Combined psychotherapy plus benzodiazepines for panic disorder

Pharmacological treatments in panic disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, churning stomach, faintness and breathlessness. Other recognised panic attack symptoms involve fearful cognitions, such as the fear of collapse, going mad or dying, and derealisation (the sensation that the world is unreal). Panic disorder is common in the general population with a prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants and benzodiazepines.

OBJECTIVES

To compare, via network meta-analysis, individual drugs (antidepressants and benzodiazepines) or placebo in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. To rank individual active drugs for panic disorder (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To rank drug classes for panic disorder (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), mono-amine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and benzodiazepines (BDZs) and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To explore heterogeneity and inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, CENTRAL, CDSR, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and PsycINFO to 26 May 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people aged 18 years or older of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. We included trials that compared the effectiveness of antidepressants and benzodiazepines with each other or with a placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data and continuous data as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD): response to treatment (i.e. substantial improvement from baseline as defined by the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), total number of dropouts due to any reason (as a proxy measure of treatment acceptability: dichotomous outcome), remission (i.e. satisfactory end state as defined by global judgement of the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), panic symptom scales and global judgement (continuous outcome), frequency of panic attacks (as recorded, for example, by a panic diary; continuous outcome), agoraphobia (dichotomous outcome). We assessed the certainty of evidence using threshold analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, we included 70 trials in this review. Sample sizes ranged between 5 and 445 participants in each arm, and the total sample size per study ranged from 10 to 1168. Thirty-five studies included sample sizes of over 100 participants. There is evidence from 48 RCTs (N = 10,118) that most medications are more effective in the response outcome than placebo. In particular, diazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, paroxetine, venlafaxine, clomipramine, fluoxetine and adinazolam showed the strongest effect, with diazepam, alprazolam and clonazepam ranking as the most effective. We found heterogeneity in most of the comparisons, but our threshold analyses suggest that this is unlikely to impact the findings of the network meta-analysis. Results from 64 RCTs (N = 12,310) suggest that most medications are associated with either a reduced or similar risk of dropouts to placebo. Alprazolam and diazepam were associated with a lower dropout rate compared to placebo and were ranked as the most tolerated of all the medications examined. Thirty-two RCTs (N = 8569) were included in the remission outcome. Most medications were more effective than placebo, namely desipramine, fluoxetine, clonazepam, diazepam, fluvoxamine, imipramine, venlafaxine and paroxetine, and their effects were clinically meaningful. Amongst these medications, desipramine and alprazolam were ranked highest. Thirty-five RCTs (N = 8826) are included in the continuous outcome reduction in panic scale scores. Brofaromine, clonazepam and reboxetine had the strongest reductions in panic symptoms compared to placebo, but results were based on either one trial or very small trials. Forty-one RCTs (N = 7853) are included in the frequency of panic attack outcome. Only clonazepam and alprazolam showed a strong reduction in the frequency of panic attacks compared to placebo, and were ranked highest. Twenty-six RCTs (N = 7044) provided data for agoraphobia. The strongest reductions in agoraphobia symptoms were found for citalopram, reboxetine, escitalopram, clomipramine and diazepam, compared to placebo. For the pooled intervention classes, we examined the two primary outcomes (response and dropout). The classes of medication were: SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs. For the response outcome, all classes of medications examined were more effective than placebo. TCAs as a class ranked as the most effective, followed by BDZs and MAOIs. SSRIs as a class ranked fifth on average, while SNRIs were ranked lowest. When we compared classes of medication with each other for the response outcome, we found no difference between classes. Comparisons between MAOIs and TCAs and between BDZs and TCAs also suggested no differences between these medications, but the results were imprecise. For the dropout outcome, BDZs were the only class associated with a lower dropout compared to placebo and were ranked first in terms of tolerability. The other classes did not show any difference in dropouts compared to placebo. In terms of ranking, TCAs are on average second to BDZs, followed by SNRIs, then by SSRIs and lastly by MAOIs. BDZs were associated with lower dropout rates compared to SSRIs, SNRIs and TCAs. The quality of the studies comparing antidepressants with placebo was moderate, while the quality of the studies comparing BDZs with placebo and antidepressants was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In terms of efficacy, SSRIs, SNRIs (venlafaxine), TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs may be effective, with little difference between classes. However, it is important to note that the reliability of these findings may be limited due to the overall low quality of the studies, with all having unclear or high risk of bias across multiple domains. Within classes, some differences emerged. For example, amongst the SSRIs paroxetine and fluoxetine seem to have stronger evidence of efficacy than sertraline. Benzodiazepines appear to have a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability (incidence of dropouts) over other classes.

