Mirtazapine versus megestrol acetate in treatment of anorexia-cachexia in advanced cancer patients: a randomized, double-blind trial.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer-related anorexia-cachexia comprises one of the most common syndromes of advanced cancer patients. The management of cancer-related anorexia-cachexia is a great challenge in clinical practice. There are no definite practice guidelines yet for the prevention and treatment of cancer-related anorexia-cachexia. This study is considered to find out whether there is any role of mirtazapine in the improvement of anorexia in cancer patients. METHODS: A total of 80 cancer-anorexia patients were enrolled. Patients in the trial arm received the standard chemotherapy medication plus one tablet of mirtazapine 15 mg daily at night orally for 8 weeks starting from the day of an initial assessment. The control arm received the standard chemotherapy medication plus one tablet of megestrol acetate 160 mg daily orally for 8 weeks starting from the day of an initial assessment. Each patient was assessed by validated versions of Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia/Cachexia Sub Scale v 4 questionnaires. RESULTS: After 4 and 8 weeks each patient was evaluated again using the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia/Cachexia Sub Scale tool. The quality of life of each patient was assessed by European Organization for Research and Treatment QLQ-C30 v 3.0. After 4 to 8 weeks of treatment, the Functional Assessment of Anorexia/Cachexia Therapy Anorexia/Cachexia Sub Scale score in cancer anorexia patients in the mirtazapine improved anorexia significantly. However, the improvement after 4 to 8 weeks was not statistically significant when it was compared with the megestrol acetate (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, the findings of this study reveal that mirtazapine might be a potential alternative to megestrol acetate, as it has shown potential efficacy as like as megestrol acetate.

Mirtazapine for fibromyalgia in adults.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a clinically defined chronic condition of unknown etiology characterised by chronic widespread pain, sleep disturbance, cognitive dysfunction, and fatigue. Many patients report high disability levels and poor quality of life. Drug therapy aims to reduce key symptoms, especially pain, and improve quality of life. The tetracyclic antidepressant, mirtazapine, may help by increasing serotonin and noradrenaline in the central nervous system (CNS). OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy, tolerability and safety of the tetracyclic antidepressant, mirtazapine, compared with placebo or other active drug(s) in the treatment of fibromyalgia in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, SCOPUS, the US National Institutes of Health, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and ongoing trials, and examined reference lists of reviewed articles, to 9 July 2018. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any formulation of mirtazapine against placebo, or any other active treatment of fibromyalgia, in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted study characteristics, outcomes of efficacy, tolerability and safety, examined issues of study quality, and assessed risk of bias, resolving discrepancies by discussion. Primary outcomes were participant-reported pain relief (at least 50% or 30% pain reduction), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC; much or very much improved), safety (serious adverse events), and tolerability (adverse event withdrawal). Other outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL) improved by 20% or more, fatigue, sleep problems, mean pain intensity, negative mood and particular adverse events. We used a random-effects model to calculate risk difference (RD), standardised mean difference (SMD), and numbers needed to treat. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies with 606 participants compared mirtazapine with placebo (but not other drugs) over seven to 13 weeks. Two studies were at unclear or high risk of bias in six or seven of eight domains. We judged the evidence for all outcomes to be low- or very low-quality because of poor study quality, indirectness, imprecision, risk of publication bias, and sometimes low numbers of events.There was no difference between mirtazapine and placebo for any primary outcome: participant-reported pain relief of 50% or greater (22% versus 16%; RD 0.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.12; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); no data available for PGIC; only a single serious adverse event for evaluation of safety (RD -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; three studies with 606 participants; very low-quality evidence); and tolerability as frequency of dropouts due to adverse events (3% versus 2%; RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence).Mirtazapine showed a clinically-relevant benefit compared to placebo for some secondary outcomes: participant-reported pain relief of 30% or greater (47% versus 34%; RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.21; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 8, 95% CI 5 to 20; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported mean pain intensity (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.13; three studies with 591 participants; low-quality evidence); and participant-reported sleep problems (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.06; three studies with 573 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no benefit for improvement of participant-reported improvement of HRQoL of 20% or greater (58% versus 50%; RD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.16; three studies with 586 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported fatigue (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.16; two studies with 533 participants; low-quality evidence); participant-reported negative mood (SMD -0.67, 95% CI -1.44 to 0.10; three studies with 588 participants; low-quality evidence); or withdrawals due to lack of efficacy (1.5% versus 0.1%; RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02; three studies with 605 participants; very low-quality evidence).There was no difference between mirtazapine and placebo for participants reporting any adverse event (76% versus 59%; RD 0.12, 95 CI -0.01 to 0.26; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence). There was a clinically-relevant harm with mirtazapine compared to placebo: in the number of participants with somnolence (42% versus 14%; RD 0.24, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.30; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 5, 95% CI 3 to 6; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence); weight gain (19% versus 1%; RD 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.23; NNTH 6, 95% CI 5 to 10; three studies with 606 participants; low-quality evidence); and elevated alanine aminotransferase (13% versus 2%; RD 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.22; NNTH 8, 95% CI 5 to 25; two studies with 566 participants; low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Studies demonstrated no benefit of mirtazapine over placebo for pain relief of 50% or greater, PGIC, improvement of HRQoL of 20% or greater, or reduction of fatigue or negative mood. Clinically-relevant benefits were shown for pain relief of 30% or greater, reduction of mean pain intensity, and sleep problems. Somnolence, weight gain, and elevated alanine aminotransferase were more frequent with mirtazapine than placebo. The quality of evidence was low or very low, with two of three studies of questionable quality and issues over indirectness and risk of publication bias. On balance, any potential benefits of mirtazapine in fibromyalgia were outweighed by its potential harms, though, a small minority of people with fibromyalgia might experience substantial symptom relief without clinically-relevant adverse events.

