Search

Drug-induced movement disorders (DIMDs) are associated with use of dopamine receptor blocking agents (DRBAs), including antipsychotics. The most common forms are drug-induced parkinsonism (DIP), dystonia, akathisia, and tardive dyskinesia (TD). Although rare, neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) is a potentially life-threatening consequence of DRBA exposure. Recommendations for anticholinergic use in patients with DIMDs were developed on the basis of a roundtable discussion with healthcare professionals with extensive expertise in DIMD management, along with a comprehensive literature review. The roundtable agreed that "extrapyramidal symptoms" is a non-specific term that encompasses a range of abnormal movements. As such, it contributes to a misconception that all DIMDs can be treated in the same way, potentially leading to the misuse and overprescribing of anticholinergics. DIMDs are neurobiologically and clinically distinct, with different treatment paradigms and varying levels of evidence for anticholinergic use. Whereas evidence indicates anticholinergics can be effective for DIP and dystonia, they are not recommended for TD, akathisia, or NMS; nor are they supported for preventing DIMDs except in individuals at high risk for acute dystonia. Anticholinergics may induce serious peripheral adverse effects (e.g., urinary retention) and central effects (e.g., impaired cognition), all of which can be highly concerning especially in older adults. Appropriate use of anticholinergics therefore requires careful consideration of the evidence for efficacy (e.g., supportive for DIP but not TD) and the risks for serious adverse events. If used, anticholinergic medications should be prescribed at the lowest effective dose and for limited periods of time. When discontinued, they should be tapered gradually., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: We systematically reviewed extant studies evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of xanomeline and xanomeline-trospium (KarXT) for treatment of adults with schizophrenia., Methods: In accordance with PRISMA guidelines, articles were systematically searched for in databases and clinical trial registries., Results: A total of 4 preclinical trials and 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. A 4-week RCT observed a difference of 24.0 points (SD 21.0) in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score between xanomeline and placebo groups ( p  = 0.039). A 5-week RCT observed PANSS total score changes from baseline to week 5, including -17.4 and -5.9 points in KarXT and placebo groups, respectively (LSMD -11.6 points; 95% CI -16.1 to -7.1; p  < 0.001; d = 0.75). Another 5-week RCT observed PANSS total score changes from baseline to week 5, including -21.2 (SE 1.7) and -11.6 (SE 1.6) points in KarXT and placebo groups, respectively (LSMD -9.6; 95% CI -13.9 to -5.2; p  < 0.0001; d = 0.61). Side effects include constipation, nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, and dry mouth., Conclusion: KarXT offers an innovative non-D2 blocking approach, representing a promising treatment avenue for schizophrenia.

Post hoc analyses evaluated cariprazine, a dopamine D 3 -preferring D 3 /D 2 receptor partial agonist, in patients with bipolar I depression and high baseline anxiety. Data were pooled from two phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in adults with bipolar I disorder and a major depressive episode (NCT02670538, NCT02670551). Cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d were evaluated in patient subgroups with higher and lower baseline anxiety. In patients with higher baseline anxiety, significant differences for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d versus placebo were observed on change in Montgomery-Åsberg Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score and subscale scores, and rates of MADRS remission ( P < 0.05 all); nonsignificant numerical improvements were observed for cariprazine 3 mg/d versus placebo. In patients with lower anxiety, differences versus placebo were significant for HAM-A (cariprazine 3 mg/d) and MADRS (cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d) total score changes ( P < 0.05 all). Rates of treatment-emergent mania were low and similar for cariprazine and placebo. Cariprazine 1.5 mg/d had consistent effects on anxiety and depression symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression and higher baseline anxiety; tolerability was favorable. Given few proven treatments for this common comorbidity, these preliminary results are promising., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Objective: This phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (NCT02600507) evaluated the efficacy and safety of lumateperone adjunctive therapy to lithium or valproate in patients with bipolar depression., Methods: Patients (18-75 years) with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder experiencing a major depressive episode (MDE), with inadequate therapeutic response to lithium or valproate, were randomized 1:1:1 to 6 weeks adjunctive therapy with lumateperone 28 mg (n = 176), lumateperone 42 mg (n = 177), or placebo (n = 176). The primary and key secondary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline to Day 43 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total score and the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Bipolar Version-Severity Scale (CGI-BP-S) depression subscore. Safety assessments included adverse events, laboratory evaluations, vital signs, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and suicidality., Results: Patients treated with adjunctive lumateperone 42 mg showed significantly greater improvement compared with adjunctive placebo in MADRS Total score (LS mean difference vs placebo [LSMD], -2.4; p = 0.02) and CGI-BP-S depression subscore (LSMD, -0.3; p = 0.01), while adjunctive lumateperone 28 mg showed numerical improvement in MADRS Total score (LSMD, -1.7; p = 0.10) and improvement in the CGI-BP-S depression subscore (LSMD, -0.3; p = 0.04). Adjunctive lumateperone treatment was well tolerated; treatment-emergent adverse events reported at rates >5% and twice placebo for lumateperone 42 mg were somnolence (11.3%), dizziness (10.7%), and nausea (8.5%), with minimal risk of EPS, metabolic abnormalities, or increased prolactin., Conclusions: Lumateperone 42-mg treatment adjunctive to lithium or valproate significantly improved depression symptoms and was generally well tolerated in patients with MDEs associated with either bipolar I or bipolar II disorder., (© 2023 Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc and The Authors. Bipolar Disorders published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Aripiprazole 2-month ready-to-use 960 mg (Ari 2MRTU 960) is a new long-acting injectable antipsychotic formulation for administration every 2 months. A 32-week trial evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of Ari 2MRTU 960 in clinically stable adults with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder (BP-I) (per DSM-5 criteria). This secondary analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of Ari 2MRTU 960 in the subpopulation of patients with BP-I., Methods: Patients with BP-I were randomized to receive Ari 2MRTU 960 ( n  = 40) every 56 ± 2 days (4 injections scheduled) or aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM 400; n  = 41) every 28 ± 2 days (8 injections scheduled). Data were collected during August 2019-July 2020 across 16 US sites. Primary safety endpoints included reported adverse events (coded by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities preferred term), injection site reactions (assessments included a Visual Analog Scale [VAS] to evaluate patient-reported injection-site pain), and motoric symptoms. Secondary endpoints for efficacy included change from baseline at Week 32 in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impression - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP), and Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic Treatment - Short Form (SWN-S) scores, and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) at Week 32., Results: The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between Ari 2MRTU 960 (82.5% [33/40]) and AOM 400 (87.8% [36/41]; p  = .5468). The most frequently reported TEAE was increased weight (Ari 2MRTU 960: 25.0% [10/40]; AOM 400: 26.8% [11/41]; p  = 1). Injection-site pain was experienced by more patients in the Ari 2MRTU 960 group (25% [10/40]) versus the AOM 400 group (7.3% [3/41]; p  = .0622). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) VAS scores for patient-reported injection-site pain following the last injection were 1.2 (2.07) for Ari 2MRTU 960 group and 1.3 (2.19) for AOM 400 ( p  = .9479) (VAS scale range 0-100 [no pain-extreme pain]). No notable improvement or decline from baseline was observed in motoric symptoms in either treatment group. Patients in both treatment groups remained clinically stable for the entire 32-week trial duration, with minimal difference between treatment groups in the least squares (LS) mean change from baseline at Week 32 in the YMRS Total ( p  = .8995), MADRS Total ( p  = .3185), and CGI-BP scores ( p  = .8485), and in mean CGI-I score ( p  = .7960). LS mean change from baseline in SWN-S score was greater for Ari 2MRTU 960 than for AOM 400 at Week 32 ( p  = .0169)., Conclusions: Ari 2MRTU 960 was well tolerated in patients with BP-I, with efficacy similar to AOM 400., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04030143.