Different Attitudes of Patients and Psychiatrists Toward Benzodiazepine Treatment

BACKGROUND

Concern regarding the benefit/risk ratio of the long-term use of benzodiazepines (BDZs) and Z-drugs is increasing. To prevent the risk of dependence in BDZ long-term use, it is essential to understand the attitudes of patients and psychiatrists toward BDZ treatment. The aims of this investigation were to 1) obtain information on patients' attitudes with long-term BDZ use and their referring psychiatrists' attitudes toward BDZ treatment, including their perception of the difficulty of reducing the dose of BDZs, and 2) identify discrepancies between patients' and psychiatrists' perceptions.

METHODS

A brief questionnaire was constructed to investigate the attitudes of patients receiving BDZ treatment and their referring psychiatrists. Our sample comprised 155 patients who received BDZ treatment for more than one year and their referring eight psychiatrists. Both the patients and their psychiatrists completed our questionnaire between August 2017 and December 2017.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 13% felt that it was more difficult to reduce the dose of BDZs than their referring psychiatrists (type A discrepancy), while 25% felt that it was less difficult (type B discrepancy). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the female sex and both the patients' ("psychotherapy plus BDZs was necessary" and "it was necessary to increase the dose of BDZs") and psychiatrists' beliefs ("short-term prescription was justified") were associated with type A discrepancies. Type B discrepancies were associated with psychiatrists' beliefs that the patient's wishes justified the use of BDZs and that the cessation of treatment with BDZs would lead to the deterioration of their rapport with their patients.

CONCLUSION

To overcome the discrepancies in the attitudes of patients and psychiatrists toward the cessation of BDZ treatment, it is necessary to promote patient-centered care involving patient psychoeducation and practice guidelines for the decision-making process. Further studies investigating the promotion of patient-centered care to reduce BDZ use are needed.

Nonlinear relationship between early life stress exposure and subsequent resilience in monkeys

Retrospective correlational studies of humans suggest that moderate but not minimal or substantial early life stress exposure promotes the development of stress inoculation-induced resilience. Here we test for a nonlinear relationship between early life stress and resilience by comparing varying "doses" of early life stress. Juvenile squirrel monkeys underwent one of five treatment conditions between 17-27 weeks of age: Stress inoculation (SI) with continuous access to mother (SI + Mom; one stress element), SI without continuous access to mother (SI; two stress elements), SI without continuous access to mother and with alprazolam injection pretreatments (SI + Alz; three stress elements), SI without continuous access to mother and with vehicle injection pretreatments (SI + Veh; three stress elements), or standard housing (No SI; zero stress elements). Alprazolam was used to test whether anxiolytic medication diminished SI effects. Subjects exposed to one or two early life stressors subsequently responded with fewer indications of anxiety (e.g., decreased maternal clinging, increased object exploration, smaller cortisol increases) compared to No SI subjects. Subjects exposed to three early life stressors did not differ on most measures from one another or from No SI subjects. These findings provide empirical support for a nonlinear J-shaped relationship between early life stress exposure and subsequent resilience.

