Potential diagnostic markers of olanzapine efficiency for acute psychosis: a focus on peripheral biogenic amines

Haloperidol (oral) versus olanzapine (oral) for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited resource and humanitarian contexts, it is key to have several options for beneficial, low-cost antipsychotics, which require minimal monitoring. We wanted to compare oral haloperidol, as one of the most available antipsychotics in these settings, with a second-generation antipsychotic, olanzapine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of haloperidol compared to olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia study-based register of trials, which is based on monthly searches of CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP. We screened the references of all included studies. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information where clarification was required or where data were incomplete. The register was last searched on 14 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing haloperidol with olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global state, relapse, clinically important change in mental state, extrapyramidal side effects, weight increase, clinically important change in quality of life and leaving the study early due to adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently evaluated and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial or harmful outcome (NNTB or NNTH) with 95% CI. For continuous data, we estimated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. For all included studies, we assessed risk of bias (RoB 1) and we used the GRADE approach to create a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 studies randomising 9132 participants. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in clinically important change in global state (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 6 studies, 3078 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in relapse (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.02; 7 studies, 1499 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in overall mental state compared to olanzapine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81; 13 studies, 1210 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every eight people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this improvement. The evidence suggests that haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects compared to olanzapine (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.28 to 5.02; 14 studies, 3290 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every three people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one additional person would experience extrapyramidal side effects. For weight gain, the evidence suggests that there may be a large reduction in the risk with haloperidol compared to olanzapine (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; 18 studies, 4302 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 10 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience weight increase. A single study suggests that haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in quality of life compared to olanzapine (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 828 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every nine people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience clinically important improvement in quality of life. Haloperidol may result in an increase in the incidence of leaving the study early due to adverse effects compared to olanzapine (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.47; 21 studies, 5047 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 22 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this outcome. Thirty otherwise relevant studies and several endpoints from 14 included studies could not be evaluated due to inconsistencies and poor transparency of several parameters. Furthermore, even within studies that were included, it was often not possible to use data for the same reasons. Risk of bias differed substantially for different outcomes and the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low. The most common risks of bias leading to downgrading of the evidence were blinding (performance bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low for the main outcomes in this review, making it difficult to draw reliable conclusions. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in terms of clinically important global state and relapse. Olanzapine may result in a slightly greater overall clinically important change in mental state and in a clinically important change in quality of life. Different side effect profiles were noted: haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects and olanzapine in a large increase in weight gain. The drug of choice needs to take into account side effect profiles and the preferences of the individual. These findings and the recent inclusion of olanzapine alongside haloperidol in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines should increase the likelihood of it becoming more easily available in low- and middle- income countries, thereby improving choice and providing a greater ability to respond to side effects for people with lived experience of schizophrenia. There is a need for additional research using appropriate and equivalent dosages of these drugs. Some of this research needs to be done in low- and middle-income settings and should actively seek to account for factors relevant to these. Research on antipsychotics needs to be person-centred and prioritise factors that are of interest to people with lived experience of schizophrenia.

Diagnostic value and role of serum miR-15a-5p in patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

More and more studies have confirmed that the heredity plays an important role in mental disorders, especially microRNA. The objective of this research was to explore the level of miR-15a-5p in patients with schizophrenia (SZ), and to evaluate the feasibility of this miRNA as a diagnostic marker of SZ.

METHODS

The serum level of miR-15a-5p in patients with SZ and healthy people was detected by RT-qPCR. ROC curve was established to evaluate the clinical diagnostic significance of miR-15a-5p in SZ. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between miR-15a-5p level and PANSS score. Logistic regression was used to assess the risk factors of SZ. A rat model of SZ was established, and the effects of miR-15a-5p on the behavior of SZ rats were observed through water maze test and open field test.

RESULTS

The serum level of miR-15a-5p in patients with SZ was significantly increased, and ROC analysis revealed that miR-15a-5p had clinical diagnostic value in SZ. High level of miR-15a-5p was positively correlated with the positive symptom, negative symptom and general psychopathology subscore of patients. Logistic regression results showed that miR-15a-5p was a risk factor affecting the occurrence of SZ. Animal studies showed that the serum level of miR-15a-5p was elevated in the SZ rats, and inhibiting the expression of miR-15a-5p has a positive effect on improving the cognitive function and anxiety behavior of SZ rats.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum miR-15a-5p is a risk factor for SZ, which is of great significance for the diagnosis of SZ.