Introduction: The challenges posed by treatment-resistant schizophrenia and depressive symptoms have led to ongoing difficulties despite the availability of antipsychotics and antidepressants. This review addresses the potential of amisulpride analogs, particularly SEP-4199, in addressing these challenges through enhanced efficacy and reduced side effects., Areas Covered: This review focuses on the pharmacological profile of amisulpride analogs, exemplified by LB-102 and its derivative SEP-4199. PubMed gathered articles (up to 10 March 2023) on 'amisulpride,' 'schizophrenia,' 'bipolar disorder,' and 'major depressive disorder;' ClinicalTrials.gov tracked SEP-4199 and LB-102 trials. LB-102, a newly identified N-methylated analog of amisulpride, exhibits enhanced lipophilicity at lower doses, as demonstrated in a phase 1 study, indicating significant promise for therapeutic applications. The discovery of SEP-4199, a non-racemic analog composed of R - and S-enantiomers in an 85:15 ratio, is discussed, emphasizing its potential to enhance antidepressant effects while minimizing extrapyramidal side effects via selective D2 receptor binding. Recent phase 2 trials have demonstrated SEP-4199's efficacy in treating depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder I, capitalizing on D2-mediated anti-anhedonic and D3-mediated reward effects., Expert Opinion: The development of SEP-4199 presents a potential breakthrough for managing depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder I. Further exploration of D2 and D3 receptor-mediated effects could lead to improved treatment strategies.

Objective: To investigate the effect of cariprazine on cognitive symptom change across bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia., Methods: Post hoc analyses of 3- to 8-week pivotal studies in bipolar I depression and mania were conducted; one schizophrenia trial including the Cognitive Drug Research System attention battery was also analyzed. Outcomes of interest: Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], Functioning Assessment Short Test [FAST], Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]). LSMDs in change from baseline to end of study were reported in the overall intent-to-treat population and in patient subsets with specified levels of baseline cognitive symptoms or performance., Results: In patients with bipolar depression and at least mild cognitive symptoms, LSMDs were statistically significant for cariprazine vs placebo on MADRS item 6 (3 studies; 1.5 mg=-0.5 [ P <.001]; 3 mg/d=-0.2 [ P <.05]) and on the FAST Cognitive subscale (1 study; 1.5 mg/d=-1.4; P =.0039). In patients with bipolar mania and at least mild cognitive symptoms, the LSMD in PANSS Cognitive subscale score was statistically significant for cariprazine vs placebo (3 studies; -2.1; P =.001). In patients with schizophrenia and high cognitive impairment, improvement in power of attention was observed for cariprazine 3 mg/d vs placebo ( P =.0080), but not for cariprazine 6 mg/d; improvement in continuity of attention was observed for cariprazine 3 mg/d ( P =.0012) and 6 mg/d ( P =.0073)., Conclusion: These post hoc analyses provide preliminary evidence of greater improvements for cariprazine vs placebo across cognitive measures in patients with bipolar I depression and mania, and schizophrenia, suggesting potential benefits for cariprazine in treating cognitive symptoms.

Background: The endogenous opioid system affects metabolism, including weight regulation. Evidence from preclinical and clinical studies provides a rationale for targeting this system to mitigate weight-related side effects of antipsychotics. This review describes the role of the opioid system in regulating weight and metabolism, examines the effects of opioid receptor antagonism on those functions, and explores the use of opioid antagonists to mitigate antipsychotic-associated weight gain and/or metabolic effects., Methods: A PubMed literature search was conducted to identify representative opioid antagonists and associated preclinical and clinical studies examining their potential for the regulation of weight and metabolism., Results: The mu opioid receptor (MOR), delta opioid receptor (DOR), and kappa opioid receptor (KOR) types have overlapping but distinct patterns of central and peripheral expression, and each contributes to the regulation of body weight and metabolism. Three representative opioid antagonists (eg, naltrexone, samidorphan, and LY255582) were identified for illustration. These opioid antagonists differed in their receptor binding and pharmacokinetic profiles, including oral bioavailability, systemic clearance, and half-life, and were associated with varying effects on food intake, energy utilization, and metabolic dysregulation., Conclusions: Preclinical and clinical data suggest that antagonism of the endogenous opioid system is a mechanism to address antipsychotic-associated weight gain and metabolic dysregulation. However, evidence suggests that the differing roles of MOR, DOR, and KOR in metabolism, together with the differences in receptor binding, pharmacokinetic, and functional activity profiles of the opioid receptor antagonists discussed in this review, likely contribute to their differential pharmacodynamic effects and clinical outcomes observed regarding antipsychotic-associated weight gain.

Objective: A post hoc analysis of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient study investigated efficacy of lumateperone 42 mg in patients with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder and experiencing a major depressive episode (MDE) stratified by the presence of mixed features., Methods: Adults (18-75 years) with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder experiencing an MDE, defined by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, criteria, were randomized 1:1 to 6-week oral lumateperone 42 mg/d or placebo (conducted November 2017-March 2019). Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Bipolar Version-Severity (CGI-BP-S) total score, and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) were analyzed in patients (N = 376) categorized as having mixed features (Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] score ≥ 4 and ≤ 12, 41.5%) or not having mixed features (YMRS < 4, 58.5%) at baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) including mania/hypomania were assessed., Results: At day 43, lumateperone significantly improved MADRS and CGI-BP-S total scores change from baseline compared with placebo for patients with mixed features (MADRS least squares mean difference [LSMD] = -4.4, P  < .01; CGI-BP-S LSMD = -0.7, P  < .05) and without mixed features (MADRS LSMD = -4.2, P  < .001, CGI-BP-S LSMD = -1.0, P  < .001). Q-LES-Q-SF percent score significantly improved at day 43 with lumateperone vs placebo in patients with mixed features (LSMD = 5.9, P  < .05), with numerical improvements in patients without mixed features (LSMD = 2.6, P  = .27). TEAEs of mania/hypomania were rare., Conclusions: Lumateperone 42 mg significantly improved symptoms of depression and disease severity in patients with an MDE associated with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder, with or without mixed features., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03249376., (© Copyright 2023 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Introduction: Cognitive impairment is a core feature of bipolar disorder (BD) that impedes recovery by preventing the return to optimal socio-occupational functioning and reducing quality of life. Presently, there are no efficacious treatments for cognitive impairment in BD, but many pharmacological interventions are being considered as they have the potential to target the underlying pathophysiology of the disorder., Areas Covered: This review summarizes the available evidence for pharmacological interventions for cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder. We searched PubMed, MedLine, and PsycInfo from inception to December 1 st, 2022. Traditional treatments, such as lithium, anticonvulsants (lamotrigine), antipsychotics (aripiprazole, asenapine, cariprazine, lurasidone, and olanzapine), antidepressants (vortioxetine, fluoxetine, and tianeptine) and psychostimulants (modafinil), and emerging interventions, such as acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (galantamine and donepezil), dopamine agonists (pramipexole), erythropoietin, glucocorticoid receptor antagonists (mifepristone), immune modulators (infliximab, minocycline and doxycycline), ketamine, metabolic agents (insulin, metformin, and liraglutide), probiotic supplements, and Withania somnifera are discussed., Expert Opinion: The investigation of interventions for cognitive impairment in BD is a relatively under-researched area. In the past, methodological pitfalls in BD cognition trials have also been a critical limiting factor. Expanding on the existing literature and identifying novel pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for cognitive impairment in BD should be a priority.

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) is often associated with severe burden of disease, poor quality of life and functional impairment. Clozapine is the gold standard for the treatment of TRS, although it is also known to cause significant side effects in some patients. In view of the burgeoning interest in the role of genetic factors in precision psychiatry, we conducted a scoping review to narratively summarize the current genetic factors associated with TRS, clozapine resistance and side effects to clozapine treatment. We searched PubMed from inception to December 2022 and included 104 relevant studies in this review. Extant evidence comprised associations between TRS and clozapine resistance with genetic factors related to mainly dopaminergic and serotoninergic neurotransmitter systems, specifically, TRS and rs4680, rs4818 within COMT, and rs1799978 within DRD2; clozapine resistance and DRD3 polymorphisms, CYP1A2 polymorphisms; weight gain with LEP and SNAP-25 genes; and agranulocytosis risk with HLA-related polymorphisms. Future studies, including replication in larger multi-site samples, are still needed to elucidate putative risk genes and the interactions between different genes and their correlations with relevant clinical factors such as psychopathology, psychosocial functioning, cognition and progressive changes with treatment over time in TRS and clozapine resistance.

