs. Concerning weight gain, olanzapine was worse than all other compared non‐clozapine SGAs, and risperidone was significantly worse than several other SGAs. As to prolactin increase, risperidone and amisulpride were significantly worse than several other SGAs. Regarding parkinsonism, olanzapine was superior to risperidone, without significant differences pertaining to akathisia. Concerning sedation and somnolence, clozapine and quetiapine were significantly worse than some other SGAs. In summary, different long‐term SGA efficacy and tolerability patterns emerged. The long‐term risk‐benefit profiles of specific SGAs need to be tailored to individual patients to optimize maintenance treatment outcomes.     

A non-interventional study of extended-release methylphenidate in the routine treatment of adolescents with ADHD: effectiveness, safety and adherence to treatment

This multi-centre, open-label, non-interventional study evaluates effectiveness, safety and adherence to treatment of a specific extended-release methylphenidate with a 50 % immediate and a 50 % extended-release component (Medikinet^® retard) in the clinical routine treatment of 381 adolescents with ADHD and a mean age of 14.0 ± 1.9 years. ADHD and associated psychiatric symptoms, medication status and dosage frequency, treatment adherence and adverse events were assessed at baseline and after a median treatment length with Medikinet^® retard of 70 days. Primary outcome criterion was the change of ADHD symptom severity from baseline to endpoint according to the ADHD–KGE (German: ADHS–Klinische Gesamteinschätzung) change score. At baseline, 4.2 % of the patients were treatment naïve, 92.7 % had previously received different methylphenidate formulations and 3.1 % had received atomoxetine or amphetamine. During the study, patients received a mean daily dose of 35.7 ± 15.1 mg Medikinet^® retard. At endpoint, in 78 % of patients, the total ADHD symptom severity was reduced, in 20.4 %, it remained unchanged and in 1.6 %, it was worsened. The mean ADHD–KGE total ADHD symptom score was reduced from 1.8 ± 0.7 (moderate) at baseline to 0.8 ± 0.5 (mild; p < 0.001) at endpoint; the mean ADHD–KGE total-associated symptom score was reduced from 1.9 ± 0.7 (moderate) at baseline to 1.0 ± 0.6 (mild; p < 0.0001) at endpoint. After the medication switch from previous methylphenidate formulation to Medikinet^® retard, multiple dosing with ≥3 daily medication intakes was reduced from 12.9 % at baseline to 3.1 % at endpoint (p < 0.001). Adherence to treatment was improved in 37 % of patients. Most frequent adverse events were loss of appetite and gastrointestinal problems. The findings suggest that pharmacologically treated adolescents with ADHD and insufficient symptom reduction and/or treatment adherence benefit from switching to Medikinet^® retard and that it is well tolerated when given in clinical routine care.     

The impact of severe mental disorders and psychotropic medications on sexual health and its implications for clinical management

Sexual dysfunction often accompanies severe psychiatric illness and can be due to both the mental disorder itself and the use of psychotropic treatments. Many sexual symptoms resolve as the mental state improves, but treatment‐related sexual adverse events tend to persist over time, and are unfortunately under‐recognized by clinicians and scarcely investigated in clinical trials. Treatment‐emergent sexual dysfunction adversely affects quality of life and may contribute to reduce treatment adherence. There are important differences between the various compounds in the incidence of adverse sexual effects, associated with differences in mechanisms of action. Antidepressants with a predominantly serotonergic activity, antipsychotics likely to induce hyperprolactinaemia, and mood stabilizers with hormonal effects are often linked to moderate or severe sexual dysfunction, including decreased libido, delayed orgasm, anorgasmia, and sexual arousal difficulties. Severe mental disorders can interfere with sexual function and satisfaction, while patients wish to preserve a previously satisfactory sexual activity. In many patients, a lack of intimate relationships and chronic deterioration in mental and physical health can be accompanied by either a poor sexual life or a more frequent risky sexual behaviour than in the general population. Here we describe the influence of psychosis and antipsychotic medications, of depression and antidepressant drugs, and of bipolar disorder and mood stabilizers on sexual health, and the optimal management of patients with severe psychiatric illness and sexual dysfunction.     

LPHN3 and attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a susceptibility and pharmacogenetic study

