A Novel Distal 22Q11.21 Microduplication in a 43-Year-Old Male Patient with Mild Intellectual Disability, Social Cognitive Dysfunctions, and Anxiety.

Objective: The chromosome region 22q11.2 is highly susceptible to genomic rearrangements. It has become clear that genomic instability extends distally to the commonly deleted/duplicated region (Low Copy Repeats [LCR] A-D) and that a clear difference exists between the phenotypic presentation of patients with rearrangements in the common region versus that in the distal region (LCR D-H), particularly with respect to developmental and somatic issues. Microdeletions in the 22q11.2 distal region are typically associated with congenital heart defects whereas distal 22q11.2 microduplications are infrequently described and present with a smaller duplicated region and a rather unspecified phenotype. Method: The present paper provides detailed assessments of a middle-aged male with mild intellectual disability, elsewhere diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Because of persisting functional complaints, he was referred for second opinion to a specialized outpatient department. Results: High resolution SNP-based array analysis demonstrated a ~1.5 Mb distal microduplication in chromosome 22 flanked by LCR region 22C and LCR22E encompassing among others the disease gene MAPK1. No remarkable facial dysmorphisms were noticed. Autism spectrum disorder was ruled out and it was concluded that the patient was primarily suffering from mild intellectual disability and social cognitive dysfunctions with anxieties and suspicious social interactions, to be understood as a disorder within the anxiety spectrum. Conclusions: The pattern of psychological and psychiatric phenomena was discussed against the background of findings on psychopathology in the chromosome 22 region demarcated by LCR breakpoints C and E. It was suggested that alterations in the MAPK1 gene due to either a deletion or a duplication enhance the vulnerability to develop a psychiatric disorder within the anxiety spectrum.

Limited Evidence for Risk Factors for Proarrhythmia and Sudden Cardiac Death in Patients Using Antidepressants: Dutch Consensus on ECG Monitoring.

Currently, there is a lack of international and national guidelines or consensus documents with specific recommendations for electrocardiogram (ECG) screening and monitoring during antidepressant treatment. To make a proper estimation of the risk of cardiac arrhythmias and sudden (cardiac) death during antidepressant use, both the drug and patient-specific factors should be taken into account; however, solid evidence on how this should be done in clinical practice is lacking. Available recommendations on the management of QT(c) prolongation (with antidepressant treatment) emphasize that special attention should be given to high-risk patients; however, clinicians are in need of more concrete suggestions about how to select patients for ECG screening and monitoring. Based on a review of the literature, a Dutch multidisciplinary expert panel aimed to formulate specific guidelines to identify patients at risk for cardiac arrhythmias and sudden death by developing a consensus statement regarding ECG screening before, and monitoring during, antidepressant use. We first reviewed the literature to identify the relative risks of various risk factors on cardiac arrhythmia and sudden (cardiac) death during antidepressant use. These relative contributions of risk factors could not be determined since no systematic reviews or meta-analyses quantitatively addressed this topic. Because evidence was insufficient, additional expert opinion was used to formulate recommendations. This resulted in readily applicable recommendations for clinical practice for selection of high-risk patients for ECG screening and monitoring. ECG screening and monitoring is recommended before and following the start of QTc-prolonging antidepressants in the presence of vulnerability to QTc prolongation or two or more risk factors (age > 65 years, female sex, concomitant use of a QTc-prolonging drug or concomitant use of a drug that influences the metabolism of a QTc-prolonging drug, cardiac disease, excessive dosing and specific electrolyte disturbances).

Bupropion for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adults.