Benzodiazepines versus placebo for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is characterised by recurrent unexpected panic attacks consisting of a wave of intense fear that reaches a peak within a few minutes. Panic disorder is a common disorder, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 1% to 5% in the general population and a 7% to 10% prevalence in primary care settings. Its aetiology is not fully understood and is probably heterogeneous.Panic disorder is treated with psychological and pharmacological interventions, often used in combination. Although benzodiazepines are frequently used in the treatment of panic disorder, guidelines recommend antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as first-line treatment for panic disorder, particularly due to their lower incidence of dependence and withdrawal reaction when compared to benzodiazepines. Despite these recommendations, benzodiazepines are widely used in the treatment of panic disorder, probably because of their rapid onset of action.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of benzodiazepines versus placebo in the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR Studies and References), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950-), Embase (1974-), and PsycINFO (1967-) up to 29 May 2018. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind (blinding of patients and personnel) controlled trials randomising adults with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia to benzodiazepine or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked the eligibility of studies and extracted data using a standardised form. Data were then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, settings, and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies in the review with a total of 4233 participants, of which 2124 were randomised to benzodiazepines and 1475 to placebo. The remaining 634 participants were randomised to other active treatments in three-arm trials. We assessed the overall methodological quality of the included studies as poor. We rated all studies as at unclear risk of bias in at least three domains. In addition, we judged 20 of the 24 included studies as having a high risk of bias in at least one domain.Two primary outcomes of efficacy and acceptability showed a possible advantage of benzodiazepines over placebo. The estimated risk ratio (RR) for a response to treatment was 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39 to 1.96) in favour of benzodiazepines, which corresponds to an estimated number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4 (95% CI 3 to 7). The dropout rate was lower among participants treated with benzodiazepines (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.64); the estimated NNTB was 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). We rated the quality of the evidence as low for both primary outcomes. The possible advantage of benzodiazepine was also seen for remission (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.88) and the endpoint data for social functioning (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.53, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.42), both with low-quality evidence. We assessed the evidence for the other secondary outcomes as of very low quality. With the exception of the analyses of the change score data for depression (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.04) and social functioning (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.24), all secondary outcome analyses showed an effect in favour of benzodiazepines compared to placebo. However, the number of dropouts due to adverse effects was higher with benzodiazepines than with placebo (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.15; low-quality evidence). Furthermore, our analyses of adverse events showed that a higher proportion of participants experienced at least one adverse effect when treated with benzodiazepines (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence shows a possible superiority of benzodiazepine over placebo in the short-term treatment of panic disorders. The validity of the included studies is questionable due to possible unmasking of allocated treatments, high dropout rates, and probable publication bias. Moreover, the included studies were only short-term studies and did not examine the long-term efficacy nor the risks of dependency and withdrawal symptoms. Due to these limitations, our results regarding the efficacy of benzodiazepines versus placebo provide only limited guidance for clinical practice. Furthermore, the clinician's choice is not between benzodiazepines and placebo, but between benzodiazepines and other agents, notably SSRIs, both in terms of efficacy and adverse effects. The choice of treatment should therefore be guided by the patient's preference and should balance benefits and harms from treatment in a long-term perspective.

Predictors of Broad Dimensions of Psychopathology among Patients with Panic Disorder after Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy

Background

Many patients with panic disorder meet criteria for at least one other diagnosis, most commonly other anxiety or mood disorders. Cognitive-behavioral therapy is the best empirically supported psychotherapy for panic disorder. There is now evidence indicating that cognitive-behavioral therapy for panic disorder yields positive benefits upon comorbid disorders.

Objectives

The present study aimed to examine the predictors of broad dimensions of psychopathology in panic disorder after cognitive-behavioral therapy.

Methods

Two hundred patients affected by panic disorder were treated with manualized group cognitive-behavioral therapy. We examined if the baseline personality dimensions of NEO Five Factor Index predicted the subscales of Symptom Checklist-90 Revised at endpoint using multiple regression analysis based on the intention-to-treat principle.

Results

Conscientiousness score of NEO Five Factor Index at baseline was a predictor of four Symptom Checklist-90 Revised subscales including obsessive-compulsive (β = −0.15, P < 0.01), depression (β = −0.13, P < 0.05), phobic anxiety (β = −0.15, P < 0.05), and Global Severity Index (β = −0.13, P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Conscientiousness at baseline may predict several dimensions of psychopathology in patients with panic disorder after cognitive-behavioral therapy. For the purpose of improving a wide range of psychiatric symptoms with patients affected by panic disorder, it may be useful to pay more attention to this personal trait at baseline.

Psychological treatments for mental disorders in adults: A review of the evidence of leading international organizations

Most mental health services throughout the world currently regard evidence-based psychological treatments as best practice for the treatment of mental disorders. The aim of this study was to analyze evidence-based treatments drawn from RCTs, reviews, meta-analyses, guides, and lists provided by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Division 12 (Clinical Psychology) of the American Psychological Association (APA), Cochrane and the Australian Psychological Society (APS) in relation to mental disorders in adults. A total of 135 treatments were analyzed for 23 mental disorders and compared to determine the level of agreement among the organizations. The results indicate that, in most cases, there is little agreement among organizations and that there are several discrepancies within certain disorders. These results require reflection on the meaning attributed to evidence-based practice with regard to psychological treatments. The possible reasons for these differences are discussed. Based on these findings, proposals to unify the criteria that reconcile the realities of clinical practice with a scientific perspective were analyzed.