Validating pre-treatment body mass index as moderator of antidepressant treatment outcomes: Findings from CO-MED trial.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there are no valid clinical or biological markers to personalize the treatment of depression. Recent evidence suggests that body mass index (BMI) may guide the selection of antidepressant medications with different mechanisms of action. METHODS: Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial participants with BMI measurement (n = 662) were categorized as normal- or underweight (<25), overweight (25-<30), obese I (30-<35), and obese II+ (≥35). Logistic regression analysis with remission as the dependent variable and treatment arm-by-BMI category interaction as the primary independent variable was used to evaluate if BMI differentially predicted response to escitalopram (SSRI) monotherapy, bupropion-escitalopram combination, or venlafaxine-mirtazapine combination, after controlling for gender and baseline depression severity. RESULTS: Remission rates among the three treatment arms differed on the basis of pre-treatment BMI (chi-square=12.80, degrees of freedom=6, p = .046). Normal- or under-weight participants were less likely to remit with the bupropion-SSRI combination (26.8%) than SSRI monotherapy (37.3%, number needed to treat or NNT = 9.5) or venlafaxine-mirtazapine combination (44.4%, NNT = 5.7). Conversely, obese II+ participants were more likely to remit with bupropion-SSRI (47.4%) than SSRI monotherapy (28.6%, NNT = 5.3) or venlafaxine-mirtazapine combination (37.7%, NNT = 10.3). Remission rates did not differ among overweight and obese I participants. LIMITATIONS: Secondary analysis, higher rates of obesity than the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressant selection in clinical practice can be personalized with BMI measurements. Bupropion-SSRI combination should be avoided in normal- or under-weight depressed outpatients as compared to SSRI monotherapy and venlafaxine-mirtazapine combination and preferred in those with BMI≥35.

