Background: Bipolar disorder is one of the most burdensome severe mental disorders, characterized by high levels of personal and social disability. Patients often need an integrated pharmacological and non-pharmacological approach. Lithium is one of the most effective treatments available not only in psychiatry, but in the whole medicine, and its clinical efficacy is superior to that of other mood stabilizers. However, a declining trend on lithium prescriptions has been observed worldwide in the last 20 years, supporting the notion that lithium is a 'forgotten drug' and highlighting that the majority of patients with bipolar disorder are missing out the best available pharmacological option. Based on such premises, a narrative review has been carried out on the most common "misconceptions" and "stereotypes" associated with lithium treatment; we also provide a list of "good reasons" for using lithium in ordinary clinical practice to overcome those false myths.
Main text: A narrative search of the available literature has been performed entering the following keywords: "bipolar disorder", "lithium", "myth", "mythology", "pharmacological treatment", and "misunderstanding". The most common false myths have been critically revised and the following statements have been proposed: (1) Lithium should represent the first choice for the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder; (2) lithium treatment is effective in different patients' groups suffering from bipolar disorder; (3) Drug-drug interaction risk can be easily managed during lithium treatment; (4) The optimal management of lithium treatment includes periodical laboratory tests; (5) Slow-release lithium formulation has advantages compared to immediate release formulation; (6) Lithium treatment has antisuicidal properties; (7) Lithium can be carefully managed during pregnancy.
Conclusions: In recent years, a discrepancy between evidence-based recommendations and clinical practice in using lithium treatment for patients with bipolar disorder has been highlighted. It is time to disseminate clear and unbiased information on the clinical efficacy, effectiveness, tolerability and easiness to use of lithium treatment in patients with bipolar disorder. It is necessary to reinvigorate the clinical and academic discussion about the efficacy of lithium, to counteract the decreasing prescription trend of one of the most effective drugs available in the whole medicine.
Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a major and common cause of suicide. The purpose of this article is to report the clinical characteristics and patterns of co-morbid suicidal behavior (SB) in first hospitalized and drug-naïve MDD patients.
Methods: A total of 345 patients with first hospitalization and drug-naïve MDD with SB were included in this study, while 183 patients without SB were included as a control group. We collected socio-demographic, general clinical data and common biochemical indicators of all participants and assessed their clinical symptoms.
Results: Compared to patients without SB, MDD with SB had more severe clinical symptoms and worse metabolic indicators. Duration of disease, depressive symptom scores, and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels was risk factors for SB and its number.
Conclusions: MDD patients with SB suffered more severe clinical symptoms and worse metabolic indicators, and risk factors for SB in this population were identified, which may provide beneficial insight and reference for clinical prevention and intervention of SB in MDD patients.
Background: Factors influencing antidepressant treatment discontinuation are poorly understood. In the present study, we aimed to estimate the prevalence of antidepressant treatment discontinuation and identify demographic characteristics, psychiatric comorbidities, and specific side effects associated with treatment discontinuation.
Methods: We leveraged data from the Australian Genetics of Depression Study (AGDS; N = 20,941) to perform a retrospective cohort study on antidepressant treatment discontinuation. Participants were eligible if they were over 18 years of age, had taken antidepressants in the past 4 years, and provided informed consent.
Results: Among the ten antidepressants studied, the highest discontinuation rates were observed for Mirtazapine (57.3%) and Amitriptyline (51.6%). Discontinuation rates were comparable across sexes except for Mirtazapine, for which women were more likely to discontinue. The two most common side effects, reduced sexual function and weight gain, were not associated with increased odds of treatment discontinuation. Anxiety, agitation, suicidal thoughts, vomiting, and rashes were associated with higher odds for treatment discontinuation, as were lifetime diagnoses of PTSD, ADHD, and a higher neuroticism score. Educational attainment showed a negative (protective) association with discontinuation across medications.
