Early pharmacological interventions for prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in individuals experiencing acute traumatic stress symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Acute traumatic stress symptoms may develop in people who have been exposed to a traumatic event. Although they are usually self-limiting in time, some people develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a severe and debilitating condition. Pharmacological interventions have been proposed for acute symptoms to act as an indicated prevention measure for PTSD development. As many individuals will spontaneously remit, these interventions should balance efficacy and tolerability. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and acceptability of early pharmacological interventions for prevention of PTSD in adults experiencing acute traumatic stress symptoms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and two other databases. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews. The search was last updated on 23 January 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials on adults exposed to any kind of traumatic event and presenting acute traumatic stress symptoms, without restriction on their severity. We considered comparisons of any medication with placebo, or with another medication. We excluded trials that investigated medications as an augmentation to psychotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. Using a random-effects model, we analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RR) and calculated the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial/harmful outcome (NNTB/NNTH). We analysed continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). Our primary outcomes were PTSD severity and dropouts due to adverse events. Secondary outcomes included PTSD rate, functional disability and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included eight studies that considered four interventions (escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin, temazepam) and involved a total of 779 participants. The largest trial contributed 353 participants and the next largest, 120 and 118 participants respectively. The trials enrolled participants admitted to trauma centres or emergency departments. The risk of bias in the included studies was generally low except for attrition rate, which we rated as high-risk. We could meta-analyse data for two comparisons: escitalopram versus placebo (but limited to secondary outcomes) and hydrocortisone versus placebo. One study compared escitalopram to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. There was inconclusive evidence of any difference in terms of PTSD severity (mean difference (MD) on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS, score range 0 to 136) -11.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) -24.56 to 1.86; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence), dropouts due to adverse events (no participant left the study early due to adverse events; 1 study, 31 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and PTSD rates (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.03 to 13.08; NNTB 37, 95% CI NNTB 15 to NNTH 1; 1 study, 23 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess functional disability or quality of life. Three studies compared hydrocortisone to placebo at our primary time point of three months after the traumatic event. We found inconclusive evidence on whether hydrocortisone was more effective in reducing the severity of PTSD symptoms compared to placebo (MD on CAPS -7.53, 95% CI -25.20 to 10.13; I2 = 85%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and whether it reduced the risk of developing PTSD (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.38; NNTB 14, 95% CI NNTB 8 to NNTH 5; I2 = 36%; 3 studies, 136 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Evidence on the risk of dropping out due to adverse events is inconclusive (RR 3.19, 95% CI 0.13 to 75.43; 2 studies, 182 participants; low-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether hydrocortisone might improve quality of life (MD on the SF-36 (score range 0 to 136, higher is better) 19.70, 95% CI -1.10 to 40.50; 1 study, 43 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study assessed functional disability. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides uncertain evidence regarding the use of escitalopram, hydrocortisone, intranasal oxytocin and temazepam for people with acute stress symptoms. It is therefore unclear whether these pharmacological interventions exert a positive or negative effect in this population. It is important to note that acute traumatic stress symptoms are often limited in time, and that the lack of data prevents the careful assessment of expected benefits against side effects that is therefore required. To yield stronger conclusions regarding both positive and negative outcomes, larger sample sizes are required. A common operational framework of criteria for inclusion and baseline assessment might help in better understanding who, if anyone, benefits from an intervention. As symptom severity alone does not provide the full picture of the impact of exposure to trauma, assessment of quality of life and functional impairment would provide a more comprehensive picture of the effects of the interventions. The assessment and reporting of side effects may facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of tolerability.

Clinical trajectories of individuals with severe mental illness continuing and discontinuing long-acting antipsychotics: a one-year mirror-image analysis from the STAR Network Depot study.