Association of DRD2, DRD4 and COMT genes variants and their gene-gene interactions with antipsychotic treatment response in patients with schizophrenia

Antipsychotic drugs are the first line of treatment in schizophrenia; although antipsychotic responses indicate a wide interindividual variety in patients with schizophrenia. This study aimed to investigate the association between four polymorphisms in DRD2, DRD4 and COMT genes and their gene-gene interactions with antipsychotic treatment response in patients with schizophrenia. A total of 101 patients with schizophrenia were recruited and stratified in treatment responder and treatment resistant groups based on the published criteria of resistant to treatment using PANSS. Clinical and demographic factors were analyzed. Genomic DNA was extracted from whole blood and genotyping for the four polymorphisms were done by ARMS-PCR, PCR-RFLP and gap-PCR. Gene-gene interactions were analyzed by logistic regression. In case of DRD2 A-241G, G allele was significantly associated with resistant to treatment. Regarding DRD4 120-bp duplication, 240/240 genotype was significantly associated with resistant to treatment comparing to other genotypes in a dominant model. The genotype combination of DRD4 240/240 and COMT Val/Val was significantly associated with treatment resistant. Among DRD2 AA genotype, COMT met allele carriers which also had a 120 bp allele of DRD4 had a significantly better response to antipsychotics. Moreover, analysis of clinical and demographic factors demonstrated a significantly longer duration of hospitalization and higher chlorpromazine-equivalent daily dose in resistant to treatment patients. Discovering the polymorphisms which effect treatment response to antipsychotics will provide the possibility of genetic screening before starting an antipsychotic treatment which enhances the chance of responding to antipsychotics and decreases drugs side effects and costs.

Expression of Dopamine D1-4 and Serotonin 5-HT1A-3A Receptors in Blood Mononuclear Cells in Schizophrenia

Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine the mRNA expression profile of dopamine D₁, D₂, D₃, D₄ and serotonin 5-HT_1A, 5-HT_2A, and 5-HT_3A receptors in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) in schizophrenia and the in vitro effect of antipsychotics on the expression of these receptors in PBMCs of healthy subjects. Materials and Methods: Twenty-seven patients with schizophrenia and 29 healthy controls were recruited for the study. All study subjects underwent thorough clinical assessment, including anthropometric and body composition measurements. The expression of mRNA for dopamine D_1-4 and serotonin 5-HT_1A-3A receptors was measured using quantitative RT-PCR in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. In vitro mRNA and protein expression of these receptors was measured using quantitative RT-PCR and Western Blotting in PBMCs cultured with quetiapine, haloperidol, aripiprazole, risperidone, olanzapine or clozapine at IC₅₀, half of IC₅₀, and one-quarter of IC₅₀ concentrations. Results: The key finding was that the schizophrenia group demonstrated significantly higher mRNA expression of D₁, D₂ and D₄ receptors (p < 0.001), and significantly lower mRNA expression of 5-HT_3A receptors (p < 0.01). After adjusting for smoking, the mRNA expression of D₁ lost its significance, while that of D₃, 5-HT_1A, 5-HT_2A became significant (all three were lower in the schizophrenia group). These receptors also demonstrated different ratios of mRNA expression in the schizophrenia group. The in vitro experiments showed that high concentrations of antipsychotics influenced the mRNA and protein expression of all studied receptors. Conclusion: Schizophrenia patients display a distinctive pattern of dopamine and serotonin receptor mRNA expression in blood mononuclear cells. This expression is little affected by antipsychotic treatment and it may therefore serve as a useful diagnostic biomarker for schizophrenia.

