Molecular mechanisms of quetiapine bidirectional regulation of bipolar depression and mania based on network pharmacology and molecular docking: Evidence from computational biology.

BACKGROUND: Quetiapine monotherapy is recommended as the first-line option for acute mania and acute bipolar depression. However, the mechanism of action of quetiapine is unclear. Network pharmacology and molecular docking were employed to determine the molecular mechanisms of quetiapine bidirectional regulation of bipolar depression and mania. METHODS: Putative target genes for quetiapine were collected from the GeneCard, SwissTargetPrediction, and DrugBank databases. Targets for bipolar depression and bipolar mania were identified from the DisGeNET and GeneCards databases. A protein-protein interaction (PPI) network was generated using the String database and imported into Cytoscape. DAVID and the Bioinformatics platform were employed to perform the Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses of the top 15 core targets. The drug-pathway-target-disease network was constructed using Cytoscape. Finally, molecular docking was performed to evaluate the interactions between quetiapine and potential targets. RESULTS: Targets for quetiapine actions against bipolar depression (126 targets) and bipolar mania (81 targets) were identified. Based on PPI and KEGG pathway analyses, quetiapine may affect bipolar depression by targeting the MAPK and PI3K/AKT insulin signaling pathways via BDNF, INS, EGFR, IGF1, and NGF, and it may affect bipolar mania by targeting the neuroactive ligand-receptor interaction signaling pathway via HTR1A, HTR1B, HTR2A, DRD2, and GRIN2B. Molecular docking revealed good binding affinity between quetiapine and potential targets. LIMITATIONS: Pharmacological experiments should be conducted to verify and further explore these results. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that quetiapine affects bipolar depression and bipolar mania through distinct biological core targets, and thus through different mechanisms. Furthermore, our results provide a theoretical basis for the clinical use of quetiapine and possible directions for new drug development.

Interventions for generalized anxiety disorder.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an overview of recently published work on anxiety, focusing on generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and its treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Self-reported anxiety symptoms were highly prevalent during the COVID-19 global pandemic in both the general population and in selected groups. There remains divided opinion about whether internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is noninferior to face-to-face CBT for GAD. A systematic review of drug treatment for GAD showed efficacy for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), agomelatine, and quetiapine. There may be a place for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of GAD. There was some evidence of efficacy for complementary therapies, including physical exercise, yoga, acupuncture, and Withania somnifera (ashwagandha). However, a systematic review of cannabidiol and tetrahydrocannabinol found insufficient evidence of efficacy in anxiety disorders. SUMMARY: Antidepressants and quetiapine show efficacy in the treatment of GAD. Internet-based psychological interventions have a place in the treatment of GAD when face-to-face treatment is inaccessible. There is increasing evidence for the use of physical exercise in the management of GAD. Some other complementary therapies, including cannabinoids, require further, methodologically sound, research.

The negative impact of vitamin D on antipsychotic drug exposure may counteract its potential benefits in schizophrenia.

AIMS: Patients with schizophrenia frequently show insufficient vitamin D levels, which are associated with somatic comorbidity and may contribute to psychopathology. For many reasons, vitamin D supplementation may be indicated for this patient cohort. However, there is growing evidence for a vitamin D-mediated increase of drug metabolism by induction of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Hence, this study aimed to assess vitamin D's impact on both antipsychotic drug concentrations and psychopathology in a non-interventional manner. METHODS: Totals of 107 serum concentrations of different antipsychotic drugs (amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone), 80 serum concentrations of vitamin D and psychopathological assessments were obtained from 80 patients with schizophrenia. The impact of Vitamin D on antipsychotic drug concentrations and symptomatology was assessed using a generalized linear model, path and correlation analyses. RESULTS: We observed a negative relationship between vitamin D and dose-adjusted antipsychotic drug concentrations, which was particularly pronounced for drugs which are predominantly metabolized via CYP3A4 (i.e., aripiprazole and quetiapine). A path analysis suggested a relieving effect of vitamin D on symptomatology which was, however, counteracted by its negative impact on antipsychotic drug levels. Finally, patients with vitamin D levels above the median exhibited a significantly higher proportion of therapeutically insufficient dose-normalized drug concentrations of aripiprazole and quetiapine. CONCLUSION: Despite vitamin D's potential benefits on physical and mental health, clinicians should be aware of its negative impact on blood concentrations of antipsychotics metabolized by CYP3A4 in patients with schizophrenia. Therefore, when considering its supplementation, therapeutic drug monitoring should be applied to guide dose adjustment.