Latrophilin 3 (LPHN3) is a brain‐specific member of the G‐protein coupled receptor family associated to both attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) genetic susceptibility and methylphenidate (MPH) pharmacogenetics. Interactions of LPHN3 variants with variants harbored in the 11q chromosome improve the prediction of ADHD development and medication response. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of LPHN3 variants in childhood ADHD susceptibility and treatment response in a naturalistic clinical cohort. The association between LPHN3 and ADHD was evaluated in 523 children and adolescents with ADHD and 132 controls. In the pharmacogenetic study, 172 children with ADHD were investigated. The primary outcome measure was the parent‐rated Swanson, Nolan and Pelham Scale – version IV applied at baseline, first and third months of treatment with MPH. The results reported herein suggest the CGC haplotype derived from single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) rs6813183, rs1355368 and rs734644 as an ADHD risk haplotype (P = 0.02, OR = 1.46). Although non‐significant after multiple testing correction, its interaction with the 11q chromosome SNP rs965560 slightly increases risk (P = 0.03, OR = 1.55). Homozygous individuals for the CGC haplotype showed faster response to MPH treatment as a significant interaction effect between CGC haplotype and treatment over time was observed (P < 0.001). Homozygous individuals for the GT haplotype derived from SNPs rs6551665 and rs1947275 showed a nominally significant interaction with treatment over time (P = 0.04). Our findings replicate previous findings reporting that LPHN3 confers ADHD susceptibility, and moderates MPH treatment response in children and adolescents with ADHD.     

Comparative effect of lurasidone and blonanserin on cortical glutamate,dopamine, and acetylcholine efflux: role of relative serotonin (5‐HT)2A and DA D2 antagonism and 5‐HT1A partial agonism

Atypical antipsychotic drugs (AAPDs) have been suggested to be more effective in improving cognitive impairment in schizophrenia than typical APDs, a conclusion supported by differences in receptor affinities and neurotransmitter efflux in the cortex and the hippocampus. More potent serotonin (5‐HT)_2A than dopamine (DA) D₂ receptors antagonism, and direct or indirect 5‐HT_1A agonism, characterize almost all AAPDs. Blonanserin, an AAPD, has slightly greater affinity for D₂ than 5‐HT_2A receptors. Using microdialysis and ultra performance liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry, we compared the abilities of the typical APD, haloperidol, three AAPDs, blonanserin, lurasidone, and olanzapine, and a selective 5‐HT_1A partial agonist, tandospirone, and all, except haloperidol, were found to ameliorate the cognitive deficits produced by the N‐methyl‐d‐aspartate antagonist, phencyclidine, altering the efflux of neurotransmitters and metabolites in the rat cortex and nucleus accumbens. Blonanserin, lurasidone, olanzapine, and tandospirone, but not haloperidol, increased the efflux of cortical DA and its metabolites, homovanillic acid and 3,4‐dihydroxyphenylacetic acid. Olanzapine and lurasidone increased the efflux of acetylcholine; lurasidone increased glutamate as well. None of the compounds significantly altered the efflux of 5‐HT or its metabolite, 5‐hydroxyindole acetic acid, or GABA, serine, and glycine. The ability to increase cortical DA efflux was the only shared effect of the compounds which ameliorates the deficit in cognition in rodents following phencyclidine.

     

Bipolar disorder: involvement of signaling cascades and AMPA receptor trafficking at synapses

There is increasing evidence that severe mood disorders are associated with impairment of structural plasticity and cellular resilience. Cumulative data demonstrate that mood stabilizers regulate intracellular signaling cascades, including protein kinase C (PKC), PKA, mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase, glycogen synthase kinase 3-beta (GSK3-beta) and intracellular calcium, which are signaling pathways that regulate synaptic plasticity. In this context, it is noteworthy that a growing body of data indicates that the glutamatergic system, has a major role in neuronal plasticity and cellular resilience, might be involved in the pathophysiology and treatment of mood disorders. AMPA glutamate-receptor trafficking is important in synaptic plasticity and might play crucial roles in maintaining critical neuronal circuits associated with mood. Two clinically effective, structurally dissimilar, antimanic agents, lithium and valproate (VPA), down-regulate synaptic expression of AMPA receptor subunit GluR1 in hippocampus in chronically treated rats. This reduction in synaptic GluR1 by lithium and VPA is due to attenuated phosphorylation of GluR1 at a specific PKA site (residue 845 of GluR1), which is crucial for AMPA receptor insertion. By contrast,imipramine, which can provoke mania, increases synaptic expression of GluR1 in the hippocampus in vivo. Furthermore, there is ample evidence from preclinical and clinical research that the glutamatergic system is involved in the pathophysiology of mood disorders and that many of the somatic treatments used for mood disorders including antidepressants, mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotic drugs and electroconvulsive therapy have both direct and indirect effects on the glutamatergic system. Given these findings, further research with medications that specifically affect the glutamatergic system is warranted. Recent studies in our lab have shown that riluzole, a FDA approved medicine that regulates the glutamatergic system, shows antidepressant efficacy in unipolar and bipolar depression. These studies indicate that regulation of glutamate-mediated synaptic plasticity might play a role in the treatment of mood disorders, and raise new avenues for novel therapies for this devastating illness.     