Conclusions: Our study suggests that not all side effects contribute equally to discontinuation. Common side effects such as reduced sexual function and weight gain may not necessarily increase the risk of treatment discontinuation. Side effects linked to discontinuation can be divided into two groups, psychopathology related and allergy/intolerance.
Background: Major depressive disorder (MDD) poses a significant social and economic burden worldwide. Identifying exposures, risk factors, and biological mechanisms that are causally connected to MDD can help build a scientific basis for disease prevention and development of novel therapeutic approaches.
Methods: In this systematic review, we assessed the evidence for causal relationships between putative causal risk factors and MDD from Mendelian randomization (MR) studies, following PRISMA. We assessed methodological quality based on key elements of the MR design: use of a full instrumental variable analysis and validation of the three key MR assumptions.
Results: We included methodological details and results from 52 articles. A causal link between lifestyle, metabolic, inflammatory biomarkers, particular pathological states and MDD is supported by MR investigations, although results for each category varied substantially.
Conclusions: While this review shows how MR can offer useful information for examining prospective treatment targets and better understanding the pathophysiology of MDD, some methodological flaws in the existing literature limit reliability of results and probably underlie their heterogeneity. We highlight perspectives and recommendations for future works on MR in psychiatry.
Background: Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is defined by the European Medicines Agency as a lack of clinically meaningful improvement after treatment, with at least two different antidepressants. Individual, familiar, and socio-economic burden of TRD is huge. Given the lack of clear guidelines, the large variability of TRD approaches across different countries and the availability of new medications to meet the need of effective and rapid acting therapeutic strategies, it is important to understand the consensus regarding the clinical characteristics and treatment pathways of patients with TRD in Italian routine clinical practice, particularly in view of the recent availability of esketamine nasal spray.
Methods: A Delphi questionnaire with 17 statements (with a 7 points Likert scale for agreement) was administered via a customized web-based platform to Italian psychiatrists with at least 5 years of experience and specific expertise in the field of depression. In the second-round physicians were asked to answer the same statements considering the interquartile range of each question as an index of their colleagues' responses. Stata 16.1 software was used for the analyses.
Results: Sixty panellists, representative of the Italian territory, answered the questionnaire at the first round. For 8/17 statements more than 75% of panellists reached agreement and a high consensus as they assigned similar scores; for 4 statements the panellists assigned similar scores but in the middle of the Likert scale showing a moderate agreement with the statement, while for 5 statements there was indecision in the agreement and low consensus with the statement.
Conclusions: This Delphi Panel showed that there is a wide heterogeneity in Italy in the management of TRD patients, and a compelling need of standardised strategies and treatments specifically approved for TRD. A high level of consensus and agreement was obtained about the importance of adding lithium and/or antipsychotics as augmentation therapies and in the meantime about the need for long-term maintenance therapy. A high level of consensus and agreement was equally reached for the identification of esketamine nasal spray as the best option for TRD patients and for the possibility to administrate without difficulties esketamine in a community outpatient setting, highlighting the benefit of an appropriate educational support for patients.
Objective: To evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of Agomelatine in improving symptoms in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), providing more scientific evidence for the treatment of depression, and offering more effective therapeutic options for patients.
Methods: A total of 180 MDD patients in acute phase from 10 psychiatric hospitals of Grade three in Zhejiang Province were enrolled in this 12-week study with the competitive and consecutive pattern, and they were randomized into two different groups treated with flexible-dosage antidepressants of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) or agomelatine, respectively. The subjects were evaluated with psychological scales of HAMD-17, HAMA, SHAPS for anhedonia, MFI-20 for fatigue, PQSI for sleep quality and MEQ for disturbances in chronobiologic rhythms at baseline, 2, 4, 8 and 12-weekend points, and TESS was used for side-effect. The results were analyzed with repeated measurement analysis of variance.