Anxiety sensitivity as a predictor of broad dimensions of psychopathology after cognitive behavioral therapy for panic disorder

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder (PD) is a common disease and presents with broad dimensions of psychopathology. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is known to improve these broad dimensions of psychopathology in addition to PD symptoms. However, little is known about the predictors of treatment response in comorbid psychiatric symptoms after CBT for PD. Recent studies suggest that anxiety sensitivity (AS) may be a key vulnerability for PD. This study aimed to examine AS as a predictor of broad dimensions of psychopathology after CBT for PD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 118 patients with PD were treated with manualized group CBT. We used multiple regression analysis to examine the associations between 3 Anxiety Sensitivity Index (ASI) factors (physical concerns, mental incapacitation concerns, and social concerns) at baseline and the subscales of the Symptom Checklist-90 Revised (SCL-90-R) at endpoint.

RESULTS

Low levels of social concerns at baseline predicted low levels on 5 SCL-90-R subscales after CBT: interpersonal sensitivity, depression, hostility, paranoid ideation, and psychosis. High levels of mental incapacitation concerns significantly predicted low levels on 3 SCL-90-R subscales after treatment: interpersonal sensitivity, hostility, and paranoid ideation. Physical concerns at baseline did not predict broad dimensions of psychopathology.

CONCLUSION

This study suggested that the social concerns and mental incapacitation concerns subscales of the ASI at baseline predicted several dimensions of psychopathology after CBT for PD. To improve comorbid psychopathology, it may be useful to direct more attention to these ASI subscales.

Antidepressants and benzodiazepines for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. Panic disorder is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, antidepressants and benzodiazepines are the mainstay of treatment for panic disorder. Different classes of antidepressants have been compared; and the British Association for Psychopharmacology, and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) consider antidepressants (mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)) as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). In addition to antidepressants, benzodiazepines are widely prescribed for the treatment of panic disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the evidence for the effects of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for panic disorder in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

The Specialised Register of the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group (CCMDCTR) to 11 September 2015. This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950-), Embase (1974-) and PsycINFO (1967-). Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were handsearched. We contacted experts in this field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind randomised controlled trials allocating adult patients with panic disorder to antidepressants or benzodiazepines versus any other active treatment with antidepressants or benzodiazepines.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. Data were entered in RevMan 5.3 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, settings and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability and tolerability.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five studies, including 6785 participants overall (of which 5365 in the arms of interest (antidepressant and benzodiazepines as monotherapy)) were included in this review; however, since studies addressed many different comparisons, only a few trials provided data for primary outcomes. We found low-quality evidence suggesting no difference between antidepressants and benzodiazepines in terms of response rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.47; participants = 215; studies = 2). Very low-quality evidence suggested a benefit for benzodiazepines compared to antidepressants in terms of dropouts due to any cause, even if confidence interval (CI) ranges from almost no difference to benefit with benzodiazepines (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.63; participants = 1449; studies = 7). We found some evidence suggesting that serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are better tolerated than TCAs (when looking at the number of patients experiencing adverse effects). We failed to find clinically significant differences between individual benzodiazepines. The majority of studies did not report details on random sequence generation and allocation concealment; similarly, no details were provided about strategies to ensure blinding. The study protocol was not available for almost all studies so it is difficult to make a judgment on the possibility of outcome reporting bias. Information on adverse effects was very limited.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies are not sufficient to comprehensively address the objectives of the present review. The majority of studies enrolled a small number of participants and did not provide data for all the outcomes specified in the protocol. For these reasons most of the analyses were underpowered and this limits the overall completeness of evidence. In general, based on the results of the current review, the possible role of antidepressants and benzodiazepines should be assessed by the clinician on an individual basis. The choice of which antidepressant and/or benzodiazepine is prescribed can not be made on the basis of this review only, and should be based on evidence of antidepressants and benzodiazepines efficacy and tolerability, including data from placebo-controlled studies, as a whole. Data on long-term tolerability issues associated with antidepressants and benzodiazepines exposure should also be carefully considered.The present review highlights the need for further higher-quality studies comparing antidepressants with benzodiazepines, which should be conducted with high-methodological standards and including pragmatic outcome measures to provide clinicians with useful and practical data. Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.

