Comparative efficacy of akathisia treatments: A network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Akathisia, a common side effect of psychotropic medications, poses a significant challenge in neuropsychiatry, affecting up to 30% of patients on antipsychotics. Despite its prevalence, akathisia remains poorly understood, with difficulties in diagnosis, patient reporting, and treatment efficacy. This research aimed to shed light on effective interventions to improve akathisia management. METHODS: A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted, encompassing controlled trials in English and Italian languages. Databases, such asPubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE, were searched until July 9, 2023. Treatment effectiveness was assessed using standardized mean differences (SMDs) in post-treatment akathisia scores. RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 446 individuals met the inclusion criteria. Benzodiazepines, beta-blockers, and NaSSA demonstrated significant efficacy as compared with placebo. Anticholinergic, anticonvulsant, triptan, and other treatments did not show significant differences. Benzodiazepines ranked highest in P-scores (0.8186), followed by beta-blockers and NaSSA. CONCLUSIONS: Effective management of akathisia is crucial, with benzodiazepines, beta-blockers, and NaSSA offering evidence-based options. Treatment rankings provide guidance for clinicians. Future research should prioritize larger, more robust studies to address limitations associated with small sample sizes and publication bias. This research enhances our understanding of interventions for akathisia, offering promising options to improve patient quality of life and prevent complications related to non-adherence and mismanagement.

Acetaminophen improves tardive akathisia induced by dopamine D2 receptor antagonists.

Tardive akathisia is a movement disorder characterized by internal restlessness with an uncontrollable urge to move, leading to repetitive movements. It is a common side effect of long-term treatment with dopamine D2 receptor antagonists. In the present study, we analyzed the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System and IBM MarketScan Research Database to find a drug that can be used concomitantly with dopamine D2 receptor antagonists and still reduce the risk of akathisia. Acetaminophen was determined to be the most effective akathisia-suppressing drug. In an experimental validation of the hypothesis, chronic treatment of rats with haloperidol caused akathisia symptoms, including increased stereotyped behavior and locomotor activity, and decreased immobility time. Acute treatment with acetaminophen significantly attenuated haloperidol-induced akathisia. In the ventral striata of these rats, acetaminophen prevented haloperidol-induced decrease in the number of c-Fos+ preproenkephalin+ neurons. These results suggest that acetaminophen is effective in suppressing tardive akathisia by activating indirect-pathway medium spiny neurons.

Reassessment of amphetamine- and phencyclidine-induced locomotor hyperactivity as a model of psychosis-like behavior in rats.

Locomotor hyperactivity induced by psychotomimetic drugs, such as amphetamine and phencyclidine, is widely used as an animal model of psychosis-like behaviour and is commonly attributed to an interaction with dopamine release and N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, respectively. However, what is often not sufficiently taken into account is that the pharmacological profile of these drugs is complex and may involve other neurotransmitter/receptor systems. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effect of three antagonists targeting different monoamine pathways on amphetamine- and phencyclidine-induced locomotor hyperactivity. A total of 32 rats were pre-treated with antagonists affecting dopaminergic, noradrenergic and serotonergic transmission: haloperidol (0.05 mg/kg), prazosin (2 mg/kg) and ritanserin (1 mg/kg), respectively. After 30 min of spontaneous activity, rats were injected with amphetamine (0.5 mg/kg) or phencyclidine (2.5 mg/kg) and distance travelled, stereotypy and rearing recorded in photocell cages over 90 min. Pre-treatment with haloperidol or prazosin both reduced amphetamine-induced hyperactivity although pre-treatment with ritanserin had only a partial effect. None of the pre-treatments significantly altered the hyperlocomotion effects of phencyclidine. These findings suggest that noradrenergic as well as dopaminergic neurotransmission is critical for amphetamine-induced locomotor hyperactivity. Hyperlocomotion effects of phencyclidine are dependent on other factors, most likely NMDA receptor antagonism. These results help to interpret psychotomimetic drug-induced locomotor hyperactivity as an experimental model of psychosis.