Evidence on long-acting antipsychotics (LAIs) in unselected populations with severe mental illness is scant. In this mirror-image study, we compared multiple clinical outcomes 1 year before and after a first LAI prescription in adults with severe mental illness, describing clinical trajectories of LAI continuers and discontinuers. We compared LAI continuers and discontinuers through Mann-Whitney U test, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, regression for interval-censored data, and a maximum-likelihood mixed-model with individual random-effect and time as predictor. Of the 261 participants analyzed, 71.3% had schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, and 29.5% discontinued the LAI before 1 year. At baseline, LAI discontinuers had a shorter illness duration, lower attitude and adherence scores. The mirror-image analysis showed reduced hospital admissions only for LAI continuers. Over time, continuers spent less days hospitalized, but had more adverse events and more antipsychotics prescribed, with higher overall doses. In conclusion, this study shows that LAIs might be beneficial in unselected patient populations, provided that adherence is maintained. LAI continuers spent less time hospitalized, but received more antipsychotics and suffered from more cumulative adverse events over time. Therefore, the choice of initiating and maintaining a LAI should be carefully weighed on a case-by-case basis.

COVID-19 and common mental health symptoms in the early phase of the pandemic: An umbrella review of the evidence.

BACKGROUND: There remains uncertainty about the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental health. This umbrella review provides a comprehensive overview of the association between the pandemic and common mental disorders. We qualitatively summarized evidence from reviews with meta-analyses of individual study-data in the general population, healthcare workers, and specific at-risk populations. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A systematic search was carried out in 5 databases for peer-reviewed systematic reviews with meta-analyses of prevalence of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms during the pandemic published between December 31, 2019 until August 12, 2022. We identified 123 reviews of which 7 provided standardized mean differences (SMDs) either from longitudinal pre- to during pandemic study-data or from cross-sectional study-data compared to matched pre-pandemic data. Methodological quality rated with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist scores (AMSTAR 2) instrument was generally low to moderate. Small but significant increases of depression, anxiety, and/or general mental health symptoms were reported in the general population, in people with preexisting physical health conditions, and in children (3 reviews; SMDs ranged from 0.11 to 0.28). Mental health and depression symptoms significantly increased during periods of social restrictions (1 review; SMDs of 0.41 and 0.83, respectively) but anxiety symptoms did not (SMD: 0.26). Increases of depression symptoms were generally larger and longer-lasting during the pandemic (3 reviews; SMDs depression ranged from 0.16 to 0.23) than those of anxiety (2 reviews: SMDs 0.12 and 0.18). Females showed a significantly larger increase in anxiety symptoms than males (1 review: SMD 0.15). In healthcare workers, people with preexisting mental disorders, any patient group, children and adolescents, and in students, no significant differences from pre- to during pandemic were found (2 reviews; SMD's ranging from -0.16 to 0.48). In 116 reviews pooled cross-sectional prevalence rates of depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms ranged from 9% to 48% across populations. Although heterogeneity between studies was high and largely unexplained, assessment tools and cut-offs used, age, sex or gender, and COVID-19 exposure factors were found to be moderators in some reviews. The major limitations are the inability to quantify and explain the high heterogeneity across reviews included and the shortage of within-person data from multiple longitudinal studies. CONCLUSIONS: A small but consistent deterioration of mental health and particularly depression during early pandemic and during social restrictions has been found in the general population and in people with chronic somatic disorders. Also, associations between mental health and the pandemic were stronger in females and younger age groups than in others. Explanatory individual-level, COVID-19 exposure, and time-course factors were scarce and showed inconsistencies across reviews. For policy and research, repeated assessments of mental health in population panels including vulnerable individuals are recommended to respond to current and future health crises.

Risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection, severe COVID-19 illness and COVID-19 mortality in people with pre-existing mental disorders: an umbrella review.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has posed a serious health risk, especially in vulnerable populations. Even before the pandemic, people with mental disorders had worse physical health outcomes compared to the general population. This umbrella review investigated whether having a pre-pandemic mental disorder was associated with worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Following a pre-registered protocol available on the Open Science Framework platform, we searched Ovid MEDLINE All, Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL, and Web of Science up to the 6th of October 2021 for systematic reviews on the impact of COVID-19 on people with pre-existing mental disorders. The following outcomes were considered: risk of contracting the SARS-CoV-2 infection, risk of severe illness, COVID-19 related mortality risk, risk of long-term physical symptoms after COVID-19. For meta-analyses, we considered adjusted odds ratio (OR) as effect size measure. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment with the AMSTAR 2 tool have been done in parallel and duplicate. RESULTS: We included five meta-analyses and four narrative reviews. The meta-analyses reported that people with any mental disorder had an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR: 1.71, 95% CI 1.09-2.69), severe illness course (OR from 1.32 to 1.77, 95%CI between 1.19-1.46 and 1.29-2.42, respectively) and COVID-19 related mortality (OR from 1.38 to 1.52, 95%CI between 1.15-1.65 and 1.20-1.93, respectively) as compared to the general population. People with anxiety disorders had an increased risk of SAR-CoV-2 infection, but not increased mortality. People with mood and schizophrenia spectrum disorders had an increased COVID-19 related mortality but without evidence of increased risk of severe COVID-19 illness. Narrative reviews were consistent with findings from the meta-analyses. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: As compared to the general population, there is strong evidence showing that people with pre-existing mental disorders suffered from worse physical health outcomes due to the COVID-19 pandemic and may therefore be considered a risk group similar to people with underlying physical conditions. Factors likely involved include living accommodations with barriers to social distancing, cardiovascular comorbidities, psychotropic medications and difficulties in accessing high-intensity medical care.

Continuing, reducing, switching, or stopping antipsychotics in individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who are clinically stable: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Although antipsychotic maintenance treatment is widely recommended to prevent relapse in chronic psychoses, evidence-based guidelines do not provide clear indications on different maintenance treatment strategies, including continuing the antipsychotic at standard doses, reducing the dose, switching to another antipsychotic, or even stopping the antipsychotic. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of these maintenance treatment strategies, hypothesising the superiority of all strategies over stopping, and of continuing at standard doses over both switching and reducing the dose. METHODS: We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated antipsychotics for relapse prevention in adults with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who were clinically stable, and which compared four treatment strategies: continuing the current antipsychotic at standard doses recommended for acute treatment; reducing the current antipsychotic dose; switching to a different antipsychotic; and stopping the antipsychotic and replacing it with placebo. We excluded RCTs with fewer than 25 individuals, a prerandomisation washout period greater than 4 weeks, a follow-up shorter than 6 weeks, and those recruiting treatment-resistant individuals. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and online trial registers for published and unpublished RCTs from inception to Sept 1, 2021, combining terms describing all available antipsychotics, and terms describing continuation, maintenance, or long-term treatment for schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Relative risks (RRs) and standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses. We assessed risk of bias of each RCT with the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool, and confidence of pooled estimates with CINeMA. The primary outcome was relapse prevention. The study protocol was registered in advance in the Open Science Forum registry. FINDINGS: Of 3936 records identified, 119 records, reporting on 101 RCTs, were eligible, 98 of which (including 13 988 individuals) provided data that could be meta-analysed for at least one outcome. The mean proportion of female participants per study was 38% (range 0-100; median 39%, IQR 29-50), whereas for male participants it was 62% (range 0-100; median 61%, IQR 50-71), and the overall mean age was 38·8 years (range 23·2-63·9; median 39·3, IQR 35·0-43·9). Of the 98 RCTs meta-analysed, 89·8% were done in high-income and upper-middle-income countries. The ethnic group White or so-called Caucasian was the most represented (mean 56% participants per study), although this information was relatively scarce. All continuation strategies were significantly more effective in preventing relapse than stopping antipsychotic treatment, with a large risk reduction for continuing at standard doses (RR 0·37, 95% CI 0·32-0·43; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] 3·17, 95% CI 2·94-3·51) and antipsychotic switching (RR 0·44, 0·37-0·53; NNT 3·57, 3·17-4·25), and moderate risk reduction for dose reduction (RR 0·68, 0·51-0·90; NNT 6·25, 4·08-20·00). Continuing and switching antipsychotics did not differ significantly (RR 0·84, 0·69-1·02; with lower values favouring continuing), whereas reducing antipsychotic dose was outperformed by both continuing (RR 0·55, 0·42-0·71; NNT 4·44, 3·45-6·90) and switching (RR 0·65, 0·47-0·89; NNT 5·17, 3·77-18·18). Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses and by several sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including removing studies with abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation or fast tapering (≤4 weeks). No tolerability differences emerged between treatment strategies. According to the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool, version 2, 16·8% of included RCTs had an overall high risk of bias for the primary outcome. We found moderate heterogeneity (τ2=0·13; I2=61%) and no overall incoherence for the primary analysis. Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses. INTERPRETATION: Contrary to our original hypothesis, we found that continuing antipsychotic treatment at standard doses or switching to a different antipsychotic are similarly effective treatment strategies, whereas reducing antipsychotic doses below standard doses is associated with higher risk of relapse than the other two maintenance treatment strategies and should therefore be limited to selected cases. Despite limitations, including moderate heterogeneity and moderate certainty of evidence, these results are of pragmatic relevance for clinicians, and should support the update of evidence-based guidelines. FUNDING: None.