Quetiapine treatment for cannabis use disorder.

BACKROUND: Pharmacotherapy for cannabis use disorder (CUD) is an important unmet public health need. METHODS: In a 12-week randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, the efficacy of quetiapine (300 mg nightly) for the treatment of CUD was tested in 130 outpatients. Weekly cannabis use was categorized into three groups: heavy use (5-7 days), moderate use (2-4 days) and light use (0-1 days). RESULTS: At baseline both groups were considered heavy users (using days per week: median = 7.0; interquartile range (IQR): 6.5-7.0; daily dollar value: median = $121.4; IQR: 73.8-206.3). The week-by-treatment interaction was marginally significant (χ2(2) = 5.56, P = .06). With each week, the odds of moderate compared to heavy use significantly increased in the quetiapine group (OR=1.17, P < .0001), but not significantly in the placebo group (OR=1.05, P = .16). The odds of light versus heavy use did not significantly differ over time (P = .12). Treatment was also associated with reduced cannabis withdrawal symptoms by 10.4% each week (95% CI: 8.9-11.8). No serious adverse events occurred during the study and no evidence of development of a movement disorder was detected. Adverse effects were not significantly different between the quetiapine and placebo treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: The use of quetiapine to treat CUD was associated with an increased likelihood of heavy frequency use transitioning to moderate use, but not light use. The clinical significance of reductions in cannabis use, short of abstinence warrants further study.

In a Model of Neuroinflammation Designed to Mimic Delirium, Quetiapine Reduces Cortisol Secretion and Preserves Reversal Learning in the Attentional Set Shifting Task.

Quetiapine, an atypical antipsychotic medication has lacked pre-clinical validation for its purported benefits in the treatment of delirium. This laboratory investigation examined the effects of quetiapine on the attentional set shifting task (ASST), a measure of cognitive flexibility and executive functioning, in a rodent model of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) mediated neuroinflammation. 19 Sprague Dawley female rats were randomly selected to receive intraperitoneal placebo (N = 5), LPS and placebo (N = 7) or LPS and quetiapine (n = 7) and performed the ASST. We measured trials to criterion, errors, non-locomotion episodes and latency to criterion, serum cortisol and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) levels. TNF-α levels were not different between groups at 24 h. Cortisol levels in the LPS + Quetiapine group were reduced compared to LPS + Placebo (P < 0.001) and did not differ from the placebo group (P = 0.15). Analysis between LPS + Quetiapine and LPS + Placebo treated rats demonstrated improvement in the compound discrimination reversal (CD Rev1) (P = 0.016) and the intra-dimensional reversal (ID Rev2) (P = 0.007) discriminations on trials to criterion. LPS + Quetiapine treated rats had fewer errors than LPS + Placebo treated animals in the compound discrimination (CD) (P = 0.007), CD Rev1 (P = 0.005), ID Rev2 (P < 0.001) discriminations. There was no difference in non-locomotion frequency or latency to criterion between the three groups in all discriminations (P > 0.0167). We demonstrated preserved reversal learning, no effect on attentional set shifting and normalized cortisol levels in quetiapine-treated rats in this neuroinflammatory model of delirium. This suggests that quetiapine's beneficial effects in delirium may be related to the preservation of reversal learning and potential downstream effects related to reduction in cortisol production. Graphical Abstract.