CYP2D6 Genotyping and Antipsychotic-Associated Extrapyramidal Adverse Effects in a Randomized Trial of Aripiprazole Versus Quetiapine Extended Release in Children and Adolescents, Aged 12-17 Years, With First Episode Psychosis.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the association between genetically predicted CYP2D6 phenotypes and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPSs). METHODS/PROCEDURES: Data from the Tolerability and Efficacy of Antipsychotics trial of adolescents with first-episode psychosis randomized to aripiprazole versus quetiapine extended release were studied. Extrapyramidal symptom assessments included the Simpson-Angus Scale and the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale. Patients were CYP2D6 genotyped. Plasma concentrations of antipsychotics and antidepressants were analyzed. FINDINGS/RESULTS: One hundred thirteen youths (age, 12-17 years; males, 30%; antipsychotic naive, 51%) were enrolled. Poor metabolizers had a significantly higher dose-adjusted aripiprazole plasma concentration (±SD) compared with normal metabolizers at week 4 (24.30 ± 6.40 ng/mL per milligram vs 14.85 ± 6.15 ng/mL per milligram; P = 0.019), but not at week 12 (22.15 ± 11.04 ng/mL per milligram vs 14.32 ± 4.52 ng/mL per milligram; P = 0.067). This association was not found in the quetiapine extended release group. No association between CYP2D6 genotype groups and global Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale score or Simpson-Angus Scale score was found in any of the treatment arms. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support routine use of CYP2D6 testing as a predictor of drug-induced parkinsonism or akathisia risk in clinical settings. Further studies with larger samples of CYP2D6 poor metabolizers are needed.

Safety and effectiveness of oral blonanserin for schizophrenia: A review of Japanese post-marketing surveillances.

Schizophrenia significantly limits social functioning with positive and negative symptoms and cognitive dysfunction. Blonanserin (LONASEN®), a novel second-generation antipsychotic approved for treating schizophrenia in Japan in 2008, reportedly shows beneficial effects on cognitive function as well as positive and negative symptoms, with potential for improving social functioning. To understand the safety and effectiveness of blonanserin in the real clinical practice, five Japanese post-marketing surveillances have been conducted and published to date. In this article, we reviewed all the Japanese post-marketing surveillances and discussed the clinical usefulness of blonanserin in patients with schizophrenia having diverse clinical characteristics. Adverse drug reactions, such as akathisia and extrapyramidal symptoms, were common in all surveillances. However, those specific to second-generation antipsychotics, such as weight gain and abnormalities in glycometabolism or lipid metabolism, were rarely observed. In addition, no adverse drug reactions apart from clinical trial results were found. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total scores in all surveillances significantly lowered at the last evaluation than at baseline. These results were consistent through 1-year of treatment, suggesting that effectiveness is maintained even after long-term use. In conclusion, blonanserin is considered a beneficial drug in real clinical practice for patients with schizophrenia having diverse characteristics.

Adult Emergence Agitation: A Veteran-Focused Narrative Review.