Can we recommend mirtazapine and bupropion for patients at risk for bleeding?: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) are associated with an increased risk of bleeding. Mirtazapine and bupropion, which commonly lack serotonin reuptake inhibition, have been recommended as alternatives for patients who are at risk for bleeding. However, the evidence for these recommendations is insufficient. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search, systematic review, and meta-analysis to investigate an evidence-based approach for the bleeding risks of mirtazapine and bupropion. From 1946 to May 2017, a total of 3981 studies were searched from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Among the studies, two independent reviewers selected studies per predefined eligibility criteria. RESULTS: A total of five meta-analyses were conducted. Patients taking mirtazapine were at a greater risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.01-1.38) than those who did not take antidepressants. No differences were observed in the bleeding risk between mirtazapine and SSRI or between bupropion and SSRI. LIMITATIONS: The number of studies included in the meta-analysis was small. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that it is premature to recommend mirtazapine and bupropion for patients who have a bleeding risk. More studies with larger sample sizes and longitudinal follow-ups are warranted.

Antidepressant polypharmacy and the potential of pharmacokinetic interactions: Doxepin but not mirtazapine causes clinically relevant changes in venlafaxine metabolism.

BACKGROUND: To uncover pharmacokinetic interactions between venlafaxine and doxepin or mirtazapine in a naturalistic sample. METHODS: A therapeutic drug monitoring database containing plasma concentrations of venlafaxine (VEN) and its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN) was analyzed. We included 1067 of 1594 patients in the analysis. Three study groups were considered; a group of patients under venlafaxine without confounding medications, V0 (n = 905), a group of patients co-medicated with doxepin, VDOX (n = 25) and a second group, co-medicated with mirtazapine, VMIR, n = 137. Plasma concentrations of VEN, ODVEN and the clinically relevant active moiety, sum of venlafaxine and O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN) (AM), as well as dose-adjusted plasma concentrations (C/D) were compared. RESULTS: Median concentrations in the doxepin group showed 57.7% and 194.4% higher values for AM and VEN respectively; these differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001 for AM and p = 0.002 for VEN). Similar differences were detected for C/D concentrations of active moiety and VEN (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001) with higher values also in the doxepin group. The ratios ODVEN/VEN were lower in the doxepin group (p < 0.001). A co-medication with mirtazapine did not cause any changes in venlafaxine metabolism. CONCLUSIONS: Higher concentrations for VEN and AM imply an inhibiting effect of doxepin on the metabolism of venlafaxine, although the huge variability of concentrations has to be taken into account. It is recommended to monitor plasma concentrations in combination treatment to avoid problems in safety and efficacy. LIMITATIONS: Despite the large size of our study sample, the naturalistic nature of this data may arise some concerns of information bias potentially resulting from non-standardized data recording.

Posterior fossa progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy: first presentation of an unknown autoimmune disease.

We present a case of a 57-year-old man who presented with progressive cerebellar dysarthria and cerebellar ataxia. Additional investigations confirmed the diagnosis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) in the posterior fossa. This is a demyelinating disease of the central nervous system, caused by an opportunistic infection with John Cunningham virus. PML has previously been considered a lethal condition, but because of careful monitoring of patients with HIV and of patients using immunosuppressive drugs it is discovered in earlier stages and prognosis can be improved. Our patient had no known immune-compromising state, but further work-up revealed that the PML was most likely the first presentation of a previous untreated autoimmune disorder: sarcoidosis.

Interleukin 17 selectively predicts better outcomes with bupropion-SSRI combination: Novel T cell biomarker for antidepressant medication selection.

