Subjective response to antipsychotics in bipolar disorders: A review of a neglected area

Are all antidepressants the same? The consumer has a point

BACKGROUND

Although a large variety of antidepressants agents (AD) with different mechanisms of action are available, no significant differences in efficacy and safety have been shown. However, there have been few attempts to incorporate data on subjective experiences under different AD.

METHOD

We conducted a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the posts from the website www.askapatient.com from different AD. We reviewed a random sample of 1000 posts.

RESULT

After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included a final sample of 450 posts, 50 on each of the most used AD: sertraline, citalopram, paroxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, venlafaxine, duloxetine, mirtazapine, and bupropion. Bupropion, citalopram, and venlafaxine had the higher overall satisfaction ratings. Sertraline, paroxetine, and fluoxetine had high reports of emotional blunting, while bupropion very few. Overall satisfaction with AD treatment was inversely associated with the presence of the following side-effects: suicidality, irritability, emotional blunting, cognitive disturbances, and withdrawal symptoms. After adjusting for confounders, only emotional blunting was shown to be more frequently reported by users of serotonergic agents, as compared to non-serotoninergic agents.

CONCLUSION

This research points out that the subjective experience of patients under treatment should be taken into consideration when selecting an AD as differences between agents were evident. In contrast to the more frequent treatment decisions, users might prefer receiving a non-serotoninergic agent over a serotonergic one due to their lower propensity to produce emotional blunting.

Contrasting Typical and Atypical Antipsychotic Drugs

The beliefs that antipsychotic drugs (APDs) are 1) effective only to treat delusions and hallucinations (positive symptoms), 2) that typical and atypical APDs differ only in ability to cause extrapyramidal side effects, and 3) that their efficacy as antipsychotics is due solely to their dopamine D₂ receptor blockade are outmoded concepts that prevent clinicians from achieving optimal clinical results when prescribing an APD. Atypical APDs are often more effective than typical APDs in treating negative symptoms, cognitive impairment, and mood symptoms as well as reducing the risk for suicide and decreasing aggression. This applies not only to those diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder but also to bipolar disorder, major depression, and other psychiatric diagnoses. The greater advantage of an atypical APD is not evident in all patients for every atypical APD due, in part, to individual differences in genetic and epigenetic endowment and differences in the pharmacology of the atypical APDs, their mode of action being far more complex than that of the typical APDs. A common misconception is that among the atypical APDs, only clozapine is effective for reducing psychosis in treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Aripiprazole, lurasidone, olanzapine, and risperidone also can be more effective than typical APDs for treatment-resistant schizophrenia; clozapine is uniquely indicated for reducing the risk for suicide. The ability of the atypical APDs to improve cognition and negative symptoms in some patients together with lower propensity to cause tardive dyskinesia (an underappreciated advantage) leads to better overall outcomes. These advantages of the atypical APDs in efficacy and safety are due, in part, to initiation of synaptic plasticity via direct and indirect effects of the atypical APDs on a variety of proteins, especially G proteins, and release of neurotrophins (e.g., brain-derived neurotrophic factor). The typical APDs beneficial effects on psychosis are mainly the result of D₂ receptor blockade, which can be associated with serious side effects and lack of tolerability.

Adjunct high-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation over the lateral prefrontal cortex improves negative symptoms of schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled pilot study

High-frequency transcranial random noise stimulation (hf-tRNS) is a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique capable of increasing human cortex excitability. There were only published case reports on the use of hf-tRNS targeting the lateral prefrontal cortex in treating negative symptoms of schizophrenia, thus necessitating systematic investigation. We designed a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in a cohort of stabilized schizophrenia patients to examine the efficacy of add-on hf-tRNS (100-640 Hz; 2 mA; 20 min) using a high definition 4 × 1 electrode montage (anode AF3, cathodes AF4, F2, F6, and FC4) in treating negative symptoms (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04038788). Participants received either active hf-tRNS or sham twice daily for 5 consecutive weekdays. Primary outcome measure was the change over time in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Factor Score for Negative Symptoms (PANSS-FSNS), which was measured at baseline, after 10-session stimulation, and at one-week and one-month follow-ups. Among 36 randomized patients, 35 (97.2%) completed the trial. Intention-to-treat analysis showed a significantly greater decrease in PANSS-FSNS score after active (-17.11%) than after sham stimulation (-1.68%), with a large effect size (Cohen's d = 2.16, p < 0.001). The beneficial effect lasted for up to one month. In secondary-outcome analyses, the authors observed improvements with hf-tRNS of disorganization symptoms, unawareness of negative symptoms, subjective response to taking antipsychotics, and antipsychotic-induced extrapyramidal symptoms. No effects were observed on the neurocognitive performance and other outcome measures. Overall, hf-tRNS was safe and efficacious in improving negative symptoms. Our promising findings should be confirmed in a larger sample of patients with predominant negative symptoms.

Association between Adherence with an Atypical Antipsychotic and with Other Psychiatric Drugs in Patients with Bipolar Disorder

BACKGROUND

Using U.S. pharmacy and medical claims, medication adherence patterns of patients with serious mental illness suggest that adherence to atypical antipsychotics may be related to adherence to other prescription drugs. This study investigated whether adherence to an atypical antipsychotic was related to adherence to other prescribed psychiatric drugs using self-reported data from patients with bipolar disorder.

METHODS

Daily self-reported medication data were available from 123 patients with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder receiving treatment as usual who took at least 1 atypical antipsychotic over a 12-week period. Patients took a mean of 4.0±1.7 psychiatric drugs including the antipsychotic. The adherence rate for the atypical antipsychotic was compared to that for other psychiatric drugs to determine if the adherence rate for the atypical antipsychotic differed from that of the other psychiatric drug by at least ±10%.

RESULTS

Of the 123 patients, 58 (47.2%) had an adherence rate for the atypical antipsychotic that differed from the adherence rate for at least 1 other psychiatric drug by at least±10%, and 65 (52.8%) patients had no difference in adherence rates. The patients with a difference took a larger total number of psychiatric drugs (p<0.001), had a larger daily pill burden (p=0.020) and a lower adherence rate with the atypical antipsychotic (p=0.007), and were more likely to take an antianxiety drug (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adherence with an atypical antipsychotic was not useful for estimating adherence to other psychiatric drugs in about half of the patients with bipolar disorder.