Ignoring non‐English‐language studies may bias ecological meta‐analyses

Meta‐analysis plays a crucial role in syntheses of quantitative evidence in ecology and biodiversity conservation. The reliability of estimates in meta‐analyses strongly depends on unbiased sampling of primary studies. Although earlier studies have explored potential biases in ecological meta‐analyses, biases in reported statistical results and associated study characteristics published in different languages have never been tested in environmental sciences. We address this knowledge gap by systematically searching published meta‐analyses and comparing effect‐size estimates between English‐ and Japanese‐language studies included in existing meta‐analyses. Of the 40 published ecological meta‐analysis articles authored by those affiliated to Japanese institutions, we find that three meta‐analysis articles searched for studies in the two languages and involved sufficient numbers of English‐ and Japanese‐language studies, resulting in four eligible meta‐analyses (i.e., four meta‐analyses conducted in the three meta‐analysis articles). In two of the four, effect sizes differ significantly between the English‐ and Japanese‐language studies included in the meta‐analyses, causing considerable changes in overall mean effect sizes and even their direction when Japanese‐language studies are excluded. The observed differences in effect sizes are likely attributable to systematic differences in reported statistical results and associated study characteristics, particularly taxa and ecosystems, between English‐ and Japanese‐language studies. Despite being based on a small sample size, our findings suggest that ignoring non‐English‐language studies may bias outcomes of ecological meta‐analyses, due to systematic differences in study characteristics and effect‐size estimates between English‐ and non‐English languages. We provide a list of actions that meta‐analysts could take in the future to reduce the risk of language bias.     

Atomoxetine treatment for children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD): a comprehensive meta-analysis of outcomes on parent-rated core symptomatology

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) impacts a significant number of children and adolescents and often leads to deleterious functional impairment. Psychostimulant medication has historically been the first line of pharmacological intervention, though recent years have seen greater attention paid to non-stimulant alternatives. The objective of the present study was to conduct the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date evaluating the efficacy of atomoxetine in reducing core symptomatology of ADHD according to parent report. Selection criteria were applied, and studies were located by searching electronic databases, review of reference sections, and contact with expert researchers; article searching began on 10/01/2013, and the final search was conducted on 09/01/2014. A total of 42 studies met inclusion criteria—33 with control groups and 9 without—for a total sample of 8398 individuals. For those receiving atomoxetine, the summary pre–post (e.g., standardized mean gain) effect size estimate was 1.37 (95% CI [1.24, 1.51], p < .001); atomoxetine was found to statistically significantly outperform control conditions overall (Z = 4.07, p < .001), though results differed by the type of control group; for instance, when comparing atomoxetine to alternative medications as controls, significant differences were no longer present. The non-stimulant atomoxetine led to significant improvement in core ADHD symptomatology and should be considered as a viable pharmacological treatment option for ADHD.     

The impact of pharmacological and non‐pharmacological interventions to improve physical health outcomes in people with schizophrenia: a meta‐review of meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials

We summarized and compared meta‐analyses of pharmacological and non‐pharmacological interventions targeting physical health outcomes among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Major databases were searched until June 1, 2018. Of 3,709 search engine hits, 27 meta‐analyses were included, representing 128 meta‐analyzed trials and 47,231 study participants. While meta‐analyses were generally of adequate or high quality, meta‐analyzed studies were less so. The most effective weight reduction interventions were individual lifestyle counseling (standardized mean difference, SMD=–0.98) and exercise interventions (SMD=–0.96), followed by psychoeducation (SMD=–0.77), aripiprazole augmentation (SMD=–0.73), topiramate (SMD=–0.72), d‐fenfluramine (SMD=–0.54) and metformin (SMD=–0.53). Regarding waist circumference reduction, aripiprazole augmentation (SMD=–1.10) and topiramate (SMD=–0.69) demonstrated the best evidence, followed by dietary interventions (SMD=–0.39). Dietary interventions were the only to significantly improve (diastolic) blood pressure (SMD=–0.39). Switching from olanzapine to quetiapine or aripiprazole (SMD=–0.71) and metformin (SMD=–0.65) demonstrated best efficacy for reducing glucose levels, followed by glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (SMD=–0.39), dietary interventions (SMD=–0.37) and aripiprazole augmentation (SMD=–0.34), whereas insulin resistance improved the most with metformin (SMD=–0.75) and rosiglitazone (SMD=–0.44). Topiramate had the greatest efficacy for triglycerides (SMD=–0.68) and low‐density lipoprotein (LDL)‐cholesterol (SMD=–0.80), whereas metformin had the greatest beneficial effects on total cholesterol (SMD=–0.51) and high‐density lipoprotein (HDL)‐cholesterol (SMD=0.45). Lifestyle interventions yielded small effects for triglycerides, total cholesterol and LDL‐cholesterol (SMD=–0.35 to –0.37). Only exercise interventions increased exercise capacity (SMD=1.81). Despite frequent physical comorbidities and premature mortality mainly due to these increased physical health risks, the current evidence for pharmacological and non‐pharmacological interventions in people with schizophrenia to prevent and treat these conditions is still limited and more larger trials are urgently needed.