Treatment-refractory anxiety; definition, risk factors, and treatment challenges

A sizable proportion of psychiatric patients will seek clinical evaluation and treatment for anxiety symptoms reportedly refractory to treatment. This apparent lack of response is either due to “pseudo-resistance” (a failure to have received and adhered to a recognized and effective treatment or treatments for their condition) or to true “treatment resistance.” Pseudo-resistance can be due to clinician errors in selecting and delivering an appropriate treatment effectively, or to patient nonadherence to a course of treatment. True treatment resistance can be due to unrecognized exogenous anxiogenic factors (eg, caffeine overuse, sleep deprivation, use of alcohol or marijuana) or an incorrect diagnosis (eg, atypical bipolar illness, occult substance abuse, attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder). Once the above factors are eliminated, treatment should focus on combining effective medications and cognitive behavioral therapy, combining several medications (augmentation), or employing novel medications or psychotherapies not typically indicated as first-line evidence-based anxiety treatments.

Psychological therapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is characterised by the presence of recurrent unexpected panic attacks, discrete periods of fear or anxiety that have a rapid onset and include symptoms such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating and shaking. Panic disorder is common in the general population, with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. A previous Cochrane meta-analysis suggested that psychological therapy (either alone or combined with pharmacotherapy) can be chosen as a first-line treatment for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. However, it is not yet clear whether certain psychological therapies can be considered superior to others. In order to answer this question, in this review we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA), in which we compared eight different forms of psychological therapy and three forms of a control condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different psychological therapies and different control conditions for panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the main searches in the CCDANCTR electronic databases (studies and references registers), all years to 16 March 2015. We conducted complementary searches in PubMed and trials registries. Supplementary searches included reference lists of included studies, citation indexes, personal communication to the authors of all included studies and grey literature searches in OpenSIGLE. We applied no restrictions on date, language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on adults with a formal diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. We considered the following psychological therapies: psychoeducation (PE), supportive psychotherapy (SP), physiological therapies (PT), behaviour therapy (BT), cognitive therapy (CT), cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), third-wave CBT (3W) and psychodynamic therapies (PD). We included both individual and group formats. Therapies had to be administered face-to-face. The comparator interventions considered for this review were: no treatment (NT), wait list (WL) and attention/psychological placebo (APP). For this review we considered four short-term (ST) outcomes (ST-remission, ST-response, ST-dropouts, ST-improvement on a continuous scale) and one long-term (LT) outcome (LT-remission/response).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

As a first step, we conducted a systematic search of all relevant papers according to the inclusion criteria. For each outcome, we then constructed a treatment network in order to clarify the extent to which each type of therapy and each comparison had been investigated in the available literature. Then, for each available comparison, we conducted a random-effects meta-analysis. Subsequently, we performed a network meta-analysis in order to synthesise the available direct evidence with indirect evidence, and to obtain an overall effect size estimate for each possible pair of therapies in the network. Finally, we calculated a probabilistic ranking of the different psychological therapies and control conditions for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 1432 references; after screening, we included 60 studies in the final qualitative analyses. Among these, 54 (including 3021 patients) were also included in the quantitative analyses. With respect to the analyses for the first of our primary outcomes, (short-term remission), the most studied of the included psychological therapies was CBT (32 studies), followed by BT (12 studies), PT (10 studies), CT (three studies), SP (three studies) and PD (two studies).The quality of the evidence for the entire network was found to be low for all outcomes. The quality of the evidence for CBT vs NT, CBT vs SP and CBT vs PD was low to very low, depending on the outcome. The majority of the included studies were at unclear risk of bias with regard to the randomisation process. We found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of attrition bias and detection bias. We also found selective outcome reporting bias to be present and we strongly suspected publication bias. Finally, we found almost half of the included studies to be at high risk of researcher allegiance bias.Overall the networks appeared to be well connected, but were generally underpowered to detect any important disagreement between direct and indirect evidence. The results showed the superiority of psychological therapies over the WL condition, although this finding was amplified by evident small study effects (SSE). The NMAs for ST-remission, ST-response and ST-improvement on a continuous scale showed well-replicated evidence in favour of CBT, as well as some sparse but relevant evidence in favour of PD and SP, over other therapies. In terms of ST-dropouts, PD and 3W showed better tolerability over other psychological therapies in the short term. In the long term, CBT and PD showed the highest level of remission/response, suggesting that the effects of these two treatments may be more stable with respect to other psychological therapies. However, all the mentioned differences among active treatments must be interpreted while taking into account that in most cases the effect sizes were small and/or results were imprecise.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no high-quality, unequivocal evidence to support one psychological therapy over the others for the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults. However, the results show that CBT - the most extensively studied among the included psychological therapies - was often superior to other therapies, although the effect size was small and the level of precision was often insufficient or clinically irrelevant. In the only two studies available that explored PD, this treatment showed promising results, although further research is needed in order to better explore the relative efficacy of PD with respect to CBT. Furthermore, PD appeared to be the best tolerated (in terms of ST-dropouts) among psychological treatments. Unexpectedly, we found some evidence in support of the possible viability of non-specific supportive psychotherapy for the treatment of panic disorder; however, the results concerning SP should be interpreted cautiously because of the sparsity of evidence regarding this treatment and, as in the case of PD, further research is needed to explore this issue. Behaviour therapy did not appear to be a valid alternative to CBT as a first-line treatment for patients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.