A recent Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study established that lumateperone 42-mg monotherapy significantly improved symptoms of depression in patients with bipolar depression. This manuscript reports prespecified secondary and post hoc efficacy analyses. Patients with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder experiencing a major depressive episode were randomized 1:1 to lumateperone 42 mg or placebo, administered orally once daily for 6 weeks. Prespecified analyses evaluated change from baseline to Day 43 in individual Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item scores in the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT) and bipolar I and bipolar II disorder subgroups. Post hoc analyses investigated the MADRS anhedonia factor and categorical shifts in MADRS item scores. In the mITT, there was significant improvement from baseline to Day 43 with lumateperone 42 mg compared with placebo for all 10 MADRS items; most MADRS items significantly improved in subgroups with bipolar I (9 items) and bipolar II disorder (8 items). A significantly higher proportion of patients receiving lumateperone compared with placebo shifted from baseline MADRS item score ≥4 to ≤2 at end of treatment in Reported Sadness, Reduced Sleep, Concentration Difficulties, Lassitude, Inability to Feel, and Pessimistic Thoughts. Lumateperone significantly improved the MADRS anhedonia factor from baseline to Day 43 compared with placebo in the mITT (effect size, -0.47) and subgroups with bipolar I (-0.36) and bipolar II disorder (-0.90). Lumateperone 42 mg treatment significantly improved depression symptoms compared with placebo, with consistent efficacy across a broad range of symptoms in people with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest R. McIntyre has received research grant support from CIHR/GACD/National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC); speaker/consultation fees from Lundbeck, Janssen, Alkermes, Neumora Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Sage, Biogen, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Purdue, Pfizer, Otsuka, Takeda, Neurocrine, Sunovion, Bausch Health, Axsome, Novo Nordisk, Kris, Sanofi, Eisai, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc., NewBridge Pharmaceuticals, Abbvie, Atai Life Sciences. R. McIntyre is a CEO of Braxia Scientific Corp. S. Durgam, S.G. Kozauer, R. Chen, and R.E. Davis are full-time employees of Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc., and may hold company stock/stock options. A.J. Cutler has been a consultant for or received speaker/promotional honoraria from AbbVie/Allergan, Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AiCure, Alfasigma, Alkermes, Avanir Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Axsome Therapeutics Inc., BioXcel, Blackthorn, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cerevel, Corium, Gedeon Richter, Idorsia, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Karuna, Lundbeck, Luye Pharma, MedAvante-ProPhase, Inc., Neumora Therapeutics, Neurocrine Biosciences, Novartis, Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Relmada, Sage Therapeutics, Supernus, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Tris Pharma, and Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; he has received research grants from AbbVie/Allergan, Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Alkermes, Axsome Therapeutics, Inc., Biohaven Pharmaceuticals, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., KemPharm, Lundbeck, Neurocrine Biosciences, Novartis, Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Sage Therapeutics, Supernus, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., and Tris Pharma; and he is on the DSMB for COMPASS Pathways and is on the board of the Neuroscience Education Institute., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Lumateperone (LUM) is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved atypical antipsychotic agent for adults with schizophrenia (SCZ) and bipolar depression (for both bipolar I and bipolar II disorder as as monotherapy or as adjunctive treatment to lithium or valproate). LUM simultaneously modulates serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate neurotransmission. The foregoing pleiotropic mechanism of action is predictive of therapeutic benefits across multiple domains of psychopathology in SCZ (i.e., positive, negative, cognitive, and prosocial symptoms). Herein, the overarching aim is to synthesize the extant literature reporting on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LUM in adults with SCZ., Recent Findings: Four clinical studies (i.e., three RCTs and one open-label trial) were included in this synthesis. Overall, LUM significantly reduced the severity of SCZ compared with placebo. The open label study provided the real-world effectiveness of shifting stable patients with SCZ to LUM from other atypical antipsychotics. With respect to safety and tolerability profile, LUM demonstrated placebo-level rates of weight gain, metabolic shift, prolactin elevation, extrapyramidal side effects (EPS), and akathisia across short term trials (i.e., 4-6 weeks). Taken together, our results indicate that LUM significantly improves symptoms severity in adults with SCZ. LUM also exhibits a favorable tolerability and safety profile with placebo level rates of weight gain, metabolic disruption, akathisia, extrapyramidal side effects (excluding akathisia), and prolactin elevation. Lumateperone should be conceptualized as a first-line treatment strategy for adults with SCZ., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: The overarching aim of this review is to synthesize the efficacy, tolerability, and weight-mitigation effects of the olanzapine/samidorphan (OLZ/SAM) combination treatment in adults with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder-I., Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library was conducted on August 15th, 2021. Studies were included if they investigated the use of OLZ/SAM treatment in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder-I, and reported the clinical outcomes: efficacy, change in weight or waist circumference, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, or change in metabolic parameters. A narrative synthesis was undertaken of the data., Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. All identified studies were conducted in adults with schizophrenia. Compared to OLZ-monotherapy, OLZ/SAM was associated with decreased odds of developing clinically significant (>10%) weight gain (OR=0.50, 95% CI:0.31,0.80; p= 0.003) and increase in waist circumference (risk difference = -17.1% 95% CI:-26.3,-7.8) from baseline measurements respectively. In another study, OLZ was 2.7 times more associated with clinically significant weight gain as compared to OLZ/SAM (OR=2.73, 95% CI:1.11, 6.67; p = 0.023). The clinical efficacy of OLZ/SAM remained similar to OLZ with improved tolerability in both short- and long-term studies with no significantly altered pharmacokinetic properties of the constituent agents., Conclusion: OLZ/SAM-treatment is associated with mitigated weight-gain liability when compared to OLZ-monotherapy in adults with schizophrenia. Additional studies are needed to ascertain patient acceptability, appropriate selection and sequencing of OLZ/SAM in the treatment algorithms for adults with schizophrenia (and BD-I), as well as to determine cost-effectiveness and long-term metabolic effects., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical practice guidelines (CPG) are an important tool for implementation of evidence-based clinical care. Despite clinical trials showing lack of efficacy of some agents in bipolar disorder (BD), they are still frequently prescribed in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically review the CPG recommendations on pharmacological interventions with evidence against their use due to lack of efficacy data and/or due to serious safety concerns., Methods: A systematic literature search identified 29 guidelines published by national and international organizations during the 1994-2020 period. Information was extracted regarding how the recommendations framed non-use of treatments in particular clinical situations as well as the actual recommendation in the guideline., Results: Twenty-three guidelines (79%) mentioned at least one non-recommended treatment. The terms used to qualify recommendations varied amongst guidelines and included: "not recommended" "no recommendation" and "negative evidence". Lamotrigine, topiramate and gabapentin were commonly cited as non-recommended treatments for mania and most CPG did not recommend monotherapy with antidepressants, aripiprazole, risperidone, and ziprasidone for treatment of acute bipolar depression. Most guidelines made recommendations about lack of efficacy data or potential harm in treatments for BD but there is a significant variation in the way this information is conveyed to the reader., Limitations: Non-recommended treatments were based on their use for BD episodes or maintenance but specific medications may benefit patients when treating comorbid conditions., Conclusions: The absence of a uniform language and recommendations in current guidelines may be an additional complicating factor in the implementation of evidence-based treatments in BD., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) guidelines provided clinicians with pragmatic treatment recommendations for bipolar disorder (BD). While these guidelines included commentary on how mixed features may direct treatment selection, specific recommendations were not provided-a critical gap which the current update aims to address., Method: Overview of research regarding mixed presentations in BD, with treatment recommendations developed using a modified CANMAT/ISBD rating methodology. Limitations are discussed, including the dearth of high-quality data and reliance on expert opinion., Results: No agents met threshold for first-line treatment of DSM-5 manic or depressive episodes with mixed features. For mania + mixed features second-line treatment options include asenapine, cariprazine, divalproex, and aripiprazole. In depression + mixed features, cariprazine and lurasidone are recommended as second-line options. For DSM-IV defined mixed episodes, with a longer history of research, asenapine and aripiprazole are first-line, and olanzapine (monotherapy or combination), carbamazepine, and divalproex are second-line. Research on maintenance treatments following a DSM-5 mixed presentation is extremely limited, with third-line recommendations based on expert opinion. For maintenance treatment following a DSM-IV mixed episode, quetiapine (monotherapy or combination) is first-line, and lithium and olanzapine identified as second-line options., Conclusion: The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope these guidelines provide valuable support for clinicians providing care to patients experiencing mixed presentations, as well as further influence investment in research to improve diagnosis and treatment of this common and complex clinical state., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The safety and efficacy of cariprazine, a dopamine D 3 -preferring D 3 /D 2 receptor partial agonist and serotonin 5-HT 1A receptor partial agonist, was evaluated in 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with bipolar depression., Methods: Safety and tolerability were evaluated in 2 post hoc analyses. Modal dose analysis: pooled data from all 4 flexible/fixed-dose trials (dose groups: <1.5, 1.5, 3 mg/d). Fixed-dose analysis: pooled data from 2 identically designed fixed-dose trials (1.5 and 3 mg/d dose groups)., Results: The modal dose and fixed-dose analyses evaluated data from 1775 and 970 patients, respectively. Cariprazine was generally safe and well tolerated; study completion rates were 78% and 82% in the modal dose and fixed-dose analyses, respectively. In modal dose analysis, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 60% of overall cariprazine- and 55% of placebo-treated patients; nausea (8% vs 3%) and akathisia (7% vs 2%) occurred in ≥5% of cariprazine patients and twice the rate of placebo. Metabolic changes were small and generally similar for cariprazine and placebo; mean increase in glucose was 3.1 mg/dL for cariprazine and 2.6 mg/dL for placebo. Fixed-dose and modal dose findings were generally consistent; values for most metabolic parameters were slightly higher for fixed-dose 3 mg/d versus 1.5 mg/d., Limitations: Post hoc analyses, modal dose groups, short treatment duration., Conclusions: In modal dose (0.25-3 mg/d) and fixed-dose (1.5 and 3 mg/d) analyses, cariprazine was generally safe and well tolerated in the treatment of bipolar depression. Slightly improved tolerability was observed with fixed-dose cariprazine 1.5 mg/d versus 3 mg/d., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT00852202, NCT01396447, NCT02670538, NCT02670551., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Roger S. McIntyre has received research grant support from Lundbeck, Shire, Otsuka, National Institute of Mental Health, Stanley Medical Research Institute, Canadian Institutes for Health Research, and The Brain and Behavior Research Foundation, and the Chinese National Natural Research Foundation. He has also received speaker/consultant fees from Lundbeck, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Janssen Sunovion, Bausch Health, Takeda, Otsuka, Shire, Allergan, Purdue, Minerva, and Neurocrine. Trisha Suppes in the last 36 months has reported grants from National Institute of Mental Health, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Elan Pharma International Limited, VA Cooperative Studies Program, Pathway Genomics, Stanley Medical Research Institute, National Institute of Health, Palo Alto Health Sciences, and National Institute on Drug Abuse; consulting fees from Sunovion and Allergan, Inc.; honoraria from Medscape Education, Global Medical Education, and CMEology; and royalties from Jones and Bartlett, UpToDate, and Hogrefe Publishing. Joseph Calabrese has received federal funding from the Department of Defense, Health Resources Services Administration and National Institute of Mental Health; research support from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Cleveland Foundation, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, NARSAD, Repligen, Stanley Medical Research Institute, Takeda, and Wyeth; served on advisory boards of Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Dainippon Sumitomo, EPI Q, Inc., Forest Laboratories, Inc., France Foundation, Gedeon Richter Plc., GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Lundbeck, Merck, Neurosearch, OrthoMcNeil, Otsuka, Pfizer, Repligen, Schering-Plough, Servier, Solvay, Supernus, Synosia, Takeda, and Wyeth; and provided CME lectures supported by AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, France Foundation, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Sanofi Aventis, Schering-Plough, Pfizer, Solvay, and Wyeth. Lakshmi N. Yatham has received research support from or served as a consultant or speaker for Alkermes, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, the Canadian Psychiatric Foundation, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Dainippon Sumitomo, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Lilly, Lundbeck, NARSAD, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Servier, the Stanley Foundation, Sunovion, Teva, Valeant, and Wyeth. Willie R. Earley, Maria Burgess, Ludmyla Rekeda, and Arlene Hankinson are employees of Allergan., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: A nominal group process followed by a modified Delphi method was used to survey expert opinions on best practices for tardive dyskinesia (TD) screening, diagnosis, and treatment and to identify areas lacking in clinical evidence., Participants: A steering committee of 11 TD experts met in nominal group format to prioritize questions to be addressed and identify core bibliographic materials and criteria for survey panelists. Of 60 invited experts, 29 (23 psychiatrists and 6 neurologists) agreed to participate., Evidence: A targeted literature search of PubMed (search term: tardive dyskinesia) and recommendations of the steering committee were used to generate core bibliographic material. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) review articles, meta-analyses, guidelines, or clinical trials; (2) publication in English between 2007 and 2017; (3) > 3 pages in length; and (4) publication in key clinical journals with impact factors ≥ 2.0. Of 29 references that met these criteria, 18 achieved a score ≥ 5 (calculated as the number of steering committee votes multiplied by journal impact factor and number of citations divided by years since publication) and were included., Consensus Process: Two survey rounds were conducted anonymously through electronic media from November 2017 to January 2018; responses were collected, collated, and analyzed. Respondent agreement was defined a priori as unanimous (100%), consensus (75%-99%), or majority (50%-74%). For questions using a 5-point Likert scale, agreement was based on percentage of respondents choosing ≥ 4 ("agree completely" or "agree"). Round 1 survey included questions on TD screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Round 2 questions were refined per panelist feedback and excluded Round 1 questions with < 25% agreement and > 75% agreement (unless feedback suggested further investigation)., Conclusions: Consensus was reached that (1) a brief, clinical assessment for TD should be performed at every clinical encounter in patients taking antipsychotics; (2) even mild movements in 1 body area may represent possible TD; (3) management requires an overall evaluation of treatment, including reassessment of antipsychotics and anticholinergics as well as consideration of vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2) inhibitors; and (4) informed discussions with patients/caregivers are essential., (© Copyright 2020 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: When bipolar I disorder (BP-I) mania is accompanied by subsyndromal depressive symptoms, a more complicated illness presentation results. To qualify for the mixed features specifier during mania, the DSM-5 requires ≥3 "non-overlapping" depressive symptoms (DS); notwithstanding, concerns of this definition's ecological validity and implications for timely diagnosis remain., Methods: Herein, patients were pooled from three similarly-designed pivotal trials of cariprazine compared to placebo for BP-I mania (NCT00488618/NCT01058096/NCT01058668) in post hoc analyses of mixed features using three criteria: ≥3 DS (DSM-5), ≥2 DS, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥10. Efficacy of cariprazine compared to placebo was assessed (Week 3) by Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and MADRS scores and rates of mania response and remission., Results: In pooled patients (N = 1037), cariprazine significantly improved mean YMRS scores compared to placebo for each criterion; LSMDs were ≥3 DS = -3.79 (P = .0248), ≥2 DS = -2.91 (P = .0207), and ≥10 MADRS = -5.49 (P < .0001). More cariprazine- than placebo-treated patients met YMRS response and remission criteria, reaching significance for response in ≥2 DS (34% versus 47%; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] = 8, P = .0483) and ≥10 MADRS (31% versus 57%, NNT = 4, P < .0001) and for remission in ≥2 DS (27% versus 39%, NNT = 9, P = .0462), ≥10 MADRS (23% versus 44%, NNT = 5, P < .0001). Depressive symptoms were improved compared to placebo, reaching statistical significance in the MADRS ≥10 subgroup (LSMD = -1.59, P = .0082)., Limitations: Post hoc analysis, MADRS  < 18 entry criterion may have prevented assessment of MADRS changes., Conclusions: Cariprazine significantly reduced manic and depressive symptoms in patients with mixed features with differential efficacy across the subgroups analyzed herein., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objective: The association between antipsychotic use and gastric cancer risk remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the association between antipsychotic exposure and the incidence of gastric cancer., Methods: Using a nested case-control design, a total of 34 470 gastric cancer patients and 163 430 nongastric cancer controls were identified from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database between 1 January 1997 and 31 December 2013. We analyzed the data using a conditional logistic regression model to adjust for possible confounding variables., Results: Antipsychotic use was independently inversely associated with gastric cancer risk after controlling for potential confounding factors including income, urbanization, medications, physical and medical illness, aspirin use, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and triple therapy. In addition, dose-dependent trends against gastric cancer risk were also shown with individual antipsychotic compounds including thioridazine, haloperidol, sulpiride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, amisulpride, and risperidone. A sensitivity analysis showed that second-generation antipsychotics had significant dose-dependent effects in reducing the risk of gastric cancer risk in patients with and without peptic ulcer disease., Conclusions: Antipsychotic use was inversely associated with gastric cancer risk, and dose-dependent effects against gastric cancer were also seen with several individual antipsychotic compounds., (© 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Cariprazine, a dopamine D 3 /D 2 and 5-HT 1A receptor partial agonist, was found to be effective in treating bipolar I depression in a previous phase 2 study. This phase 3 study further assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine in bipolar I depression., Methods: In a double-blind placebo-controlled study, adult participants (18-65 years old) who met DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder and a current depressive episode were randomly assigned to receive placebo (N=158) or cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day (N=157) or 3.0 mg/day (N=165). The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were changes from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score, respectively. Least squares mean differences were estimated using a mixed model for repeated measures, and p values were adjusted for multiplicity., Results: Both dosages of cariprazine were significantly more effective than placebo in improving depressive symptoms (reducing MADRS total score); the least squares mean differences were -2.5 (95% CI=-4.6, -0.4) for cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day and -3.0 (95% CI=-5.1, -0.9) for cariprazine at 3.0 mg/day. Both cariprazine dosages were associated with lower CGI-S scores compared with placebo, but the differences did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for multiplicity (least squares mean difference, -0.2 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 1.5 mg/day group and -0.3 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 3.0 mg/day group). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (in at least 5% of participants in either cariprazine treatment group and twice the rate of the placebo group) were nausea, akathisia, dizziness, and sedation. Mean changes in weight and metabolic parameters were relatively small and comparable across groups., Conclusions: Cariprazine, at both 1.5 mg/day and 3.0 mg/day, was effective, generally well tolerated, and relatively safe in reducing depressive symptoms in adults with bipolar I depression.