Emergence agitation (EA) is a self-limited state of psychomotor excitement during awakening from general anesthesia. EA is confined to the emergence period as consciousness is restored, which sharply distinguishes it from other postoperative delirium states. Sporadic episodes of EA may become violent with the potential for harm to both patients and caregivers, but the long-term consequences of such events are not fully understood. Current literature on EA in adults is limited to small-scale studies with inconsistent nomenclature, variable time periods that define emergence, a host of different surgical populations, and conflicting diagnostic criteria. Therefore, true incidence rates and risk factors are unknown. In adult noncardiac surgery, the incidence of EA is approximately 19%. Limited data suggest that young adults undergoing otolaryngology operations with volatile anesthetic maintenance may be at the highest risk for EA. Currently suggested EA mechanisms are theoretical but might reflect underblunted sympathetic activation in response to various internal (eg, flashbacks or anxiety) or external (eg, surgical pain) stimuli as consciousness returns. Supplemental dexmedetomidine and ketamine may be utilized for EA prevention. Compared to the civilian population, military veterans may be more vulnerable to EA due to high rates of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) manifesting as violent flashbacks; however, confirmatory data are limited. Nonetheless, expert military medical providers suggest that use of patient-centered rapport tactics, PTSD trigger identification and avoidance, and grounding measures may alleviate hyperactive emergence phenomena. Future research is needed to better characterize EA in veterans and validate prophylactic measures to optimize care for these patients. This narrative review provides readers with an important framework to distinguish EA from delirium. Furthermore, we summarize current knowledge of EA risk factors, mechanisms, and adult management strategies and specifically revisit them in the context of veteran perioperative health. The anesthesiology care team is ideally positioned to further explore EA and develop effective prevention and treatment protocols.

Positive and negative side effects of androgen abuse. The HAARLEM study: A one-year prospective cohort study in 100 men.

An estimated 4-6% of fitness center visitors uses anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS). Reliable data about adverse reactions of AAS are scarce. The HAARLEM study aimed to provide insight into the positive and negative effects of AAS use. One hundred men (≥18 years) who intended to start an AAS cycle on short notice were included for follow-up. Clinic visits took place before (T0 ), at the end (T1 ), and three months after the end of the AAS cycle (T2 ), and one year after the start of the cycle (T3 ), and comprised a medical history, physical examination, laboratory analysis, and psychological questionnaires. During the follow-up period, four subjects reported a serious adverse event, that is, congestive heart failure, acute pancreatitis, suicidal ideation, and exacerbation of ulcerative colitis. All subjects reported positive side effects during AAS use, mainly increased strength (100%), and every subject reported at least one negative health effect. Most common were fluid retention (56%) and agitation (36%) during the cycle, and decreased libido (58%) after the cycle. Acne and gynecomastia were observed in 28% and 19%. Mean alanine transaminase (ALT) and creatinine increased 18.7 U/l and 4.7 µmol/L, respectively. AAS dose and cycle duration were not associated with the type and severity of side effects. After one-year follow-up (T3 ), the prevalence of observed effects had returned to baseline. There was no significant change in total scores of questionnaires investigating wellbeing, quality of life, and depression. In conclusion, all subjects experienced positive effects during AAS use. Four subjects experienced a serious adverse event. Other side effects were mostly anticipated, mild, and transient.

Trazodone as an Alternative Treatment for Neuroleptic-Associated Akathisia: A Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Akathisia is a distressing extrapyramidal complication that follows the use of antipsychotic medications. Early treatment of neuroleptic-associated akathisia (NAA) is of great importance because it may lead to poor therapeutic response and ultimately treatment noncompliance. Considering the lack of adequate response of some patients to conventional treatments and the assumption that serotonin might be involved in the pathophysiology of the disease in addition to dopaminergic mechanisms, we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of trazodone as an antidepressant agent with strong antagonistic effects on serotonin receptors in the treatment of akathisia. METHODS: In a double-blind clinical trial, 52 patients receiving antipsychotic medications who were diagnosed to have mild to severe NAA using Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale were treated with trazodone 50 mg daily for 5 days and compared with the placebo control group. RESULTS: Patients receiving trazodone did not show a significant difference compared with the control group in terms of the severity of akathisia symptoms until the third day of the study. In contrast, at the end of the fifth day, there was a significant improvement in objective (P = 0.01) and subjective (P = 0.001) symptoms of akathisia and the global clinical assessment of akathisia scale (P = 0.001). Moreover, there was no clear difference between trazodone and placebo group in terms of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the antagonistic effect of trazodone on postsynaptic 5-hydroxytryptamine2A receptors as a possible mechanism of efficacy of this agent in the treatment of NAA, this study suggests that trazodone might be an effective and relatively safe drug.