Association of the genetic polymorphisms of metabolizing enzymes, transporters, target receptors and their interactions with treatment response to olanzapine in chinese han schizophrenia patients

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug that has been increasingly used for treatment in schizophrenia. It has been observed that olanzapine responses in schizophrenia patients vary individually, but the reason has not been elucidated. In the study, we aimed to comprehensively explore the relationships between olanzapine responses and genetic polymorphisms of drug metabolizing enzymes, transporters and target receptors, and so as to interpret the reason of good and poor responses of olanzapine. A total of 241 Chinese Han paranoid schizophrenia who treated with olanzapine alone for 4 weeks were recruited. The positive and negative symptom scale (PANSS) was used to evaluate the efficacy of olanzapine. The genetic polymorphisms were detected by improved multiple ligase detection reaction (iMLDR). Multivariate logistic regression analysis suggested that the genetic polymorphisms of CYP1A2 rs762551, UGT1A4 rs2011425, ABCB1 rs1045642, DRD2 rs1799732 and rs1799978, 5-HTR2A rs6311 were significantly associated with olanzapine response. Multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) analysis showed that there was a negative interaction between CYP1A2 rs762551, ABCB1 rs1045642, DRD2 rs1799978, 5-HTR2A rs6311 and the interaction model was the optimal model. Our findings could partially explain the different olanzapine outcome and provided evidence for clarifying the predictive indicators of olanzapine response in further.

Opening up new horizons for psychiatric genetics in the Russian Federation: moving toward a national consortium

We provide an overview of the recent achievements in psychiatric genetics research in the Russian Federation and present genotype-phenotype, population, epigenetic, cytogenetic, functional, ENIGMA, and pharmacogenetic studies, with an emphasis on genome-wide association studies. The genetic backgrounds of mental illnesses in the polyethnic and multicultural population of the Russian Federation are still understudied. Furthermore, genetic, genomic, and pharmacogenetic data from the Russian Federation are not adequately represented in the international scientific literature, are currently not available for meta-analyses and have never been compared with data from other populations. Most of these problems cannot be solved by individual centers working in isolation but warrant a truly collaborative effort that brings together all the major psychiatric genetic research centers in the Russian Federation in a national consortium. For this reason, we have established the Russian National Consortium for Psychiatric Genetics (RNCPG) with the aim to strengthen the power and rigor of psychiatric genetics research in the Russian Federation and enhance the international compatibility of this research.The consortium is set up as an open organization that will facilitate collaborations on complex biomedical research projects in human mental health in the Russian Federation and abroad. These projects will include genotyping, sequencing, transcriptome and epigenome analysis, metabolomics, and a wide array of other state-of-the-art analyses. Here, we discuss the challenges we face and the approaches we will take to unlock the huge potential that the Russian Federation holds for the worldwide psychiatric genetics community.

COMT, 5-HTR2A, and SLC6A4 mRNA Expressions in First-Episode Antipsychotic-Naïve Schizophrenia and Association With Treatment Outcomes

Background: Dopaminergic and serotonergic systems play crucial roles in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia and modulate response to antipsychotic treatment. However, previous studies of dopaminergic and serotonergic genes expression are sparse, and their results have been inconsistent. In this longitudinal study, we aim to investigate the expressions of Catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), serotonin 2A receptor (5-HTR2A), and serotonin transporter gene (SLC6A4) mRNA in first-episode antipsychotic-naïve schizophrenia and to test if these mRNA expressions are associated with cognitive deficits and treatment outcomes or not. Method: We measured COMT, 5-HTR2A, and SLC6A4 mRNA expressions in 45 drug-naive first-episode schizophrenia patients and 38 health controls at baseline, and repeated mRNA measurements in all patients at the 8-week follow up. Furthermore, we also assessed antipsychotic response and cognitive improvement after 8 weeks of risperidone monotherapy. Results: Patients were divided into responders (N = 20) and non-responders groups (N = 25) according to the Remission criteria of the Schizophrenia Working Group. Both patient groups have significantly higher COMT mRNA expression and lower SLC6A4 mRNA expression when compared with healthy controls. Interestingly, responder patients have significantly higher levels of COMT and 5-HTR2A mRNA expressions than non-responder patients at baseline. However, antipsychotic treatment has no significant effect on the expressions of COMT, 5-HTR2A, and SLC6A4 mRNA over 8-week follow up. Conclusion: Our findings suggest that dysregulated COMT and SLC6A4 mRNA expressions may implicate in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia, and that COMT and 5-HTR2A mRNA may be potential biomarkers to predict antipsychotic response.