Risk factors associated with benzodiazepine use among people who inject drugs in an urban Canadian setting

BACKGROUND

Though known to have abuse potential, benzodiazepine medications remain widely prescribed. Furthermore, issues related to benzodiazepine use by people who inject drugs (PWID) remain to be fully characterized. We therefore sought to examine the prevalence of and risk factors associated with benzodiazepine use in a street-involved urban population.

METHODS

Between May 1996 and November 2013, data were derived from two open prospective cohort studies in Vancouver, Canada, restricted to PWID. Multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations (GEE) was used to determine factors independently associated with benzodiazepine use.

RESULTS

Over the study period, 2806 individuals were recruited, including 949 (34%) women. Of these, 1080 (38.5%) participants reported benzodiazepine use at least once during the study period. In the multivariable analysis, Caucasian ethnicity, ≥ daily heroin injection, ≥ daily cocaine injection, non-fatal overdose, incarceration, syringe sharing, and unsafe sex were all independently associated with benzodiazepine use. Conversely, older age, homelessness, and ≥ daily crack smoking were negatively associated with benzodiazepine use.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of benzodiazepines was common in this urban setting and was associated with several markers of addiction severity and significant health and social vulnerabilities including syringe sharing and unsafe sex. These findings underscore the need to promote treatment for benzodiazepine use, safer benzodiazepine prescribing, including greater recognition of the limited indications for evidence-based use of this medication class.

Emerging drugs for the treatment of anxiety

INTRODUCTION

Anxiety disorders are among the most prevalent and disabling psychiatric disorders in the United States and worldwide. Basic research has provided critical insights into the mechanism regulating fear behavior in animals and a host of animal models have been developed in order to screen compounds for anxiolytic properties. Despite this progress, no mechanistically novel agents for the treatment of anxiety have come to market in more than two decades.

AREAS COVERED

The current review will provide a critical summary of current pharmacological approaches to the treatment of anxiety and will examine the pharmacotherapeutic pipeline for treatments in development. Anxiety and related disorders considered herein include panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. The glutamate, neuropeptide and endocannabinoid systems show particular promise as future targets for novel drug development.

EXPERT OPINION

In the face of an ever-growing understanding of fear-related behavior, the field awaits the translation of this research into mechanistically novel treatments. Obstacles will be overcome through close collaboration between basic and clinical researchers with the goal of aligning valid endophenotypes of human anxiety disorders with improved animal models. Novel approaches are needed to move basic discoveries into new, more effective treatments for our patients.

Acid-base dysregulation and chemosensory mechanisms in panic disorder: a translational update

Panic disorder (PD), a complex anxiety disorder characterized by recurrent panic attacks, represents a poorly understood psychiatric condition which is associated with significant morbidity and an increased risk of suicide attempts and completed suicide. Recently however, neuroimaging and panic provocation challenge studies have provided insights into the pathoetiology of panic phenomena and have begun to elucidate potential neural mechanisms that may underlie panic attacks. In this regard, accumulating evidence suggests that acidosis may be a contributing factor in induction of panic. Challenge studies in patients with PD reveal that panic attacks may be reliably provoked by agents that lead to acid-base dysbalance such as CO2 inhalation and sodium lactate infusion. Chemosensory mechanisms that translate pH into panic-relevant fear, autonomic, and respiratory responses are therefore of high relevance to the understanding of panic pathophysiology. Herein, we provide a current update on clinical and preclinical studies supporting how acid-base imbalance and diverse chemosensory mechanisms may be associated with PD and discuss future implications of these findings.