Intravenous Migraine Treatment in Children and Adolescents.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Pediatric migraine is a common, chronic, and disabling neurological disorder in children and adolescents. Outpatient management is not always effective, and intravenous migraine management may be necessary for headache treatment in the pediatric emergency department. Most current treatment is based on retrospective evidence and there is a lack of well-designed randomized double-blinded controlled pediatric studies. Intravenous drug treatment agents including intravenous fluids, prochlorperazine, diphenhydramine, metoclopramide, dexamethasone, magnesium, valproate and propofol, and dihydroergotamine are reviewed in this paper. RECENT FINDINGS: Nineteen studies were reviewed including one prospective randomized double-blind; one single-blinded randomized; one prospective; and one open-label, randomized clinical trial. Most studies were retrospective and the quality of the studies was limited. No definite conclusions can be drawn from the studies, but appropriate prospective trials between major pediatric headache institutions will move pediatric intravenous migraine management forward.

Characteristics of Patients Experiencing Extrapyramidal Symptoms or Other Movement Disorders Related to Dopamine Receptor Blocking Agent Therapy.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Dopamine receptor blocking agents (DRBAs), also known as antipsychotics, are medications widely used to treat a growing number of mental health diagnoses. However, their utility is limited by the potential to cause serious adverse movement reactions. Akathisia, dystonia, parkinsonism, and tardive dyskinesia (collectively known as extrapyramidal symptoms or EPSs) are associated with reduced social and occupational functioning, negative patient attitudes toward treatment, and nonadherence to pharmacotherapy. Neuroleptic malignant syndrome is a life-threatening reaction that can result from DRBA use and cause musculoskeletal dysfunction. The aim of this study is to profile patients who have developed DRBA-related movement adverse effects and identify risk factors significantly associated with each subtype of EPSs or other movement disorders (OMDs) such as neuroleptic malignant syndrome. METHODS/PROCEDURES: A report of all potential DRBA-related EPSs or OMDs occurrences within a large community hospital network was generated using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and 10th Revision (ICD-10) billing codes. Each patient encounter was manually reviewed to confirm that a documented case of DRBA-related EPSs or OMDs had indeed occurred and subsequently determine the likely causative agent(s). FINDINGS/RESULTS: The resultant cohort of 148 patients experiencing unique DRBA-related EPS or OMD events was analyzed. The average patient was female, middle-aged, and overweight. The most common DRBAs precipitating EPSs or OMDs were haloperidol and quetiapine. In the population studied, age was significantly associated with the subtype of EPSs experienced such that those patients with akathisia and dystonia tended to be younger, whereas those with tardive dyskinesia tended to be older. Body mass index (BMI) category was also negatively correlated with the incidence of dystonia. In addition, it was observed that exposure to specific DRBAs, classes, and routes of administration significantly affected the risk of developing different subtypes of EPSs or OMDs in the study population. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to describe an association between age and BMI with the risk of akathisia and dystonia, respectively, in patients taking DRBAs. Other trends observed with age and BMI in patients developing DRBA-related EPSs support previously reported findings. Expanding the knowledge base of individual characteristics associated with the risk of developing different subtypes of EPSs or OMDs can help providers and patients anticipate and attempt to mitigate these reactions, and may ultimately improve adherence to DRBA therapy.

