Search

Objectives The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of non-emotional and emotional distracters on working memory maintenance in schizophrenic patients and to demonstrate the associated brain areas. Methods 16 schizophrenic patients and 16 healthy controls underwent 3.0T fMRI during a face recognition task with non-emotional (novel face pictures) and emotional (fear-provoking pictures) distracters. The paradigm consisted of 20 trials with the sequence “encoding – maintenance – distracter – retrieval”. As the encoding, three different human faces sequentially appear once on a quartile coordinate. Subjects were instructed to look at the distracters and maintain the memory for the encoded faces. In the retrieval, participants were presented either the previously encoded face or a new face, asked whether they recognize the face. We compared the accuracy and the brain activation maps by SPM 8. Results The accuracies were lower in schizophrenic patients than controls with non-emotional (52.6% and 65.4%, respectively, p<0.05) and emotional (53.3% and 65.6%, respectively, p<0.05) distracter. For non-emotional distracter, schizophrenic patients showed significantly increased activation in superior frontal gyrus, dorsolateral prefrontal gyrus, ventrolateral prefrontal gyrus (VLPFG), superior parietal gyrus (SPG), inferior parietal gyrus, anterior cingulate gyrus, and fusiform gyrus (FG) (p<0.001). And for emotional distracter, patients showed increased in VLPFC, SPG, FG, hippocampus, parahippocampal gyrus, amygdale, superior and middle temporal gyrus, middle and inferior occipital gyrus (p<0.001). Conclusions There was significant difference of neuroanatomy associated with the effects of non-emotional and emotional distracters in schizophrenia. Working memory of schizophrenic patients was significantly influenced by emotional distracters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The primary aim of this non-inferiority study was to investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of generic escitalopram (Lexacure) versus branded escitalopram (Lexapro) for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods The present study included 158 patients who were randomized (1:1) to receive a flexible dose of generic escitalopram ( n = 78) or branded escitalopram ( n = 80) over a 6-week single-blind treatment period. The clinical benefits in the two groups were evaluated using the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Scale (CGI-S), and the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale (CGI-I) at baseline, week 1, week 2, week 4, and week 6. The frequency of adverse events (AEs) was also assessed to determine safety at each follow-up visit. Results At week 6, 28 patients (57.1%) in the generic escitalopram group and 35 patients (67.3%) in the branded escitalopram group had responded to treatment ( P = 0.126), and the remission rates (MADRS score: ≤ 10) were 42.9% ( n = 21) in generic escitalopram group and 53.8% ( n = 28) in the branded escitalopram group ( P = 0.135). The most frequently reported AEs were nausea (17.9%) in the generic escitalopram group and nausea (20.0%) in the branded escitalopram group. Conclusions The present non-inferiority study demonstrated that generic escitalopram is a safe and effective initial treatment for patients with MDD and may also be considered as an additional therapeutic option for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]