Oral and long-acting antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a network meta-analysis of 92 randomized trials including 22,645 participants.

According to current evidence and guidelines, continued antipsychotic treatment is key for preventing relapse in people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, but evidence-based recommendations for the choice of the individual antipsychotic for maintenance treatment are lacking. Although oral antipsychotics are often prescribed first line for practical reasons, long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are a valuable resource to tackle adherence issues since the earliest phase of disease. Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL and CINAHL databases and online registers were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing LAIs or oral antipsychotics head-to-head or against placebo, published until June 2021. Relative risks and standardized mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were relapse and dropout due to adverse events. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess study quality, and the CINeMA approach to assess the confidence of pooled estimates. Of 100 eligible trials, 92 (N=22,645) provided usable data for meta-analyses. Regarding relapse prevention, the vast majority of the 31 included treatments outperformed placebo. Compared to placebo, "high" confidence in the results was found for (in descending order of effect magnitude) amisulpride-oral (OS), olanzapine-OS, aripiprazole-LAI, olanzapine-LAI, aripiprazole-OS, paliperidone-OS, and ziprasidone-OS. "Moderate" confidence in the results was found for paliperidone-LAI 1-monthly, iloperidone-OS, fluphenazine-OS, brexpiprazole-OS, paliperidone-LAI 1-monthly, asenapine-OS, haloperidol-OS, quetiapine-OS, cariprazine-OS, and lurasidone-OS. Regarding tolerability, none of the antipsychotics was significantly worse than placebo, but confidence was poor, with only aripiprazole (both LAI and OS) showing "moderate" confidence levels. Based on these findings, olanzapine, aripiprazole and paliperidone are the best choices for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, considering that both LAI and oral formulations of these antipsychotics are among the best-performing treatments and have the highest confidence of evidence for relapse prevention. This finding is of particular relevance for low- and middle-income countries and constrained-resource settings, where few medications may be selected. Results from this network meta-analysis can inform clinical guidelines and national and international drug regulation policies.