It has been encouraged to use large existing data like insurance claims data to investigate the new indications of old drugs. New strategies of research are warranted to identify feasible drugs. We conducted a dual research model with a population-based case-control study using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database and an in vitro study to investigate the association between atypical antipsychotic and Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) risk. The study herein consists of two components. The first is a population-based case-control study using existing data from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. The second component was an in vitro study in which HCC cell lines (Huh7 and Hep G2) were treated with risperidone, quetiapine and clozapine. after treatment of the foregoing antipsychotics, the HCC cell lines were assessed for cell proliferation, invasion and apoptosis. Multivariate conditional logistic regression analysis revealed that antipsychotic use was independently and inversely associated with HCC risk (adjusted odds-ratio [aOR]:0.85, 95% CI: 0.81-0.89). The protective effect was dose-dependent: compared to the low cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) group (0-29 cDDD), the 30-89 cDDD and ≥90 cDDD groups were associated with significantly reduced risk for HCC (aOR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41-0.76; aOR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.27-0.50, respectively). In vitro study results indicated that risperidone, quetiapine and clozapine significantly inhibited cell proliferation, invasion and induced apoptosis in human HCC cell lines. Our results herein suggested that antipsychotic use might reduce the risk of HCC and may provide evidence for new uses of old drugs., (© 2018 UICC.)