BACKGROUND: Interleukin 17 (IL-17) is produced by highly inflammatory Th17 cells and has been implicated in pathophysiology of depression. IL-17 putatively disrupts the blood brain barrier and affects dopamine synthesis whereas dopamine has been shown to decrease Th17 cell-mediated immune response. Nevertheless, whether IL-17 can predict differential treatment outcome with antidepressants modulating dopaminergic transmission is unknown. METHODS: IL-17 and other T cell and non-T cell markers (Th1, Th2 and non-T cell markers) were measured with the Bioplex Pro™ human cytokine 27-plex kit in the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial participants who provided baseline plasma and were treated with either bupropion plus escitalopram (bupropion-SSRI), escitalopram plus placebo (SSRI monotherapy), or venlafaxine plus mirtazapine (n=166). Differential changes in symptom severity and side-effects based on levels of IL-17 and other T and non-T cell markers were tested using a treatment-arm-by-biomarker interaction in separate repeated measures mixed model analyses. Subsequent analyses stratified by treatment arm were conducted for those markers with a significant interaction. RESULTS: There was a significant treatment-arm-by-IL-17 interaction for depression severity (p=0.037) but not for side-effects (p=0.28). Higher baseline IL-17 level was associated with greater reduction in depression severity (effect size=0.78, p=0.008) in the bupropion-SSRI but not the other two treatment arms. Other T and non-T cell markers were not associated with differential treatment outcomes. CONCLUSION: Higher baseline levels of IL-17 are selectively associated with greater symptomatic reduction in depressed patients treated with bupropion-SSRI combination.

Brain Biopsy Is More Reliable than the DNA test for JC Virus in Cerebrospinal Fluid for the Diagnosis of Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy.

The current standard diagnostic approach for progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is to perform a DNA test to identify the presence of the JC virus in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). A 32-year-old woman with a 5-year history of systemic lupus erythematosus developed right hemiplegia and motor aphasia. MRI revealed a large white matter lesion in the left frontal lobe. JC virus DNA was undetectable in the CSF, but a brain biopsy showed typical histopathology and a high DNA load of the JC virus. The patient was treated with mefloquine and mirtazapine, and is currently alive at 24 months after onset. An early brain biopsy may therefore be important for making a timely diagnosis of PML.

Brain antioxidant effect of mirtazapine and reversal of sedation by its combination with alpha-lipoic acid in a model of depression induced by corticosterone.

BACKGROUND: Depression is accompanied by activated neuro-oxidative and neuro-nitrosative pathways, while targeting these pathways has clinical efficacy in depression. This study aimed to investigate the effects of mirtazapine (MIRT) alone and combined with alpha-lipoic acid (ALA) against corticosterone (CORT) induced behavioral and oxidative alterations. METHODS: Male mice received vehicle or CORT 20mg/kg during 14 days. From the 15th to 21st days they were divided in groups administered: vehicle, MIRT 3mg/kg or the combinations MIRT+ALA100 or MIRT+ALA200. On the 21st day of treatment, the animals were subjected to behavioral tests. Twenty-four hours after the last drug administration hippocampus (HC) and striatum (ST) were dissected for the determination reduced glutathione (GSH), lipid peroxidation (LP) and nitrite levels. RESULTS: CORT induced anxiety- and depressive-like behaviors as observed by increased immobility time in the tail suspension test and decreased sucrose consumption. MIRT or MIRT+ALA are effective in reversing anxiety- and depressive-like behaviors induced by CORT. CORT and MIRT alone prolonged sleeping time and this effect was reversed by MIRT+ALA. CORT significantly increased LP, which was reversed by MIRT or MIRT+ALA. Nitrite levels were increased in CORT-treated animals and reversed by MIRT+ALA200 (HC), MIRT or MIRT+ALA (ST). LIMITATION: A relative small sample size and lack of a washout period between drug administration and behavioral testing. CONCLUSIONS: MIRT or MIRT+ALA reverse CORT-induced anxiety- and depressive-like behaviors probably via their central antioxidant effects. Augmentation of MIRT with ALA may reverse sedation, an important side effect of MIRT. Randomized controlled studies are needed to examine the clinical efficacy of this combination in human depression.

Reevaluating the Efficacy and Predictability of Antidepressant Treatments: A Symptom Clustering Approach.