Early pharmacological interventions for universal prevention of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a severe and debilitating condition. Several pharmacological interventions have been proposed with the aim to prevent or mitigate it. These interventions should balance efficacy and tolerability, given that not all individuals exposed to a traumatic event will develop PTSD. There are different possible approaches to preventing PTSD; universal prevention is aimed at individuals at risk of developing PTSD on the basis of having been exposed to a traumatic event, irrespective of whether they are showing signs of psychological difficulties. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological interventions for universal prevention of PTSD in adults exposed to a traumatic event. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trial Register (CCMDCTR), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, two other databases and two trials registers (November 2020). We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant systematic reviews. The search was last updated on 13 November 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials on adults exposed to any kind of traumatic event. We considered comparisons of any medication with placebo or with another medication. We excluded trials that investigated medications as an augmentation to psychotherapy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. In a random-effects model, we analysed dichotomous data as risk ratios (RR) and number needed to treat for an additional beneficial/harmful outcome (NNTB/NNTH). We analysed continuous data as mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD). MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 studies which considered eight interventions (hydrocortisone, propranolol, dexamethasone, omega-3 fatty acids, gabapentin, paroxetine, PulmoCare enteral formula, Oxepa enteral formula and 5-hydroxytryptophan) and involved 2023 participants, with a single trial contributing 1244 participants. Eight studies enrolled participants from emergency departments or trauma centres or similar settings. Participants were exposed to a range of both intentional and unintentional traumatic events. Five studies considered participants in the context of intensive care units with traumatic events consisting of severe physical illness. Our concerns about risk of bias in the included studies were mostly due to high attrition and possible selective reporting. We could meta-analyse data for two comparisons: hydrocortisone versus placebo, but limited to secondary outcomes; and propranolol versus placebo. No study compared hydrocortisone to placebo at the primary endpoint of three months after the traumatic event. The evidence on whether propranolol was more effective in reducing the severity of PTSD symptoms compared to placebo at three months after the traumatic event is inconclusive, because of serious risk of bias amongst the included studies, serious inconsistency amongst the studies' results, and very serious imprecision of the estimate of effect (SMD -0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.61 to 0.59; I2 = 83%; 3 studies, 86 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study provided data on dropout rates due to side effects at three months post-traumatic event. The evidence on whether propranolol was more effective than placebo in reducing the probability of experiencing PTSD at three months after the traumatic event is inconclusive, because of serious risk of bias amongst the included studies, and very serious imprecision of the estimate of effect (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.92; 3 studies, 88 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No study assessed functional disability or quality of life.  Only one study compared gabapentin to placebo at the primary endpoint of three months after the traumatic event, with inconclusive evidence in terms of both PTSD severity and probability of experiencing PTSD, because of imprecision of the effect estimate, serious risk of bias and serious imprecision (very low-certainty evidence). We found no data on dropout rates due to side effects, functional disability or quality of life. For the remaining comparisons, the available data are inconclusive or missing in terms of PTSD severity reduction and dropout rates due to adverse events. No study assessed functional disability. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides uncertain evidence only regarding the use of hydrocortisone, propranolol, dexamethasone, omega-3 fatty acids, gabapentin, paroxetine, PulmoCare formula, Oxepa formula, or 5-hydroxytryptophan as universal PTSD prevention strategies. Future research might benefit from larger samples, better reporting of side effects and inclusion of quality of life and functioning measures.

Comparing 1-year effectiveness and acceptability of once-monthly paliperidone palmitate and aripiprazole monohydrate for schizophrenia spectrum disorders: Findings from the STAR Network Depot Study.

In this prospective study, we assessed the effectiveness and acceptability of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) and aripiprazole monohydrate (AM) over 1-year follow-up. We included 195 subjects (117 treated with PP1M and 78 with AM) with schizophrenia spectrum disorders from real-world settings. We estimated no differences in hospitalization (Odds Ratio=1.59; p = 0.12), symptoms improvement (p = 0.90 adjusted for baseline severity), and discontinuation (Hazard Ratio=0.72; p = 0.20) at study endpoint. Although current evidence suggests the possible superiority of AM over PP1M, our findings showed comparable effectiveness between these drugs. Additional studies in real-world settings with direct comparisons between these two LAIs are needed.