Results: The two groups each had 90 participants, and there were no significant differences at baseline. The scores of various assessment scales showed statistically significant time main effects during the visits (P < 0.01). The Agomelatine group demonstrated faster efficacy within 2 weeks, with better improvement in SHAPS, MEQ, and PSQI compared to the SSRIs group. However, the remission rate at 12 weeks was lower in the Agomelatine group than in the SSRIs group (63.3% and 72.2%), but the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. The Agomelatine group had fewer adverse reactions (14.4% and 16.7%), but there was a slightly higher incidence of liver function impairment (6.7% and 4.4%), with no statistically significant difference between the groups.
Conclusion: Agomelatine, as a novel antidepressant, shows certain advantages in improving depression and anxiety symptoms and is comparable to SSRIs in terms of safety. However, its long-term efficacy and safety on MDD or other depressive subtypes still require further observation and research.
Background: There is a critical need for effective treatment of the core symptoms of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The purinergic antagonist suramin may improve core symptoms through restoration of normal mitochondrial function and reduction of neuro-inflammation via its known antagonism of P2X and P2Y receptors. Nonclinical studies in fragile X knockout mice and the maternal immune activation model support these hypotheses.
Methods: We conducted a 14 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proof -of-concept study (N = 52) to test the efficacy and safety of suramin intravenous infusions in boys aged 4-15 years with moderate to severe ASD. The study had 3 treatment arms: 10 mg/kg suramin, 20 mg/kg suramin, and placebo given at baseline, week 4, and week 8. The Aberrant Behavior Checklist of Core Symptoms (ABC-Core) (subscales 2, 3, and 5) was the primary endpoint and the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) was a secondary endpoint.
Results: Forty-four subjects completed the study. The 10 mg/kg suramin group showed a greater, but statistically non-significant, numeric improvement (- 12.5 ± 3.18 [mean ± SE]) vs. placebo (- 8.9 ± 2.86) in ABC-Core at Week 14. The 20 mg/kg suramin group did not show improvement over placebo. In exploratory analyses, the 10 mg/kg arm showed greater ABC Core differences from placebo in younger subjects and among those with less severe symptoms. In CGI-I, the 10 mg/kg arm showed a statistically significant improvement from baseline (2.8 ± 0.30 [mean ± SE]) compared to placebo (1.7 ± 0.27) (p = 0.016). The 20 mg/kg arm had a 2.0 ± 0.28 improvement in CGI-I, which was not statistically significant compared to placebo (p = 0.65).
Conclusion: Suramin was generally safe and well tolerated over 14 weeks; most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. Trial Registration Registered with the South African Health Authority, registration number DOH-27-0419-6116.
Clinicaltrials: Gov registration ID is NCT06058962, last update posted 2023-09-28.
Background: The purpose of the present review was to summarize the main literature contribution on the relationship between borderline personality disorder (BPD) and early psychosis. While retracing the historical path of the term "borderline", specific attention was paid to psychotic and psychotic-like symptoms in BPD. Its relationship with At Risk Mental State was evaluated, as well.
Methods: This search was conducted on PUBMED/MEDLINE and PsycInfo, looking for "Borderline personality disorder, First Episode Psychosis, Early Psychosis, Ultra-High Risk AND/OR Clinical High Risk" for psychosis.
Results: Eight pertinent papers were identified on this topic. Their main findings were then discussed. The term "borderline" has undergone different changes in meaning and use, despite always referring to states considered on the fence between neurosis and psychosis. However, considering the history of psychopathology and its relationship with diagnostic manuals, little attention has been given to its psychotic features. Being those symptoms highly burdensome, this neglect has often led to misdiagnosis and under-treatment.
Conclusions: Psychotic symptoms in BPD can be severe and distressing. Nonetheless they can be easily neglected, and when found they challenge clinicians in defining a differential diagnosis to distinguish between BPD and Psychosis Spectrum Disorders. Given specific needs and interventions for these different conditions, a dimensional, rather than categorical, approach should be considered, as well as specific care pathways and monitoring should be advised.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：