BACKGROUND: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent neurobiological condition, characterised by behavioral and cognitive symptoms such as inattention, impulsivity and/or excessive activity. The syndrome is commonly accompanied by psychiatric comorbidities and is associated with educational and occupational underachievement.Although psychostimulant medications are the mainstay of treatment for ADHD, not all adults respond optimally to, or can tolerate, these medicines. Thus, alternative non-stimulant treatment approaches for ADHD have been explored. One of these alternatives is bupropion, an aminoketone antidepressant and non-competitive antagonism of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Bupropion is registered for the treatment of depression and smoking cessation, but is also used off-label to treat ADHD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects and safety of bupropion for the treatment of adults with ADHD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and seven other databases in February 2017. We also searched three trials registers and three online theses portals. In addition, we checked references of included studies and contacted study authors to identify potentially relevant studies that were missed by our search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects (including adverse effects) of bupropion compared to placebo in adults with ADHD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (WV, GB) independently screened records and extracted data using a data extraction sheet that we tested in a pilot study. We extracted all relevant data on study characteristics and results. We assessed risks of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and assessed the overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used a fixed-effect model to pool the results across studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included six studies with a total of 438 participants. Five studies were conducted in the USA, and one in Iran. All studies evaluated a long-acting version of bupropion, with the dosage ranging from 150 mg up to 450 mg daily. Study intervention length varied from six to 10 weeks. Four studies explicitly excluded participants with psychiatric comorbidity and one study included only participants with opioid dependency. Four studies were funded by industry, but the impact of this on study results is unknown. Two studies were publicly funded and in one of these studies, the lead author was a consultant for several pharmaceutical companies and also received investigator-driven funding from two companies, however none of these companies manufacture bupropion. We judged none of the studies to be free of bias because for most risk of bias domains the study reports failed to provide sufficient details. Using the GRADE approach, we rated the overall quality of evidence as low. We downgraded the quality of the evidence because of serious risk of bias and serious imprecision due to small sample sizes.We found low-quality evidence that bupropion decreased the severity of ADHD symptoms (standardised mean difference -0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.86 to -0.15, 3 studies, 129 participants), and increased the proportion of participants achieving clinical improvement (risk ratio (RR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.99, 4 studies, 315 participants), and reporting an improvement on the Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.50, 5 studies, 337 participants). There was low-quality evidence that the proportion of participants who withdrew due to any adverse effect was similar in the bupropion and placebo groups (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.10, 3 studies, 253 participants). The results were very similar when using a random-effects model and when we analysed only studies that excluded participants with a psychiatric comorbidity. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review, which compared bupropion to placebo for adult ADHD, indicate a possible benefit of bupropion. We found low-quality evidence that bupropion decreased the severity of ADHD symptoms and moderately increased the proportion of participants achieving a significant clinical improvement in ADHD symptoms. Furthermore, we found low-quality evidence that the tolerability of bupropion is similar to that of placebo. In the pharmacological treatment of adults with ADHD, extended- or sustained-release bupropion may be an alternative to stimulants. The low-quality evidence indicates uncertainty with respect to the pooled effect estimates. Further research is very likely to change these estimates. More research is needed to reach more definite conclusions as well as clarifying the optimal target population for this medicine. Treatment response remains to be reported in a DSM5-diagnosed population. There is also a lack of knowledge on long-term outcomes.

Neuropsychological phenotype of a patient with a de novo 970 kb interstitial deletion in the distal 16p11.2 region.

The 16p11.2 microdeletion syndrome is characterized by a wide range of phenotypic expressions and is frequently associated with developmental delay, symptoms from the autism spectrum, epilepsy, congenital anomalies, and obesity. These phenotypes are often related to a proximal 16p11.2 deletion of approximately 600 kb (BP4-BP5) that includes the SH2B1 gene that is reported to be causative for morbid obesity. This more centromeric deletion is most strongly related to autism spectrum susceptibility and is functionally different from the more distal 16p12.2p11.2 region, which includes the so-called atypical 16p11.2 BP2-BP3 deletion (approximately 220 kb) presenting with developmental delay, behavioral problems and mild facial dysmorphisms. Here, an adult male with a long history of maladaptive behaviors is described who was referred for diagnostic assessment of his amotivational features. Extensive neuropsychological examination demonstrated rigid thinking, anxious beliefs, and ideas of reference in the presence of normal intelligence. Microarray analysis demonstrated a de novo 970 kb 16p11.2 BP1-BP4 microdeletion that can be regarded as explanatory for his behavioral profile. It is concluded that microdeletion syndromes are not exclusively related to intellectual disabilities and genetic testing is of putative relevance for the understanding of neuropsychiatric and neuropsychological phenomena.

Antidepressants in the treatment of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Stimulant medications are the most effective drugs in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and in adults. However, some patients do not respond to this treatment and other patients suffer from adverse effects. Very often there are also comorbid disorders that warrant treatment or there is somatic comorbidity that precludes the prescription of stimulants. As a result, alternative treatments for the treatment of ADHD have been explored, such as antidepressant agents. In this systematic review the evidence base for the effect of antidepressants for ADHD in adult patients is determined. METHODS: Electronic and hand searches were conducted in order to identify clinical trials studying antidepressants for the treatment of ADHD in adult patients. The trials were screened for methodological characteristics and treatment-effect sizes. The odds ratio was calculated for randomized controlled trials with bupropion. A descriptive review of all the randomized controlled studies and an overview of the nonrandomized studies was developed. RESULTS: Only eight randomized controlled trials were retrieved with four different compounds. Five studies concerned bupropion and the meta-analysis indicates a beneficial effect for bupropion compared with placebo as measured with the Clinical Global Improvement Scale (odds ratio 2.42 [95% CI 1.09 to 5.36]). Several studies suffer from clinical and methodological shortcomings, such as exclusion of patients with comorbid disorders, short treatment duration, or a lack of information with respect to the randomization procedure. CONCLUSION: Although there is a need for alternative interventions for the treatment of ADHD, such as with antidepressant agents, the evidence base is not large. Only treatment with bupropion seems to have a medium-range effect size, but this is less than that of stimulant medications.