Unveiling the Enzymatic Degradation Process of Biobased Thiophene Polyesters.

In the past 20 years, scientific research focused on the identification of valid alternatives to materials of fossil origin, in particular, related to biobased polymers. Recently, the efforts led to the synthesis of thiophene-based polymers (TBPs), a new class of polyesters based on 2,5-thiophenedicarboxylic acid (TPCA) that can be industrially produced using biomass-derived molecules. In this study, TBPs were synthesized using diols with different chain length (from C4 to C6) leading to poly(butylene 2,5-thiophenedicarboxylate) (PBTF), poly(pentamethylene 2,5-thiophenedicarboxylate) (PPeTF), and poly(hexamethylene 2,5-thiophenedicarboxylate) (PHTF), respectively, that were processed to thin films. To investigate enzymatic hydrolysis of these polymer films, cutinase 1 (Thc_cut1) and cutinase 2 (Thc_cut2) from Thermobifida cellulosilytica were recombinantly expressed in the host E. coli and purified. After 72 h of incubation at 65°C with 5 µM Thc_cut1, weight loss and HPLC analysis indicated 9, 100, and 80% degradation of PBTF, PPeTF, and PHTG with a concomitant release of 0.12, 2.70, and 0.67 mM of TPCA. The SEM analysis showed that tiny holes were formed on the surface of the films and after 72 h PPeTF was completely degraded. The LC-TOF/MS analysis indicated that Thc_cut2 in particular released various oligomers from the polymer during the reaction. In addition, the FTIR analysis showed the formation of novel acid and hydroxyl groups on the polymer surfaces. The results showed that the two used thermostable cutinases are promising biocatalysts for the environmentally friendly degradation of TPCA-based polyesters, in view of a possible sustainable recycling of plastic waste through resynthesis processes.

Biocatalyzed Synthesis of Flavor Esters and Polyesters: A Design of Experiments (DoE) Approach.

In the present work, different hydrolases were adsorbed onto polypropylene beads to investigate their activity both in short-esters and polyesters synthesis. The software MODDE® Pro 13 (Sartorius) was used to develop a full-factorial design of experiments (DoE) to analyse the thermostability and selectivity of the immobilized enzyme towards alcohols and acids with different chain lengths in short-esters synthesis reactions. The temperature optima of Candida antarctica lipase B (CaLB), Humicola insolens cutinase (HiC), and Thermobifida cellulosilytica cutinase 1 (Thc_Cut1) were 85 °C, 70 °C, and 50 °C. CaLB and HiC preferred long-chain alcohols and acids as substrate in contrast to Thc_Cut1, which was more active on short-chain monomers. Polymerization of different esters as building blocks was carried out to confirm the applicability of the obtained model on larger macromolecules. The selectivity of both CaLB and HiC was investigated and best results were obtained for dimethyl sebacate (DMSe), leading to polyesters with a Mw of 18 kDa and 6 kDa. For the polymerization of dimethyl adipate (DMA) with BDO and ODO, higher molecular masses were obtained when using CaLB onto polypropylene beads (CaLB_PP) as compared with CaLB immobilized on macroporous acrylic resin beads (i.e., Novozym 435). Namely, for BDO the Mn were 7500 and 4300 Da and for ODO 8100 and 5000 Da for CaLB_PP and for the commercial enzymes, respectively. Thc_Cut1 led to polymers with lower molecular masses, with Mn < 1 kDa. This enzyme showed a temperature optimum of 50 °C with 63% of DMA and BDO when compared to 54% and 27%, at 70 °C and at 85 °C, respectively.