The Efficacy and Safety of Prochlorperazine in Patients With Acute Migraine: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prochlorperazine (PCP) in patients with acute migraine headache in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane) were searched for randomized clinical trials that investigated the effect of PCP on headache relief. The outcomes were the number of patients without headache or with reduced headache severity, the number of adverse events, and the need for rescue analgesia. RESULTS: From 450 citations, 11 studies (n = 771) with 15 comparison arms met the inclusion criteria. Overall, PCP was more effective than placebo (OR = 7.23; 95% CI = 3.82-3.68), metoclopramide (OR = 2.89; 95% CI = 1.42-5.86), and other active comparators (OR = 3.70; 95% CI = 2.41-5.67) for headache relief. The odds ratio of experiencing adverse events with PCP compared with placebo was 5.79 (95% CI = 2.43-13.79). When PCP compared with other active comparators, no statistical difference was found regarding the overall number of adverse events (OR = 1.88; 95% CI = 0.99-3.59). However, PCP significantly increased the odds of akathisia/dystonia (OR = 2.55; 95% CI = 1.03-6.31). The request for rescue analgesia was significantly lower in the PCP group compared with other groups (16% vs 84%; OR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.09-27). CONCLUSIONS: For adult patients with acute migraine, PCP could effectively abort the acute attack and reduce the request for rescue analgesia in the ED. However, compared with placebo, PCP could increase the risk of adverse events.

Memantine for dementia.

BACKGROUND: Memantine is a moderate affinity uncompetitive antagonist of glutamate NMDA receptors. It is licensed for use in moderate and severe Alzheimer's disease (AD); in the USA, it is also widely used off-label for mild AD. OBJECTIVES: To determine efficacy and safety of memantine for people with dementia. To assess whether memantine adds benefit for people already taking cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs). SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's register of trials (http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois/) up to 25 March 2018. We examined clinical trials registries, press releases and posters of memantine manufacturers; and the web sites of the FDA, EMEA and NICE. We contacted authors and companies for missing information. SELECTION CRITERIA: Double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled, randomised trials of memantine in people with dementia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We pooled and analysed data from four clinical domains across different aetiologies and severities of dementia and for AD with agitation. We assessed the impact of study duration, severity and concomitant use of ChEIs. Consequently, we restricted analyses to the licensed dose (20 mg/day or 28 mg extended release) and data at six to seven months duration of follow-up, and analysed separately results for mild and moderate-to-severe AD.We transformed results for efficacy outcomes into the difference in points on particular outcome scales. MAIN RESULTS: Across all types of dementia, data were available from almost 10,000 participants in 44 included trials, most of which were at low or unclear risk of bias. For nearly half the studies, relevant data were obtained from unpublished sources. The majority of trials (29 in 7885 participants) were conducted in people with AD.1. Moderate-to-severe AD (with or without concomitant ChEIs). High-certainty evidence from up to 14 studies in around 3700 participants consistently shows a small clinical benefit for memantine versus placebo: clinical global rating (CGR): 0.21 CIBIC+ points (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.14 to 0.30); cognitive function (CF): 3.11 Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) points (95% CI 2.42 to 3.92); performance on activities of daily living (ADL): 1.09 ADL19 points (95% CI 0.62 to 1.64); and behaviour and mood (BM): 1.84 Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) points (95% CI 1.05 to 2.76). There may be no difference in the number of people discontinuing memantine compared to placebo: risk ratio (RR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.04) corresponding to 13 fewer people per 1000 (95% CI 31 fewer to 7 more). Although there is moderate-certainty evidence that fewer people taking memantine experience agitation as an adverse event: RR 0.81 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.99) (25 fewer people per 1000, 95% CI 1 to 44 fewer), there is also moderate-certainty evidence, from three additional studies, suggesting that memantine is not beneficial as a treatment for agitation (e.g. Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory: clinical benefit of 0.50 CMAI points, 95% CI -3.71 to 4.71) .The presence of concomitant ChEI does not impact on the difference between memantine and placebo, with the possible exceptions of the BM outcome (larger effect in people taking ChEIs) and the CF outcome (smaller effect).2. Mild AD (Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) 20 to 23): mainly moderate-certainty evidence based on post-hoc subgroups from up to four studies in around 600 participants suggests there is probably no difference between memantine and placebo for CF: 0.21 ADAS-Cog points (95% CI -0.95 to 1.38); performance on ADL: -0.07 ADL 23 points (95% CI -1.80 to 1.66); and BM: -0.29 NPI points (95% CI -2.16 to 1.58). There is less certainty in the CGR evidence, which also suggests there may be no difference: 0.09 CIBIC+ points (95% CI -0.12 to 0.30). Memantine (compared with placebo) may increase the numbers of people discontinuing treatment because of adverse events (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.03 to 4.39).3. Mild-to-moderate vascular dementia. Moderate- and low-certainty evidence from two studies in around 750 participants indicates there is probably a small clinical benefit for CF: 2.15 ADAS-Cog points (95% CI 1.05 to 3.25); there may be a small clinical benefit for BM: 0.47 NOSGER disturbing behaviour points (95% CI 0.07 to 0.87); there is probably no difference in CGR: 0.03 CIBIC+ points (95% CI -0.28 to 0.34); and there may be no difference in ADL: 0.11 NOSGER II self-care subscale points (95% CI -0.35 to 0.54) or in the numbers of people discontinuing treatment: RR 1.05 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.34).There is limited, mainly low- or very low-certainty efficacy evidence for other types of dementia (Parkinson's disease and dementia Lewy bodies (for which CGR may show a small clinical benefit; four studies in 319 people); frontotemporal dementia (two studies in 133 people); and AIDS-related Dementia Complex (one study in 140 people)).There is high-certainty evidence showing no difference between memantine and placebo in the proportion experiencing at least one adverse event: RR 1.03 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.06); the RR does not differ between aetiologies or severities of dementia. Combining available data from all trials, there is moderate-certainty evidence that memantine is 1.6 times more likely than placebo to result in dizziness (6.1% versus 3.9%), low-certainty evidence of a 1.3-fold increased risk of headache (5.5% versus 4.3%), but high-certainty evidence of no difference in falls. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found important differences in the efficacy of memantine in mild AD compared to that in moderate-to-severe AD. There is a small clinical benefit of memantine in people with moderate-to-severe AD, which occurs irrespective of whether they are also taking a ChEI, but no benefit in people with mild AD.Clinical heterogeneity in AD makes it unlikely that any single drug will have a large effect size, and means that the optimal drug treatment may involve multiple drugs, each having an effect size that may be less than the minimum clinically important difference.A definitive long-duration trial in mild AD is needed to establish whether starting memantine earlier would be beneficial over the long term and safe: at present the evidence is against this, despite it being common practice. A long-duration trial in moderate-to-severe AD is needed to establish whether the benefit persists beyond six months.