IMPORTANCE: Depressive severity is typically measured according to total scores on questionnaires that include a diverse range of symptoms despite convincing evidence that depression is not a unitary construct. When evaluated according to aggregate measurements, treatment efficacy is generally modest and differences in efficacy between antidepressant therapies are small. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of antidepressant treatments on empirically defined groups of symptoms and examine the replicability of these groups. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patient-reported data on patients with depression from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial (n = 4039) were used to identify clusters of symptoms in a depressive symptom checklist. The findings were then replicated using the Combining Medications to Enhance Depression Outcomes (CO-MED) trial (n = 640). Mixed-effects regression analysis was then performed to determine whether observed symptom clusters have differential response trajectories using intent-to-treat data from both trials (n = 4706) along with 7 additional placebo and active-comparator phase 3 trials of duloxetine (n = 2515). Finally, outcomes for each cluster were estimated separately using machine-learning approaches. The study was conducted from October 28, 2014, to May 19, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Twelve items from the self-reported Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (QIDS-SR) scale and 14 items from the clinician-rated Hamilton Depression (HAM-D) rating scale. Higher scores on the measures indicate greater severity of the symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 4706 patients included in the first analysis, 1722 (36.6%) were male; mean (SD) age was 41.2 (13.3) years. Of the 2515 patients included in the second analysis, 855 (34.0%) were male; mean age was 42.65 (12.17) years. Three symptom clusters in the QIDS-SR scale were identified at baseline in STAR*D. This 3-cluster solution was replicated in CO-MED and was similar for the HAM-D scale. Antidepressants in general (8 of 9 treatments) were more effective for core emotional symptoms than for sleep or atypical symptoms. Differences in efficacy between drugs were often greater than the difference in efficacy between treatments and placebo. For example, high-dose duloxetine outperformed escitalopram in treating core emotional symptoms (effect size, 2.3 HAM-D points during 8 weeks, 95% CI, 1.6 to 3.1; P < .001), but escitalopram was not significantly different from placebo (effect size, 0.03 HAM-D points; 95% CI, -0.7 to 0.8; P = .94). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Two common checklists used to measure depressive severity can produce statistically reliable clusters of symptoms. These clusters differ in their responsiveness to treatment both within and across different antidepressant medications. Selecting the best drug for a given cluster may have a bigger benefit than that gained by use of an active compound vs a placebo.

Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy after Ibrutinib Therapy for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a devastating neurological disease observed nearly exclusively in immunocompromised patients. Recently, the introduction of monoclonal antibodies significantly inhibiting the immune system such as rituximab has led to an increase in PML cases. Although rituximab-based immunochemotherapy remains the standard of treatment for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the importance of Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ibrutinib is steadily increasing. However, long-term experiences regarding possible side effects of these new substances are rare. Here, we report the development of eventually fatal PML possibly associated with ibrutinib therapy for CLL after multiple prior treatment lines, including rituximab. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to report such findings. Since the last course of rituximab was applied over 3 years ago, it is conceivable that the strong B cell inhibition by ibrutinib led to PML. With increased awareness of this potential side effect, further clinical studies are certainly warranted to evaluate this possible association.

JC virus granule cell neuronopathy in the setting of chronic lymphopenia treated with recombinant interleukin-7.

JC virus (JCV) is a human polyomavirus that infects the central nervous system (CNS) of immunocompromised patients. JCV granule cell neuronopathy (JCV-GCN) is caused by infection of cerebellar granule cells, causing ataxia. A 77-year-old man with iatrogenic lymphopenia presented with severe ataxia and was diagnosed with JCV-GCN. His ataxia and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) improved with intravenous immunoglobulin, high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone, mirtazapine, and mefloquine. Interleukin-7 (IL-7) therapy reconstituted his lymphocytes and reduced his CSF JCV load. One month after IL-7 therapy, he developed worsening ataxia and CSF inflammation, which raised suspicion for immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome. Steroids were restarted and his ataxia stabilized.