Comparing Long-Acting Antipsychotic Discontinuation Rates Under Ordinary Clinical Circumstances: A Survival Analysis from an Observational, Pragmatic Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines suggested a wider use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) than previously, but naturalistic data on the consequences of LAI use in terms of discontinuation rates and associated factors are still sparse, making it hard for clinicians to be informed on plausible treatment courses. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess, under real-world clinical circumstances, LAI discontinuation rates over a period of 12 months after a first prescription, reasons for discontinuation, and associated factors. METHODS: The STAR Network 'Depot Study' was a naturalistic, multicentre, observational prospective study that enrolled subjects initiating a LAI without restrictions on diagnosis, clinical severity or setting. Participants from 32 Italian centres were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Psychopathology, drug attitude and treatment adherence were measured using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Drug Attitude Inventory and the Kemp scale, respectively. RESULTS: The study followed 394 participants for 12 months. The overall discontinuation rate at 12 months was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.4-44.3), with paliperidone LAI being the least discontinued LAI (33.9%; 95% CI 25.3-43.5) and olanzapine LAI the most discontinued (62.5%; 95% CI 35.4-84.8). The most frequent reason for discontinuation was onset of adverse events (32.9%; 95% CI 25.6-40.9) followed by participant refusal of the medication (20.6%; 95% CI 14.6-27.9). Medication adherence at baseline was negatively associated with discontinuation risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.853; 95% CI 0.742-0.981; p = 0.026), whereas being prescribed olanzapine LAI was associated with increased discontinuation risk compared with being prescribed paliperidone LAI (HR 2.156; 95% CI 1.003-4.634; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that LAI discontinuation is a frequent occurrence. LAI choice should be carefully discussed with the patient, taking into account individual characteristics and possible obstacles related to the practicalities of each formulation.

Maintenance Treatment With Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics for People With Nonaffective Psychoses: A Network Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared relapse prevention and acceptability of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in the maintenance treatment of adults with nonaffective psychoses. METHODS: The authors searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and online registers for randomized controlled trials published until June 2020. Relative risks and standardized mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were relapse rate and all-cause discontinuation ("acceptability"). The quality of included studies was rated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of pooled estimates was measured with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). RESULTS: Of 86 eligible trials, 78 (N=11,505) were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding relapse prevention, most of the 12 LAIs included outperformed placebo. The largest point estimates and best rankings of LAIs compared with placebo were found for paliperidone (3-month formulation) and aripiprazole. Moderate to high GRADE certainty for superior relapse prevention compared with placebo was also found for (in descending ranking order) risperidone, pipothiazine, olanzapine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation). In head-to-head comparisons of LAIs, only haloperidol was inferior to aripiprazole, fluphenazine, and paliperidone. For acceptability, most LAIs outperformed placebo, with moderate to high GRADE certainty for (in descending ranking order) zuclopenthixol, aripiprazole, paliperidone (3-month formulation), olanzapine, flupenthixol, fluphenazine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation). In head-to-head comparisons, only LAI aripiprazole had superior acceptability to other LAIs (bromperidol, fluphenazine, paliperidone [1-month formulation], pipothiazine, and risperidone). CONCLUSIONS: LAI formulations of paliperidone (3-month formulation), aripiprazole, olanzapine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation) showed the highest effect sizes and certainty of evidence for both relapse prevention and acceptability. Results from this network meta-analysis should inform frontline clinicians and guidelines.

Safety of Psychotropic Medications in People With COVID-19: Evidence Review and Practical Recommendations.

(Reprinted with permission from the BMC Medicine (2020) 18:215).

Correction to: Safety of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19: evidence review and practical recommendations.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Safety of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19: evidence review and practical recommendations.