Very Low-Dose Mirtazapine (7.5 mg) in Treatment of Acute Antipsychotic-Associated Akathisia.

BACKGROUND: Some evidence suggests that off-label use of mirtazapine (15 mg) is effective in treatment of acute antipsychotic-associated akathisia (AAA). We analyzed whether a lower dose of mirtazapine (7.5 mg) maintained its antiakathisia properties while exhibiting better tolerability in patients with schizophrenia and mood disorders who developed acute AAA. METHODS: Medical charts were retrospectively evaluated for 12 patients with AAA. All scored at least 2 (mild akathisia) on the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and were treated with mirtazapine (7.5 mg) for a mean of 10.3 days. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant decrease in the BARS subjective, distress, and global (P < 0.01 to P < 0.001), but not objective (P = 0.63), subscales. Five participants (41.6%) fulfilled the predefined criterion of response, a decrease of at least 2 points on the BARS global subscale. The positive antiakathisia effect of mirtazapine was observed predominantly in aripiprazole-treated patients. Mirtazapine (7.5 mg) was well tolerated, and no clinically significant adverse effects, primarily drowsiness or increased appetite, were reported. CONCLUSIONS: A large-scale controlled evaluation is warranted to substantiate clinical utility of off-label use of mirtazapine (7.5 mg) for patients with AAA.

Incidence of antiemetic-induced akathisia in patients at a comprehensive cancer center.