Although the sedative and extrapyramidal side effects associated with first-generation antipsychotics are well known, some second-generation antipsychotics are also associated with substantial sedation and activation effects. In this Academic Highlights article, 4 experts on depression from the fields of psychiatry and primary care take a closer look at activation and sedation effects of atypical antipsychotics in patients with MDD. They examine the likelihood of each agent to cause these effects; the impact of these effects on patient functioning, quality of life, and treatment adherence; and the question of whether leveraging activation and sedation to address acute symptoms is ever advisable., (© Copyright 2019 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Introduction: Depressive symptoms and episodes dominate the course of bipolar disorder. The morbidity of bipolar disorder is disproportionately mediated by depressive symptoms; economic costs of bipolar disorder are also disproportionately due to unremitting depressive symptoms. Relatively few treatment options have established unequivocal efficacy in the treatment of bipolar depression. Herein we review evidence regarding the efficacy of the D 3 preferring D 2 /D 3 partial agonist cariprazine in the treatment of adults with bipolar depression. Areas covered: Randomized controlled trials that sought to determine the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of cariprazine in adults with bipolar I depression. Expert opinion: The available evidence from clinical trials indicates that cariprazine is effective at treating bipolar depression wherein treatment for bipolar depression remains an unmet need in bipolar disorder. Cariprazine has demonstrated good tolerability and safety profiles in bipolar disorder. Furthermore, cariprazine may be effective in improving both anhedonia and cognitive dysfunction. Long term prevention studies in bipolar depression, as well as separate studies evaluating efficacy in adults with bipolar II depression, are needed.

Purpose: We sought to characterize the clinical experience of outpatients treated with brexpiprazole after achieving suboptimal outcomes with aripiprazole or bupropion as determined by the treating psychiatric provider., Design and Methods: Case series; inefficacy, intolerability, or other unsatisfactory outcome to previous trial with aripiprazole or bupropion., Findings: The majority of individuals in our sample exhibited tolerability of brexpiprazole. In addition, reduction in mean PHQ-9 scores was observed with brexpiprazole treatment., Implications: The results of our preliminary analysis suggest that a subpopulation of adults who have insufficient outcomes on aripiprazole or bupropion due to intolerability, inefficacy or other unsatisfactory outcome may benefit by switching to brexpiprazole treatment. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed, as well as sophisticated network analysis to further understand efficacy and tolerability differences between atypical antipsychotics., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Recent studies have shown that antipsychotic drugs have epigenetic effects. However, the effects of antipsychotic drugs on histone modification remain unclear. Therefore, we investigated the effects of antipsychotic drugs on the epigenetic modification of the BDNF gene in the rat hippocampus. Rats were subjected to chronic restraint stress (6 h/d for 21 d) and then were administered with either olanzapine (2 mg/kg) or haloperidol (1 mg/kg). The levels of histone H3 acetylation and MeCP2 binding at BDNF promoter IV were assessed with chromatin immunoprecipitation assays. The mRNA levels of total BDNF with exon IV, HDAC5, DNMT1, and DNMT3a were assessed with a quantitative RT-PCR procedure. Chronic restraint stress resulted in the downregulation of total and exon IV BDNF mRNA levels and a decrease in histone H3 acetylation and an increase in MeCP2 binding at BDNF promoter IV. Furthermore, there were robust increases in the expression of HDAC5 and DNMTs. Olanzapine administration largely prevented these changes. The administration of haloperidol had no effect. These findings suggest that the antipsychotic drug olanzapine induced histone modification of BDNF gene expression in the hippocampus and that these epigenetic alterations may represent one of the mechanisms underlying the actions of antipsychotic drugs.