Serotonin Syndrome Following an Uncomplicated Orthopedic Surgery in a Patient With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Serotonin syndrome (SS) is a potentially life-threatening adverse drug reaction that may occur in patients treated with serotonin agonist medications. Medications responsible for serotonin syndrome include commonly prescribed antidepressants, anxiolytics, analgesics, and antiemetics. Veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are at risk for polypharmacy with serotoninergic medications, given their psychological comorbidities and service-related musculoskeletal injuries. The perioperative period is a particularly vulnerable time owing to the use of high-dose anxiolytics and antiemetics frequently administered in this period, and places PTSD patients at higher risk of SS. Herein, we present the first case of SS in a young veteran with combat-related PTSD following an uncomplicated L5-S1 revision discectomy that highlights the unique set of clinical challenges and dilemmas faced when treating SS in a patient with severe postsurgical pain. As we are likely to encounter increasing numbers of veterans treated for PTSD who require multiple surgical procedures to treat their service-related injuries, health care providers need to be familiar with prevention, recognition, and the clinical challenges in the management of SS in the postoperative period.

Paraneoplastic Itch Management.

Paraneoplastic itch occurs as the result of a systemic reaction to an underlying malignancy. Paraneoplastic itch is most commonly associated with lymphoproliferative malignancies and solid tumors that result in cholestasis. Paraneoplastic itch may occur in the absence of a primary rash or in association with dermatologic conditions such as erythroderma, acanthosis nigricans, dermatomyositis, Grover's disease, and eruptive seborrheic keratosis. Treatment of paraneoplastic itch is centered on targeting the underlying malignancy responsible for the systemic reaction. In cases of malignancy that are refractive to treatment, other therapies have been found to be effective for paraneoplastic itch, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, mirtazapine, gabapentin, thalidomide, opioids, aprepitant, and histone deacetylase inhibitors.

Treatment of Progressive Multifocal Leukoencephalopathy With Mirtazapine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rare, JC-virus-mediated, demyelinating disease with a high mortality rate. As no recommended treatment exists, mirtazapine, a potential blocker of virus entry into cells, has been empirically used. METHODS: We analysed existing data on mirtazapine's efficacy to treat PML by systematically reviewing the literature since 2005, when it was first used. RESULTS: Searches in PubMed, EBSCO, SCOPUS and Google Scholar between January 2005 and December 2015, identified five cohort studies and 74 case reports. No statistically significant effect of mirtazapine on PML outcome was observed in the cohort studies. From studying the case reports, mortality rate for PML was associated with the underlying circumstances, such as an older age, the use of an immunosuppressant, or PML occurring in patients with a haematological malignancy or a transplant. CONCLUSIONS: Except for natalizumab-associated PML, we did not highlight any potential benefit of mirtazapine on disease outcomes. Further interventional studies are needed to confirm that 5-HT2AR inhibition is relevant to treat PML.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy with bilateral middle cerebellar peduncle lesions confirmed by repeated CSF-JC virus tests and coexistence of JC virus granule cell neuronopathy. Report of a case.

A 65 year-old woman with small lymphocytic leukemia presented with subacute cerebellar ataxia. Six months after rituximab chemotherapy, a cranial MRI revealed lesions in the bilateral middle cerebellar peduncles. Both cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) JC virus (JCV)-DNA PCR test on three occasions and brain biopsy were negative. CSF tests were repeated. The fourth test performed 6 months after the onset showed positive JCV-DNA, and a definite diagnosis of progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) was made. Neuroimaging of cerebellar atrophy was considered to be coexistence of granule cell neuronopathy. Medication with mirtazapine and mefloquine was temporarily effective for several months. Little are known solitary bilateral MRI lesions of the middle cerebellar peduncle in PML. JCV-PCR test of CSF may be negative at an earlier stage of PML. Repeated CSF tests should be essential to confirming the diagnosis in such cases.

Efficacy of mirtazapine for the treatment of fibromyalgia without concomitant depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIa study in Japan.