Azapirones versus placebo for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is common in the general population. It is often associated with other psychiatric disorders, such as drug dependence, major depression, bipolar disorder, social phobia, specific phobia and generalised anxiety disorder. Azapirones are a class of drugs used as anxiolytics. They are associated with less drowsiness, psychomotor impairment, alcohol potentiation and potential for addiction or abuse than benzodiazepines. However, azapirones are not widely used in the treatment of panic disorder and evidence for their efficacy is unclear. It is important to find out if azapirones are effective and acceptable in the treatment of panic disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of azapirones on panic disorder in adults, specifically:1. to determine the efficacy of azapirones in alleviating symptoms of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo;2. to review the acceptability of azapirones in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo; and3. to investigate adverse effects of azapirones in panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, including general prevalence of adverse effects, compared with placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis Group Trials Specialised Register (CCDANCTR, search date: 10th January 2014), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from The Cochrane Library (all years), MEDLINE (1950-), EMBASE (1974-), and PsycINFO (1967-).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials that compared azapirones with placebo for panic disorder in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently identified studies, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies involving 170 participants compared the azapirone buspirone with placebo. No study provided enough usable information on our primary efficacy outcome (response). For our primary acceptability outcome, moderate-quality evidence indicated that azapirones had lower acceptability than placebo: risk ratio (RR) for dropouts for any reason 2.13 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11 to 4.07; 3 studies, 170 participants. Evidence for secondary efficacy outcomes were of low quality. Results on efficacy between azapirone and placebo in terms of agoraphobia (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.53; 1 study, 52 participants), general anxiety (mean difference (MD) -2.20, 95% CI -5.45 to 1.06; 2 studies, 115 participants) and depression (MD -1.80, 95% CI -5.60 to 2.00; 1 study, 52 participants) were uncertain. None of the studies provided information for the assessment of allocation concealment or sequence generation. Conflicts of interest were not explicitly expressed. The risk of attrition bias was rated high for all three studies. Information on adverse effects other than dropouts for any reason was insufficient to include in the analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of azapirones is uncertain due to the lack of meta-analysable data for the primary outcome and low-quality evidence for secondary efficacy outcomes. A small amount of moderate-quality evidence suggested that the acceptability of azapirones for panic disorder was lower than for placebo. However, only trials of one azapirone (namely buspirone) were included in this review; this, combined with the small sample size, limits our conclusions. If further research is to be conducted, studies with larger sample sizes, with different azapirones and with less risk of bias are necessary to draw firm conclusions regarding azapirones for panic disorder.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder (PD) is a common type of anxiety disorder, characterized by unexpected and repeated panic attacks or fear of future panic attacks, or both. Individuals with PD are often resistant to pharmacological or psychological treatments and this can lead to the disorder becoming a chronic and disabling illness. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) can deliver sustained and spatially selective current to suppress or induce cortical excitability, and its therapeutic effect on pathological neuronal activity in people with PD has already been examined in case studies and clinical trials. However, a systematic review is necessary to assess the efficacy and safety of rTMS for PD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for panic disorder (PD) in adults aged 18 to 65 years, either as a monotherapy or as an augmentation strategy.

SEARCH METHODS

An electronic search of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR) was conducted to 19 February 2014. The CCDANCTR includes reports of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date), PsycINFO (1967 to date) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (all years). Additional searches were conducted in Psyndex and the main Chinese medical databases.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs or quasi-randomised trials evaluating rTMS for PD in people aged between 18 and 65 years, either as a monotherapy or as an augmentation strategy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data and verified the data by cross-checking. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. For binary data, we calculated fixed-effect model risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated fixed-effect model standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs (n = 40) were included in this review. The included trials compared rTMS with sham rTMS; no trials comparing rTMS with active treatments (electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy) met our inclusion criteria. Both included studies used 1 Hz rTMS over the right dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) for two or four weeks as an augmentation treatment for PD. However, in both studies the data for the primary outcome, panic symptoms as measured by the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS), were skewed and could not be pooled for a quantitative analysis. For this primary outcome one trial with 25 participants reported a superior effect of rTMS in reducing panic symptoms compared with sham rTMS (t = 3.04, df = 16.57, P = 0.007), but this trial had a 16% dropout rate and so was deemed as having a high risk of attrition bias. The other trial found that all 15 participants exhibited a reduction in panic symptoms but there was no significant difference between rTMS and sham rTMS (Mann Whitney U test, P > 0.05). Regarding the acceptability of rTMS, no significant difference was found between rTMS and sham rTMS in dropout rates or in reports of side effects. The quality of evidence contributing to this review was assessed as very low. Assessments of the risk of bias for the two studies were hampered by the lack of information provided in the reports, especially on methods of sequence generation and whether allocation concealment had been applied. Of the remaining sources of bias, we considered one of the studies to have been at risk of attrition bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only two RCTs of rTMS were available and their sample sizes were small. The available data were insufficient for us to draw any conclusions about the efficacy of rTMS for PD. Further trials with large sample sizes and adequate methodology are needed to confirm the effectiveness of rTMS for PD.