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Despite advances in sequencing candidate genes and whole genomes, no method has accurately predicted who will or will not benefit from a specific antipsychotic medication among patients with schizophrenia. We propose a computational algorithm that utilizes a person-centered approach that directly identifies individual patients who will respond to a specific antipsychotic medication. The algorithm was applied to the data obtained from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study. The predictors were either (1) 13 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and 53 baseline variables or (2) 25 SNPs and the same 53 baseline variables, depending on the existing findings and data availability. The outcome variables were either (1) improvement in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) (Yes/No) or (2) completion of phase 1/1A (Yes/No). Each of those four predictor-outcome combinations was tried for each of the five antipsychotic medications (Perphenazine, Olanzapine, Quetiapine, Risperidone, and Ziprasidone), leading to 20 prediction experiments. For 18 out of 20 experiments, all three performance measures were greater than 0.50 (sensitivity 0.51-0.79, specificity 0.52-0.79, accuracy 0.52-0.74). Notably, the model provided a promising prediction for Ziprasidone for the case involving completion of phase 1/1A (Yes/No) predicted by 13 SNPs and 53 baseline variables (sensitivity 0.75, specificity 0.74, accuracy 0.74). The proposed algorithm simultaneously used both genetic information and clinical profiles to predict individual patients' response to antipsychotic medications. As the method is not disease-specific but a general algorithm, it can be easily adopted in many other clinical practices for personalized medicine., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Using a nation-wide, population-based dataset, we aimed to investigate the risk of road injury among individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) compared to individuals without BD. In addition, we investigated the putative moderating effects of prescription for lithium, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, and/or first- or second-generation antipsychotic agents on the association between BD and risk of road injury., Method: As part of an16-year longitudinal cohort study, we compared the risk of road injuries among study subjects aged 16 and above with a diagnosis of BD, with ten age- and sex-matched sample of individuals without BD. Individuals were compared on measures of incidence on road injuries using medical claims data based on the ICD-9-CM codes: E800~807, E810~817, E819~830, E840~848. Time dependent Cox regression models were used to adjust for time-varying covariates such as age, and medication uses. Hazard ratios before and after adjusting for age, sex, other comorbidities, and drug use were calculated., Results: 3953 people with BD were matched with 39,530 controls from general population. Adjusted hazard ratios revealed a 1.66-fold (95% CI 1.40-1.97) increase in risk of road injuries among bipolar subjects when compared to controls. Female gender, older age (i.e. over 80), residence in areas of highest levels of urbanization, and use of antidepressants were associated with a lower risk of road injuries., Conclusions: In this large, national, population-based cohort, BD was associated with an elevated risk of road injuries. However, prescriptions of antidepressants might help mitigate the foregoing risk., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The co-primary aims are: 1) to compare the risk of fracture between adults with bipolar disorder and those without bipolar disorder; and 2) to assess whether lithium, anticonvulsants and antipsychotics reduce risk of fracture among individuals with bipolar disorder., Methods: The analysis herein is a population-based retrospective cohort study, utilizing the National Health Insurance (NHI) medical claims data collected between 1997 and 2013 in Taiwan. We identified 3705 cases with incident diagnoses of bipolar disorder during study period and 37,050 matched controls without bipolar diagnoses. Incident diagnosis of fracture was operationalized as any bone fracture after the diagnosis of bipolar disorder or after the matched index date for controls., Results: Bipolar patients had significantly higher risk of facture when compared to matched controls (17.6% versus 11.7%, respectively p<0.001). The hazard ratio (HR) was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI]＝1.23-1.48, p<0.001) after adjusting for covariates. Persons with bipolar disorder and a prior history of psychiatric hospitalization were had higher risk for bone fracture than those without prior history of psychiatric hospitalization when compared to match controls. Higher cumulative dose of antipsychotics or mood stabilizers did not increase the risk of fracture., Limitations: The diagnoses of bipolar disorder were not confirmed with structured clinical interview. Drug adherence, exact exposure dosage, smoking, lifestyle, nutrition and exercise habits were unable to be assessed in our dataset., Conclusions: Bipolar disorder is associated with increased risk of fracture, and higher cumulative dose of mood stabilizers and antipsychotics did not further increase the risk of fracture., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of asenapine 2.5 mg twice daily (bid; n=97) or 5 mg bid (n=113) versus placebo (n=101) in adults with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia., Methods: Adults with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) schizophrenia diagnosis were randomized to asenapine 2.5 mg bid, 5 mg bid, placebo, or olanzapine 15 mg once daily. The primary objective was to test superiority of asenapine versus placebo as measured by the change from baseline to day 42 in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. The key safety objective was to evaluate weight change in asenapine versus olanzapine at day 42., Results: The primary efficacy endpoint was met; the difference in least squares mean change from baseline to day 42 in PANSS total score between asenapine 5 mg bid and placebo was -5.5 points (unadjusted 95% CI: -10.1, -1.0; multiplicity adjusted P=0.0356). Neither asenapine 2.5 mg bid nor olanzapine 15mg were superior to placebo. Both asenapine groups demonstrated significantly less weight gain than olanzapine at day 42. Significantly higher incidences of oral hypoesthesia and dysgeusia (combined) for asenapine 2.5 mg bid (5.2% vs 0.0%; P=0.0217) and 5 mg bid (7.1% vs 0.0%; P=0.0033) were observed versus placebo. There were no significant differences between asenapine and placebo for insomnia, extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, dizziness, or combination of somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia., Conclusion: This study supports previous efficacy and safety findings of asenapine; asenapine 5 mg bid is the lowest effective dose in adults with schizophrenia. Asenapine was associated with significantly less weight gain than olanzapine at day 42.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) mixed features specifier provides a less restrictive definition of mixed mood states, compared to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), including mood episodes that manifest with subthreshold symptoms of the opposite mood state. A limited number of studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments specifically for DSM-5-defined mixed features in mood disorders. As such, there is currently an inadequate amount of data to appropriately inform evidence-based treatment guidelines of DSM-5 defined mixed features. However, given the high prevalence and morbidity of mixed features, treatment recommendations based on the currently available evidence along with expert opinion may be of benefit. This article serves to provide these interim treatment recommendations while humbly acknowledging the limited amount of evidence currently available. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) appear to have the greatest promise in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) with mixed features. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (ie, lithium and divalproex) may also be of benefit; however, they have been inadequately studied. In the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features, the comparable efficacy of antidepressants versus other treatments, such as SGAs, remains unknown. As such, antidepressants remain first-line treatment of MDD with or without mixed features; however, there are significant safety concerns associated with antidepressant monotherapy when mixed features are present, which merits increased monitoring. Lurasidone is the only SGA monotherapy that has been shown to be efficacious specifically in the treatment of MDD with mixed features. Further research is needed to accurately determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for mood episodes with mixed features to adequately inform future treatment guidelines.

Mixed features specifier (MFS) is a new nosological entity defined and operationalized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), 5th Edition. The impetus to introduce the MFS and supplant mixed states was protean, including the lack of ecological validity, high rates of misdiagnosis, and guideline discordant treatment for mixed states. Mixed features specifier identifies a phenotype in psychiatry with greater illness burden, as evidenced by earlier age at onset, higher episode frequency and chronicity, psychiatric and medical comorbidity, suicidality, and suboptimal response to conventional antidepressants. Mixed features in psychiatry have historical, conceptual, and nosological relevance; MFS according to DSM-5, is inherently neo-Kraepelinian insofar as individuals with either Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) or Bipolar Disorder (BD) may be affected by MFS. Clinicians are encouraged to screen all patients presenting with a major depressive episode (or hypomanic episode) for MFS. Although "overlapping symptoms" were excluded from the diagnostic criteria (eg, agitation, anxiety, irritability, insomnia), clinicians are encouraged to probe for these nonspecific symptoms as a possible proxy of co-existing MFS. In addition to conventional antidepressants, second generation antipsychotics and/or conventional mood stabilizers (eg, lithium) may be considered as first-line therapies for individuals with a depressive episode as part of MDD or BD with mixed features.