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mirtazapine in Japanese patients with fibromyalgia (FM), a parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase IIa study was conducted at 57 sites between November 2012 and February 2014. Patients aged 20 to 64 years who met the American College of Rheumatology 1990 diagnostic FM criteria and had stably high pain scores during a placebo run-in period were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4) to receive mirtazapine orally (15 mg/d for 1 week and then 30 mg/d) or matching placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in mean numerical rating scale (NRS) pain score from baseline to endpoint (week 12 or early discontinuation). Of the 430 patients randomized (n = 215 each group), 422 (n = 211 each group) were analyzed for the primary endpoint. At the study endpoint, mirtazapine caused a significantly greater reduction in the mean NRS pain score compared with placebo (difference, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, -0.72 to -0.17; P = 0.0018). The reduction by mirtazapine remained significantly greater compared with placebo from week 6 onward. More patients treated with mirtazapine had their NRS pain score reduced by ≥30% from baseline (45.5% vs 30.8%). Mirtazapine also improved pain-related quality of life assessed by the Japanese version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and the Short-Form 36 Questionnaire. Adverse events were more common with mirtazapine than placebo (68.8% vs 56.7%), including somnolence (32.1% vs 7.4%), weight gain (17.7% vs 0.9%), and increased appetite (11.6% vs 3.3%). In conclusion, mirtazapine was an effective and safe treatment for Japanese patients with FM.

Mirtazapine, in orodispersible form, for patients with preoperative psychological distress: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative psychological distress is associated with preoperative anxiety, depression, and postoperative pain. Mirtazapine is effective as an antidepressant, anxiolytic agent, and sleep enhancer. Moreover, mirtazapine can be made as orodispersible tablets with a fast onset for patients in nil per os status. This study is to determine whether mirtazapine can help psychologically distressed patients reduce perioperative anxiety, depression, and postoperative pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with preoperative psychological distress, undergoing major abdominal surgery, were inquired and assigned to two groups according to their own choice. In the treatment group, patients could choose to take orodispersible mirtazapine 30 mg at each night from Preoperative Day 0 to Postoperative Day 3. There was no other intervention in the nontreatment group. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS), and pain scores were accessed on the day before operation (Day 0), and on the 1(st) day (Day 2) and 3(rd) day (Day 4) after operation. We compared the HADS, AIS, and pain scores, and morphine consumptions between the two groups on a daily basis. Marginal regression models were fitted to our correlated longitudinal data alone with the generalized estimating equations method to estimate the population average effects of time-varying mirtazapine usage on the mean values of HADS, AIS, and pain scores, and daily morphine consumptions. RESULTS: From September 2007 to December 2008, 86 patients agreed to be enrolled and 79 of them completed the study. Propensity scores and multivariate analysis showed that mirtazapine reduced HADS scores of patients in 2 days. Trial results indicated that mirtazapine lowered the AIS day index and tended to decrease night index as well. Mirtazapine may reduce patients' morphine consumption, but this effect was not statistically significant (p = 0.2). CONCLUSION: Mirtazapine helps reduce anxiety, depression, and insomnia scores for patients with perioperative psychological distress.

Effect of Mirtazapine Treatment on Serum Levels of Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor and Tumor Necrosis Factor-α in Patients of Major Depressive Disorder with Severe Depression.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of mirtazapine and its effect on serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) levels in patients of major-depressive disorder (MDD) with severe depression. METHODS: Patients (aged 18-60) with MDD diagnosed by DSM-IV criteria, and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score ≥25 were included (n = 30). Mirtazapine was given in the doses of 30 mg/day. All patients were followed up for 12 weeks for the evaluation of clinical efficacy, safety along with serum BDNF and TNF-α levels. RESULTS: HAM-D score at the start of treatment was 30.1 ± 1.92, which significantly (p < 0.05) reduced to 13.47 ± 1.77 at 12 weeks of treatment. In responders, mean serum BDNF levels at the start of treatment were 2.32 ± 0.3 ng/ml, which significantly (p < 0.05) increased to 2.79 ± 0.33 ng/ml at 12 weeks of treatment and mean serum TNF-α levels at the start were 5.18 ± 0.67 pg/ml, which significantly decreased to 4.36 ± 0.72 pg/ml (p < 0.05) at 12 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that mirtazapine is effective and well tolerated in severely depressed patients and treatment response is associated with an increase in serum BDNF and a decrease in serum TNF-α levels.