BACKGROUND: The novel coronavirus pandemic calls for a rapid adaptation of conventional medical practices to meet the evolving needs of such vulnerable patients. People with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) may frequently require treatment with psychotropic medications, but are at the same time at higher risk for safety issues because of the complex underlying medical condition and the potential interaction with medical treatments. METHODS: In order to produce evidence-based practical recommendations on the optimal management of psychotropic medications in people with COVID-19, an international, multi-disciplinary working group was established. The methodology of the WHO Rapid Advice Guidelines in the context of a public health emergency and the principles of the AGREE statement were followed. Available evidence informing on the risk of respiratory, cardiovascular, infective, hemostatic, and consciousness alterations related to the use of psychotropic medications, and drug-drug interactions between psychotropic and medical treatments used in people with COVID-19, was reviewed and discussed by the working group. RESULTS: All classes of psychotropic medications showed potentially relevant safety risks for people with COVID-19. A set of practical recommendations was drawn in order to inform frontline clinicians on the assessment of the anticipated risk of psychotropic-related unfavorable events, and the possible actions to take in order to effectively manage this risk, such as when it is appropriate to avoid, withdraw, switch, or adjust the dose of the medication. CONCLUSIONS: The present evidence-based recommendations will improve the quality of psychiatric care in people with COVID-19, allowing an appropriate management of the medical condition without worsening the psychiatric condition and vice versa.

Reasons for initiating long-acting antipsychotics in psychiatric practice: findings from the STAR Network Depot Study.

BACKGROUND: Long acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics have been claimed to ensure treatment adherence and possibly reduce the daily burden of oral formulations. So far, only surveys investigating the theoretical prescribing attitudes of clinicians have been employed. On this basis, we aimed to investigate reasons for prescribing LAIs in a real-world, unselected sample of patients. METHODS: The STAR Network Depot Study is an observational, multicentre study consecutively enrolling adults initiating a LAI over a 12-months period. Clinical severity was assessed with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, and patient's attitude toward medications with the Drug Attitude Inventory 10 items. Psychiatrists recorded reasons for LAI prescribing for each study participant. Responses were grouped into six non-mutually exclusive categories: aggressiveness, patient engagement, ease of drug taking, side-effects, stigma, adherence. RESULTS: Of the 451 patients included, two-thirds suffered from chronic psychoses. Improving patient engagement with the outpatient psychiatric service was the most common reason for prescribing LAIs (almost 80% of participants), followed by increasing treatment adherence (57%), decreasing aggressiveness (54%), and improving ease of drug taking (52%). After adjusting for confounders, logistic regression analyses showed that reasons for LAI use were associated with LAI choice (e.g. first-generation LAIs for reducing aggressiveness). CONCLUSION: Despite the wide availability of novel LAI formulation and the emphasis on their wider use, our data suggest that the main reasons for LAI use have remained substantially unchanged over the years, focusing mostly on improving patient's engagement. Further, clinicians follow implicit prescribing patterns when choosing LAIs, and this may generate hypotheses for future experimental studies.

Factors associated with first- versus second-generation long-acting antipsychotics prescribed under ordinary clinical practice in Italy.

BACKGROUND: For many years, long-acting intramuscular (LAI) antipsychotics have been prescribed predominantly to chronic and severe patients, as a last resort when other treatments failed. Recently, a broader and earlier use of LAIs, particularly second-generation LAIs, has been emphasized. To date, few studies attempted to frame how this change in prescribing took place in real-world practice. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the clinical features of patients prescribed with LAIs, and to explore possible prescribing differences between first- and second-generations LAIs under ordinary clinical practice in Italy. METHODS: The STAR Network "Depot" Study is an observational, longitudinal, multicenter study involving 35 centers in Italy. In the cross-sectional phase, patients prescribed with LAIs were consecutively recruited and assessed over a period of 12 months. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed. RESULTS: Of the 451 recruited patients, 61% were males. The level of social and working functioning was heterogeneous, as was the severity of disease. Seventy-two per cent of the patients had a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum. Seventy per cent were prescribed with second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) LAIs (mostly paliperidone, aripiprazole and risperidone). Compared to first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) LAIs, patients prescribed with SGA LAIs were more often younger; employed; with a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorder; with higher levels of affective symptoms; with fewer LAI prescriptions in the past. DISCUSSION: LAIs' prescribing practices appear to be more flexible as compared to the past, although this change is mostly restricted to SGA LAIs.