In-situation safety behaviors among patients with panic disorder: descriptive and correlational study

AIM

In-situation safety behaviors play an important role in the maintenance of anxiety because they prevent patients from experiencing unambiguous disconfirmation of their unrealistic beliefs about feared catastrophes. Strategies for identifying particular safety behaviors, however, have not been sufficiently investigated. The aims of the present study were to (i) develop a comprehensive list of safety behaviors seen in panic disorder and to examine their frequency; and (ii) correlate the safety behaviors with panic attack symptoms, agoraphobic situations and treatment response.

METHODS

The subjects consisted of 46 consecutive patients who participated in group cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for panic disorder. All the patients completed a Safety Behavior List that was developed based on experiences with panic disorder patients.

RESULTS

Carrying medications, distracting attention, carrying a plastic bottle, and drinking water were reported by more than half of the patients. The strongest correlations between panic symptoms and safety behaviors were found between symptoms of derealization and listening to music with headphones, paresthesia and pushing a cart while shopping, and nausea and squatting down. The strongest association between agoraphobic situations and safety behaviors was found between the fear of taking a bus or a train alone and moving around. Staying still predicted response to the CBT program, while concentrating on something predicted lack of response.

CONCLUSION

An approximate guideline has been developed for identifying safety behaviors among patients with panic disorder and should help clinicians use CBT more effectively for these patients.

Usual and unusual care: existing practice control groups in randomized controlled trials of behavioral interventions

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the use of existing practice control groups in randomized controlled trials of behavioral interventions and the role of extrinsic health care services in the design and conduct of behavioral trials.

METHOD

Selective qualitative review.

RESULTS

Extrinsic health care services, also known as nonstudy care, have important but under-recognized effects on the design and conduct of behavioral trials. Usual care, treatment-as-usual, standard of care, and other existing practice control groups pose a variety of methodological and ethical challenges, but they play a vital role in behavioral intervention research.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the need for a scientific consensus statement on control groups in behavioral trials.

Combined Pharmacotherapy and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Anxiety Disorders: Medication Effects, Glucocorticoids, and Attenuated Treatment Outcomes

Despite the success of both pharmacologic and cognitive-behavioral interventions for the treatment of anxiety disorders, the combination of these modalities in adults has not resulted in substantial improvements in outcome relative to either strategy alone, raising questions about whether there are interfering effects that attenuate the magnitude of combination treatment benefits. In this article, we introduce an accounting of potential interference effects that expands upon arguments asserting the necessity of arousal for successful fear exposure. Specifically, recent advances in the study of the effects of cortisol on memory--suggesting that glucocorticoids are crucial to the learning of emotional material--have led us to posit that the attenuation of glucocorticoid activity by anxiolytic medications may interfere with extinction learning in exposure-based therapies. Implications for the efficacy of combination treatments for the anxiety disorders are discussed.

[Tree decision analysis of the therapeutic alternatives for Panic Disorders in Primary Care]

AIMS

To analyse the different therapeutic alternatives for Panic Disorders to make it easier to make collaborative treatment decisions between patients and doctors in a Primary Care setting.

DESIGN

Quantitative analysis by a decision tree.

DATA SOURCES

Time period reviewed; 1990-2008 in Med-line, Embase, Cochrane-plus Library and Tripdatabase. Terms used "panic disorder", "psychotherapy" and "drug therapy".

METHODS

I) A decision tree was prepared with only one therapeutic option in each arm; II) The same procedure with two sequential therapeutic options; III) Sensitivity analysis to test the robustness of the model.

STUDY SELECTION

Evidence summary, systematic reviews, meta-analysis and clinical guidelines.

RESULTS

Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) obtains the highest usefulness (UME=0.58), followed by the Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) (UME=0.53) and by the tricyclic antidepressants (UME=0.44). CBT followed by SSRI is the therapeutic sequence with the highest usefulness (0.62). The sensitivity analysis suggests the model is not robust enough.

CONCLUSIONS

The CBT in monotherapy or followed by SSRI in a sequential strategy would be the options with the highest usefulness. The results are not robust enough because they can clearly vary with changes in the most important variables in a reasonable range.