Diagnosing and treating major depressive disorder (MDD) accurately and efficiently is challenging for many clinicians. Recent additions to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as well as potential moderators of antidepressant response such as pretreatment phenomenological characteristics (eg, body mass index, drug metabolism markers) may help physicians to better stratify patients and make informed decisions on the best course of treatment to obtain remission. The evidence base suggests that combining traditional antidepressant therapy with atypical antipsychotics may increase the chance for remission. Other strategies that may help include switching to another antidepressant as monotherapy or combining lithium, thyroid hormone, or psychotherapy. Moreover, in some cases, a manualized-based psychotherapeutic approach may be an appropriate first-line or alternative treatment avenue for adults with MDD., (© Copyright 2016 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: Hitherto literature indicates that mood stabilizers exert variable effects on oxidative and antioxidative systems, which are involved in the pathogenesis of Bipolar Disorder. Herein we primarily sought to characterize markers of peripheral oxidative stress during euthymia in adults with Bipolar Disorder under current intake of different mood stabilizers (lithium, anticonvulsants and atypical antipsychotics/AAPs)., Methods: Peripheral oxidative stress parameters (TBARS/Thiobarbituric acid-reactive-substances, MDA/ malondialdehyde and carbonyl proteins) and antioxidative markers (SOD/Cu/Zn superoxide dismutase, GST/glutathione Stransferase and TAC/total antioxidative capacity) were measured in serum of 115 euthymic bipolar individuals (50 females, 65 males; HAMD<11 and YMRS<8). Differences in (anti)oxidative markers between bipolar participants treated with different mood stabilizing medication were tested with MANCOVAS and ANCOVAS with SPSS.21., Results: Bipolar individuals taking lithium had significantly lower oxidative parameters than test persons without lithium (multivariate effect for MDA and TBARS: F(2/182)= 3.956, p= 0.021; univariate effect for MDA: F(2/182)= 7.880, p= 0.006, Partial η2= 0.041). Subjects with AAPs had significantly higher MDA and TBARS levels compared to participants without AAPs (multivariate effect F(2/182)= 3.122, p= 0.046, Partial η2= 0.033). Patients taking anticonvulsants had significantly lower GST levels than patients without antiepileptic medication (F(1/165)= 4.501, p= 0.035, Partial η2= 0.027)., Conclusion: Lithium taking participants had the lowest MDA and TBARS levels, while AAP taking test persons had high oxidative stress markers. The observed effects on oxidative markers may provide a mechanistic basis for understanding lithium's neuroprotective effects.

The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to determine whether early symptom improvement with extended release quetiapine (quetiapine XR) may predict treatment outcome in patients with major depressive disorder. Data were from 6, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of quetiapine XR (2 fixed-dose and 2 flexible-dose monotherapy and 2 adjunct studies) in adult patients with major depressive disorder. Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Score (CGI-S) were assessed at baseline, weeks 2, 4, and 6. Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) was assessed at baseline and week 6. The MADRS improvement at week 2 (15%, 20%, 25%, 30%) was used to predict response and remission, based on MADRS (50% improvement; total score ≤ 12) or HAM-D (50% improvement; total score ≤ 7). The CGI-S improvement (1 point) at week 2 was used to predict final outcome (CGI-S score ≤ 2). The predictive value for early improvement with quetiapine XR was found to be "very strong" (Yule's Q coefficient, a combined measure of sensitivity and specificity) using 30% MADRS improvement as the threshold. This was relatively comparable for response and remission and for fixed-dose, flexible-dose, and adjunct studies. This was also observed for placebo. Exceptions were: adjunct studies (where predictivity was lower for ongoing antidepressant/placebo), and for remission (predictivity for remission appeared lower than for response with placebo). In conclusion, outcome at week 6 with quetiapine XR for a major depressive episode could be predicted by 30% improvement after 2 weeks, a finding that could give doctors confidence to continue treatment and may facilitate adherence in patients.

Bipolar depression is frequently encountered in the primary care setting. Delayed recognition and treatment can have adverse clinical, functional, and economic outcomes. Timely and accurate diagnosis and appropriate evidence-based treatment can have a substantial impact on the course of the disorder.

Introduction: Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often fail to respond to first-line antidepressant treatments (ADTs); subsequent strategies include dosage increase, switch to a different ADT, or addition of another ADT or other drug. The objective of this prospective, case review study was to identify factors that influence the decision to prescribe adjunctive antipsychotics for patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT., Methods: Psychiatrists or primary care physicians (n=411) based in the USA and Europe each completed an online survey for ten consecutive adults with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs, and for whom a treatment change was considered. A t test was used to compare survey responses between groups of patients., Results: The survey was completed for 4018 patients; an adjunctive antipsychotic was considered for 961/4018 patients (23.9%) and actually prescribed for 514/4018 (12.8%). Compared with patients not considered for an adjunctive antipsychotic, those who were considered for this treatment had more previous major depressive episodes (MDEs), longer duration of the current MDE, more severe illness both at ADT initiation and current consultation, and more treatment changes. Patients who were prescribed adjunctive antipsychotics had at baseline more functional impairment and absences from work than those considered for but not prescribed this treatment. Key symptoms that prompted physicians to consider antipsychotics were psychotic symptoms, psychomotor agitation, hostility, irritability, impulsivity, and anger bursts. Anxious mood and irritability were mentioned significantly more often by physicians who actually prescribed adjunctive antipsychotics. Obstacles to prescribing included a tendency to wait to see if symptoms improved and concern over side effects., Conclusion: This real-world study suggested that the decision to prescribe an adjunctive antipsychotic for patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT is influenced by a broad spectrum of factors, predominantly related to severity of illness, functional impairment, and symptom profile., Funding: Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc. (Princeton, USA) and H. Lundbeck A/S (Valby, Denmark).

Only 3 medications are currently approved in the US for acute bipolar depression: 2 atypical antipsychotics and a combination atypical antipsychotic-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Metabolic, neurologic, and hormonal adverse events are associated with all of the atypical antipsychotics approved for this indication. However, these agents differ in their propensity to cause weight gain or other side effects that significantly impact a patient's physical health and ability to function, and the selection of medication-which may also include a mood stabilizer-as well as other forms of treatment, will affect the outcome. It is important to design treatment based on individual needs. Evidence suggests that the collaborative care model, which incorporates individualized systematic treatment, may be more appropriate for the management of bipolar depression than the acute care model., (© Copyright 2015 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Background: These analyses compared efficacy of olanzapine in patients with bipolar mania with or without mixed features, as defined in the DSM-5., Methods: Pooled data from 3 placebo-controlled olanzapine studies in patients having bipolar I disorder with manic/mixed episode were analyzed (N=228 olanzapine; N=219 placebo). Patients were categorized for mixed features by number of concurrent depressive symptoms at baseline (0, 1, and 2 [category A; without mixed features], and ≥3 [category B; with mixed features]), as determined by HAM-D17 item score ≥1. Depressive symptoms corresponded to 6 HAM-D17 items in the DSM-5 definition of manic episode with mixed features. Primary efficacy was evaluated by changes in the baseline-to-3-week YMRS total score., Results: Patients were categorized into A (N=322; 72.0%) or B (N=125; 28.0%). Mean baseline YMRS total scores were 28.1 in category A and 27.8 in category B. Least-squares mean change of YMRS total scores in categories A and B (olanzapine versus placebo) were -11.78 versus -6.86 and -13.21 versus -4.72, respectively. Patients in the olanzapine- compared with placebo-group experienced a greater decrease in YMRS total score for both categories (p<0.001). An interaction between mixed features and treatment was seen in YMRS change at a 0.3 significance level (p=0.175)., Limitations: The results are from post-hoc analyses., Conclusions: Olanzapine was efficacious in the treatment of bipolar I mania, in patients both with and without mixed features, defined by DSM-5; however, greater efficacy was observed in patients with mixed features having more severe depressive symptoms., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: This analysis investigated the correlations between the efficacy of olanzapine monotherapy and the number of concurrent manic symptoms in patients treated for bipolar depression., Methods: Pooled data from 2 placebo-controlled olanzapine studies in patients with bipolar I depression were analyzed (total 1214 patients; 690 olanzapine monotherapy patients and 524 placebo patients). Patients were categorized for mixed features by the number of concurrent manic symptoms at baseline (0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively, as measured by a Young Mania Rating Scale item score ≥1). Efficacy was evaluated by change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to 6 weeks., Results: Least-squares mean differences between olanzapine and placebo in the change of MADRS total scores were -3.76 (p=0.002), -3.20 (p<0.001), and -3.44 (p=0.002) for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. The response rates for olanzapine versus (vs.) placebo were 52.6% vs. 39.8%, 50.3% vs. 40.0%, and 42.2% vs. 33.7% for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. The remission rates for olanzapine vs. placebo group were 46.1% vs. 34.3%, 39.5% vs. 32.0%, and 34.8% vs. 24.1% for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. No significant interaction between mixed features and treatment was seen in the MADRS changes or response and remission rates., Limitations: Post hoc analyses of the data from 2 previous randomized clinical studies., Conclusions: Olanzapine monotherapy was shown to be effective in the treatment of bipolar depression irrespective of the presence of concurrent manic symptoms., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We evaluated sexual functioning from 6 acute, randomized, placebo-controlled studies (6-10 weeks) of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) 50, 150, or 300 mg/day as monotherapy (Studies 1-4) or adjunct therapy (Studies 6-7) in major depressive disorder (MDD)., Methods: We present a pre-planned, non-inferiority analysis of quetiapine XR monotherapy versus placebo using Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ) total score change (Studies 1-4). Post hoc analyses evaluated CSFQ total and domain scores for fixed-dose monotherapy (Studies 1-2), modified fixed-dose (Studies 3-4), and adjunct therapy studies (Studies 6-7). CSFQ data for active comparators (duloxetine [Study 2], escitalopram [Study 4]) are reported., Results: Quetiapine XR monotherapy was non-inferior to placebo for sexual functioning (least squares mean [LSM] difference in CSFQ score change versus placebo, 0.16 [95% confidence interval: -0.59, 0.92]); LSM change in CSFQ score: 1.90, quetiapine XR (all doses) and 1.73, placebo. LSM differences versus placebo (95% confidence interval): 0.18 (-1.40, 1.75), duloxetine (Study 2); 0.16 (-1.77, 2.10), escitalopram (Study 4). LSM differences with adjunct quetiapine XR 150 mg/day (0.52; p = 0.338) or 300 mg/day (0.22; p = 0.679) were comparable with placebo plus antidepressants. Post hoc all-patient and gender-specific analyses were comparable for CSFQ total scores versus placebo with quetiapine XR 50, 150, or 300 mg/day, duloxetine, and escitalopram. Discussion Lack of negative effects on sexual functioning in patients with MDD may improve treatment acceptability., Conclusion: Quetiapine XR (monotherapy or adjunct therapy) had an impact on sexual function that was comparable with placebo.