INTRODUCTION: Akathisia is a common and severely disabling medication-induced movement disorder. The condition is often missed, and patients suffer for a long time until diagnosed and managed properly. It is important to bring awareness to the clinicians for early detection and management of akathisia. METHODS: We reviewed a 4-year record of patients seen at a comprehensive cancer center for anxiety and restlessness. Patients diagnosed with akathisia and the medications causing akathisia were identified. Management of akathisia is discussed. RESULTS: The results showed that 4.7% of patients developed akathisia while taking antiemetic agents to control chemotherapy-induced nausea/vomiting. Early detection and management of akathisia resulted in quick recovery and reduced patients' suffering. CONCLUSION: Akathisia is an unpleasant feeling of motor restlessness with anxiety. Clinicians need to have a full understanding to identify the subtle difference between functional anxiety and akathisia.

Adjunctive brexpiprazole for elderly patients with major depressive disorder: An open-label, long-term safety and tolerability study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of flexible-dose brexpiprazole adjunct to antidepressant treatment (ADT) in elderly patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Elderly patients (≥65 years) with MDD and inadequate response to ≥1 ADT during the current episode were recruited to a 26-week, interventional, open-label study (NCT02400346) at outpatient centers in the USA and Europe. All patients received brexpiprazole 1 to 3 mg/day adjunct to their current ADT. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), movement disorder scales, and standard safety assessments (vital signs, laboratory safety parameters, physical examination, electrocardiograms). Exploratory efficacy outcomes included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S), and Social Adaptation Self-Evaluation Scale (SASS). RESULTS: Of the 132 treated patients, 88 (66.7%) completed the study and 44 (33.3%) withdrew, including 24 who withdrew because of AEs (18.2%). Overall, 102 patients (77.3%) experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent AE (TEAE), which were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Treatment-emergent AEs with the highest incidence were fatigue (15.2%) and restlessness (12.9%). The most common TEAE leading to withdrawal was fatigue (3.0%). No consistent clinically relevant findings were seen with regard to movement disorder scales or standard safety assessments. Mean (standard error) efficacy score changes from baseline to week 26 were: MADRS total, -14.5 (0.9); CGI-S, -1.8 (0.1); and SASS, 3.2 (0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term (26-week) treatment with adjunctive brexpiprazole was generally well tolerated in elderly patients with MDD and inadequate response to prior ADT. Improvements were observed in depressive symptoms and social functioning.

Correspondence between negative symptoms and potential sources of secondary negative symptoms over time.

There has been a debate in the literature about the distinction between primary and secondary negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Our aim was to study the associations between negative symptoms and potential sources of secondary negative symptoms over time. A sample of 275 participants with at least mid-moderate negative symptoms was randomized into body psychotherapy or Pilates class in a previous study. No significant differences were found between groups over time and changes in the symptom domains were modest. The present investigation considers the longitudinal correlation between variables of interest at baseline, 3 and 9 months follow-up. Measures were the Clinical Assessment Interview for Negative Symptoms (CAINS), the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS), the Calgary Depression Scale (CDSS) and the Simpson-Angus Extrapyramidal side-effects Scale (SAS). Mixed models were computed to test the longitudinal association between these variables. In a sensitivity analysis, the dosages of antipsychotic, illness duration and allocated intervention were taken into account. Overall, the course of extrapyramidal side-effects, depressive and positive symptoms was significantly related to the course of negative symptoms. Only extrapyramidal effects were longitudinally correlated to expressive negative symptoms. The sensitivity analyses showed unaltered results for positive symptoms and depression but a lack of association between extrapyramidal effects and the CAINS outcomes. In conclusion, the unambiguous interpretation between primary and secondary negative symptoms may lead to refined treatment approaches for schizophrenia and to increased effects of the interventions.

Randomized, double-blind comparison of aripiprazole/sertraline combination and placebo/sertraline combination in patients with major depressive disorder.

