Search

Background: Racemic (R,S)‐ketamine is a glutamatergic drug with potent and rapid acting antidepressant effects. An intranasal formulation of (S)‐ketamine was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be used in individuals with treatment‐resistant depression (TRD). There are no data directly comparing outcomes on depression or other comorbidities between these two formulations of ketamine. However, recent meta‐analyses have suggested that IV racemic ketamine may be more potent than IN‐(S)‐ketamine. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcomes in 15 Veterans with comorbid TRD and post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) who underwent ketamine treatment at the VA San Diego Neuromodulation Clinic. All Veterans included in this analysis were given at least 6 intranasal (IN)‐(S)‐ketamine treatments prior to switching to treatment with IV racemic ketamine. Results: Veterans receiving ketamine treatment (across both IN‐(S)‐ketamine and IV‐(R,S)‐ketamine) showed significant reductions in both the Patient Health Questionnaire‐9 (PHQ‐9), a self‐report scale measuring depression symptoms (rm ANOVA F(14,42) = 12.6, p < 0.0001), and in the PTSD checklist for DSM‐5 (PCL‐5), a self‐report scale measuring PSTD symptoms (rm ANOVA F(13,39) = 5.9, p = 0.006). Post hoc testing revealed that PHQ‐9 scores were reduced by an average of 2.4 ± 1.2 compared to baseline after (S)‐ketamine treatments (p = 0.1) and by an average of 5.6 ± 1 after IV‐ketamine treatments (p = 0.0003) compared to pretreatment baseline scores. PCL‐5 scores were reduced by an average of 4.3 ± 3.3 after IN (S)‐ketamine treatments (p = 0.6) and 11.8 ± 3.5 after IV‐ketamine treatments (p = 0.03) compared to pretreatment baseline scores. Conclusions: This work suggests that off‐label IV‐(R,S)‐ketamine could be considered a reasonable next step in patients who do not respond adequately to the FDA‐approved IN‐(S)‐ketamine. Further double‐blinded, randomized controlled trials are warranted to assess whether IV racemic ketamine is more effective than IN‐(S)‐ketamine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Non-medical residential care facilities (RCFs) house many people with schizophrenia. • However the impact of RCFs on mental/physical health and well-being is unclear. • RCF residents have a few worse prognostic indicators and lower HDL levels. • Yet RCF residents have better mental health and comparable physical health. • Biomarkers of aging (metabolic and inflammatory function) were comparable as well. This paper aims to compare mental and physical health, cognitive functioning, and selected biomarkers of aging reflecting metabolic pathology and inflammation, in outpatients with schizophrenia from two residential settings: residential care facilities (RCFs) and living with someone in a house/apartment. This cross-sectional study examined community-dwelling adults with schizophrenia either in RCFs (N = 100) or in a house/apartment with someone (N = 76), recruited for two NIH-funded studies in San Diego. Assessments included measures of mental/physical health, cognitive function, and metabolic (glycosylated hemoglobin, cholesterol) and inflammatory (C-Reactive Protein, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha, Interleukin-6) biomarkers of aging. General logistic models were used to analyze factors associated with residential status. RCF residents had several indicators of worse prognosis (never being married, higher daily antipsychotic dosages, increased comorbidities and higher Framingham risk for coronary heart disease) than individuals living with someone. However, RCF residents had better mental well-being and lower BMI, as well as comparable biomarkers of aging as those living with someone. While the cross-sectional nature of the study does not allow us to infer causality, it is possible that the supportive environment of RCFs may have a positive impact on mental and physical health of persons with schizophrenia. Longitudinal follow-up studies are needed to test this hypothesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Wisdom, a personality trait with affective (compassionate), cognitive, and reflective dimensions, has been associated with greater well-being and health in the general population, but its role in the health of people with HIV (PWH) has not been examined. • Total wisdom score, as well as affective (compassionate) and reflective wisdom dimensions, were positively related to physical and mental well-being both in PWH and HIV- subjects. • Our findings point to a possibility that enhancing these dimensions of wisdom might improve health outcomes in PWH. Wisdom is a unique human personality trait with cognitive, affective or compassionate, and reflective dimensions. We evaluated relationships of three specific dimensions of wisdom with cognitive function and physical and mental well-being in people with HIV (PWH) and HIV-negative (HIV-) participants. Subjects included 138 adults (61 PWH, 77 HIV-) from the San Diego community. Validated measures were used to assess wisdom and well-being. Cognitive function was assessed via the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. We conducted multivariate linear regressions to evaluate the associations of wisdom dimensions with cognitive function and physical and mental well-being. Compared to the HIV- group, PWH had lower mean scores on cognitive function, and physical and mental well-being, and cognitive and reflective dimensions of wisdom, but similar scores on affective or compassionate wisdom. Among PWH, higher total wisdom scores were associated with older age, lower likelihood of substance dependence, greater mental well-being, better cognitive function, higher resilience, social support, and optimism scores, as well as lower levels of perceived stress and nadir CD4 count. Our findings of an association of different dimensions of wisdom with physical and/or mental well-being in PWH would point to a possibility that enhancing these dimensions of wisdom might improve health outcomes in PWH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]