Schizophrenia is a heterogeneous and complex mental disorder with high rates of disability, non-recovery, and relapse. The primary pharmacological treatments for schizophrenia are antipsychotics. Notwithstanding the efficacy of antipsychotics in ameliorating positive symptoms and reducing relapse rates, cognitive deficits and negative symptoms are not sufficiently treated with available pharmaceutical agents. Moreover, schizophrenia is associated with consistent, replicable, and clinically significant deficits in cognition. The importance of cognitive deficits in schizophrenia is emphasized by reports indicating that the severity of cognitive deficits is predictive of treatment compliance, adherence, and risk of relapse among first-episode individuals. Taken together, this review highlights epigenetic modulations involving histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors as a potential avenue for novel treatment toward improvements in cognition and functional outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. The combination of epigenetic modulation with pharmacological interventions that engage multiple disparate physiological systems implicated in schizophrenia are discussed, and may represent a more effective strategy in ameliorating cognitive deficits and mitigating symptoms for improved functionality., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Atypical antipsychotics may "directly" influence glucose homeostasis, increasing risk of type 2 diabetes independently of changes in adiposity. Animal models suggest direct effects after even a single dose of certain atypical antipsychotics on glucose dysregulation. Here, we investigated effects of a single-dose olanzapine (OLA) on glucose metabolism in healthy volunteers, thereby minimizing confounding effects of the illness of schizophrenia and adiposity. In a randomized double-blind crossover design, 15 subjects were administered 10 mg of OLA or placebo at 7:00 A.M. on separate study dates. A frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test was initiated 4.25 hours later to assess changes in glucose homeostasis, including an index of insulin sensitivity, disposition index, glucose effectiveness, and acute insulin response to glucose. We also examined effects on cortisol, prolactin, fasting free fatty acids (FFAs), insulin-mediated suppression of FFAs, and adipocytokines (leptin, adiponectin, C-reactive protein, interleukin 6, and tumor necrosis factor α). Complete data for both visits were analyzed for 12 subjects. Olanzapine treatment significantly decreased glucose effectiveness (P = 0.041) and raised fasting glucose over 4.25 hours (P = 0.03) as compared to placebo. Olanzapine was associated with lower serum cortisol (P = 0.003), lower fasting FFA (P = 0.042), and increased prolactin levels (P < 0.0001). We therefore suggest that a single dose of OLA may invoke early changes in some parameters of glucose and lipid metabolism, as well as endocrine indices.

Background: Clinical trials are not generally powered to analyze outcomes such as sustained response. We evaluated sustained response rates for patients with major depressive disorder receiving quetiapine XR as monotherapy or adjunct therapy., Method: Post hoc analyses of pooled data from four previously reported randomized, placebo-controlled studies of quetiapine XR 150 and 300 mg/day as monotherapy or adjunct therapy to ongoing antidepressant. Sustained response rates (≥50% reduction in MADRS total score at specific timepoint and each subsequent visit until Week 6) were calculated at Weeks 1, 2, and 4; rates were compared using a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel analysis., Results: In the monotherapy studies, the proportion of patients experiencing sustained response was greater with quetiapine XR 150 mg/day versus placebo at Week 2 (20.0% vs. 13.3%; p<0.05) and Week 4 (33.3% vs. 23.3%; p<0.01) (observed cases [OC]). The corresponding sustained response rates for quetiapine XR 300 mg/day were 18.0% (p=0.104) and 29.7% (p=0.063), respectively (OC). The proportion of patients experiencing sustained response was greater in the adjunct studies versus placebo at Weeks 2 and 4 for quetiapine XR 150 (Week 2, 30.1% vs. 15.2%, p<0.001; Week 4, 40.1% vs. 32.0%, p<0.05) and 300 mg/day (Week 2, 29.0% vs. 15.2%, p<0.001; Week 4, 42.0% vs. 32.0%, p<0.05) (OC)., Limitations: Post hoc analyses, acute treatment period; no active comparator., Conclusions: Quetiapine XR as monotherapy (150 mg/day at Weeks 2 and 4) or adjunct to ongoing antidepressant therapy (150 and 300 mg/day at Weeks 2 and 4) increased sustained response rates versus placebo., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Sleep disturbance is common in depression and is a risk factor for recurrence and suicide. This analysis evaluated the effects of adjunct extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) on sleep disturbance and quality in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and an inadequate response to on-going antidepressant therapy. Pooled data from two 6-wk, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were analysed post hoc. Patients received once-daily quetiapine XR [(150 mg/d), n = 309; (300 mg/d), n = 307] or placebo (n = 303) adjunct to on-going antidepressant therapy. Analyses included: change from randomization in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Item 4 (reduced sleep) score; Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) Items 4 (insomnia-early), 5 (insomnia-middle) and 6 (insomnia-late) scores; HAMD sleep disturbance factor (Items 4+5+6); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score. Change in MADRS total score was also evaluated in patients stratified by HAMD sleep disturbance factor score (high ≥ 4 and low < 4) at randomization. At week 6, adjunct quetiapine XR (150 and 300 mg/d) reduced MADRS Item 4, HAMD Items 4, 5 and 6, HAMD sleep disturbance factor and PSQI global scores from randomization vs. placebo (all p < 0.001). In patients with high sleep disturbance, quetiapine XR (both doses) improved depressive symptoms (MADRS total score) vs. placebo from week 1 onwards (p < 0.01). Adjunct quetiapine XR improved sleep disturbance and quality vs. placebo in patients with MDD and an inadequate response to on-going antidepressant treatment, and was effective against depressive symptoms in patients experiencing high sleep disturbance.

Introduction: Atypical antipsychotics provide broad-spectrum effectiveness for the acute and/or preventative treatment of disparate psychiatric disorders. Atypical antipsychotics offer improved efficacy in some psychopathological domains when compared with typical antipsychotics. Notwithstanding, atypicals are not a catholicon and are associated with clinically significant and treatment-limiting side effects (e.g., extrapyramidal symptoms and weight gain)., Areas Covered: This article reviews commonly encountered adverse events attributable to the use of atypical antipsychotic agents. This review aims to provide a current overview of common adverse events associated with atypical agents with a particular emphasis on adverse events that frequently lead to treatment discontinuation (e.g., changes in weight, metabolism, extrapyramidal side effects, neuroendocrine changes, blood dyscrasias, and cardiovascular toxicity)., Expert Opinion: Atypicals are not a catholicon and are associated with clinically significant and treatment-limiting side effects (e.g., extrapyramidal symptoms and weight gain). Improving the utility of these agents requires a familiarity and understanding of the heterogeneous tolerability and safety profiles of atypical agents as well as the therapeutic evidence for their efficacy.