AIM: This study compared the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole/sertraline combination (ASC) and placebo/sertraline combination (PSC) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who showed an inadequate response to sertraline 100 mg/day. METHODS: The study comprised a screening period, an 8-week prospective treatment (single-blind sertraline 25-100 mg/day) period, and a 6-week double-blind treatment period. Patients with DSM-5-defined MDD were enrolled. Following the prospective treatment, non-responders were randomly assigned to the ASC group (aripiprazole 3-12 mg/day/sertraline 100 mg/day) or the PSC group (sertraline 100 mg/day). The primary efficacy end-point was the mean change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to 6 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 412 patients were randomly assigned to either the ASC group (n = 209) or the PSC group (n = 203). Mean change in MADRS total score was significantly greater in patients with ASC than PSC (-9.2 vs -7.2; P = 0.0070). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) that occurred in ≥10% of patients with ASC versus PSC were nasopharyngitis (13.4% vs 11.3%) and akathisia (12.9% vs 3.4%). All TEAE reported in the ASC group were mild or moderate in severity. Rates of discontinuations due to TEAE were low in both the ASC (1.9%) and PSC (1.5%) groups. There were no notable issues in safety assessments in the ASC group compared with the PSC group. CONCLUSION: In patients with MDD who showed an inadequate response to treatment with sertraline 100 mg/day, ASC was efficacious and well tolerated.

Prevalence and pattern of antipsychotic induced movement disorders in a tertiary care teaching hospital in India - a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess prevalence and pattern of movement disorders among patients taking antipsychotic medications. METHODS: This cross-sectional, intensive monitoring (patient interview, case record form review and clinical examination) study was conducted in patients taking antipsychotic drugs irrespective of duration for the development of movement disorders. The psychiatrist used Modified Simpson-Angus Scale score (10-item scale), Barnes' rating scale and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale to diagnose parkinsonism, akathisia and tardive dyskinesia, respectively. We assessed movement disorders for the preventability and seriousness. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of antipsychotic induced movement disorders was 5.67% (95% CI: 4.19-7.62). The prevalence of parkinsonism, akathisia and tardive dyskinesia was 5.10% (95% CI: 3.71-6.98), 0.85% (95% CI: 0.39-1.84) and 0.57% (95% CI: 0.22-1.45), respectively. There was a trend of high proportions of movement disorders in extreme of age group, female gender, patients treated with conventional antipsychotics, on poly therapy, patients of epilepsy with psychosis, schizophrenia and bipolar mood disorder. The movement disorder was lowest with quetiapine (2.02%). CONCLUSIONS: The higher use of atypical antipsychotics had reduced the occurrence of movement disorders in our setup.

The Relationship Between Early Haloperidol Response and Associated Extrapyramidal Side Effects.

BACKGROUND: Early response to antipsychotic medication within 2 weeks of initiating treatment can predict psychiatric outcomes. However, it is unclear whether early response is also predictive of extrapyramidal side effects (EPSs) associated with antipsychotic medications. METHODS: In this study, we investigated 136 consecutive antipsychotic-naive, first-episode psychosis patients naturalistically treated with haloperidol. Patients were assessed at baseline and weekly after treatment initiation using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale. Dystonia, parkinsonism, akathisia, and dyskinesia were also assessed weekly using standardized rating scales. Regression analyses were used to determine whether early response at week 2 of treatment predicted the incidence of EPS at any point during hospitalization. A secondary analysis was conducted to determine whether early response continued to predict EPS in patients who experienced no EPS within the first 2 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The analyses demonstrated that greater Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale percent improvement at week 2 predicted a decreased risk of EPSs (P = 0.004), even in patients who did not show any EPSs within the first 2 weeks of treatment (P = 0.005). For specific EPS, early response predicted decreased incidences of parkinsonism (P = 0.028) and dyskinesia (P = 0.025), but not akathisia or dystonia. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale improvement at week 2 did not predict EPSs. In addition, EPSs were not predicted by the maximum antipsychotic dose received during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that early antipsychotic response is valuable not only for predicting psychiatric outcomes, but also for predicting the risk of EPSs.