Pharmacotherapies for co-occurring substance use and bipolar disorders: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Substance use disorders (SUDs), including those for alcohol, stimulants, tobacco, opioids and cannabis, in patients with bipolar disorder are a major clinical and public health problem, and are present in the majority of these patients. Nonetheless, the development of effective pharmacological treatments for co-occurring SUDs in bipolar illness have not been well-developed and may be an important practical reason for the reduced effectiveness of these medications in community practice. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar), and identified N = 29 clinical studies, which evaluated both mental health and SUD outcomes in patients with co-occurring bipolar disorders and SUDs. RESULTS: Our findings suggest the potential of valproate sodium and lamotrigine as preferred pharmacological agents for the treatment of co-occurring psychiatric and substance use outcomes in these patients. However, many of the reviewed studies are of open-label designs and of modest sample sizes. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, given the gaps in our knowledge, recommendations for treatment of this common and important co-morbidity are preliminary. Accordingly, the conduct of larger, randomized controlled trials for this co-morbidity is clearly needed.

Doble resultado falso en el cribado de drogas en una intoxicación accidental / Double false result in a drug screen after accidental pediatric poisoning

No disponible

Risperidone versus other antipsychotics for people with severe mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse.

BACKGROUND: Up to 75% of people with serious mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have co-occurring substance use disorders (dual diagnosis). Dual diagnosis can have an adverse effect on treatment and prognosis of SMI. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of risperidone compared to treatment with other antipsychotics (first-generation and other second-generation antipsychotics) used in people with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse. SEARCH METHODS: On 6 January 2016 and 9 October 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (including trial registers). SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised trials of risperidone versus any other antipsychotic in people with SMI and substance abuse (dual diagnosis). We included trials meeting our inclusion criteria and reporting useable data. We excluded trials that either did not meet our inclusion criteria or met our inclusion criteria but did not report any useable data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently inspected citations and selected studies. For included studies, we independently extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the quality of evidence, creating a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight randomised trials containing a total of 1073 participants with SMI and co-occurring substance misuse. Seven of these contributed useable data to the review. There was heterogeneity in trial design and measurement. Risperidone was compared to clozapine, olanzapine, perphenazine, quetiapine and ziprasidone. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents. Few trials examined participants with a dual diagnosis from the outset and most trials only contained separate analyses of subgroups with a dual diagnosis or were secondary data analyses of subgroups of people with a dual diagnosis from existing larger trials.For risperidone versus clozapine we found no clear differences between these two antipsychotics in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), n = 36, mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% CI -2.21 to 4.01, very low quality evidence), or reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 14, risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.35, very low quality evidence), improvement in subjective well-being (1 RCT, n = 36, MD -6.00, 95% CI -14.82 to 2.82, very low quality evidence), numbers discontinuing medication (1 RCT, n = 36, RR 4.05, 95% CI 0.21 to 78.76, very low quality evidence), extrapyramidal side-effects (2 RCTs, n = 50, RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.30 to 24.08; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCTs, n = 45, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.51; I² = 34%, very low quality evidence). Clozapine was associated with lower levels of craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 28, MD 7.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 11.63, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus olanzapine we found no clear differences in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 RCT, n = 37, MD -1.50, 95% CI -3.82 to 0.82, very low quality evidence), reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 0.40, 95% CI -4.72 to 5.52, very low quality evidence), craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 5.00, 95% CI -4.86 to 14.86, very low quality evidence), parkinsonism (1 RCT, n = 16, MD -0.08, 95% CI -1.21 to 1.05, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCT, n = 77, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.35; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus perphenazine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 281, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus quetiapine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 294, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus ziprasidone, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 240, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10, low-quality evidence).For many comparisons, important outcomes were missing; and no data were reported in any study for metabolic disturbances, global impression of illness severity, quality of life or mortality. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is not sufficient good-quality evidence available to determine the effects of risperidone compared with other antipsychotics in people with a dual diagnosis. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents, leading to limited applicability to settings where access to second-generation agents is limited, such as in low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, heterogeneity in trial design and measurement of outcomes precluded the use of many trials in our analyses. Future trials in this area need to be sufficiently powered but also need to conform to consistent methods in study population selection, use of measurement scales, definition of outcomes, and measures to counter risk of bias. Investigators should adhere to CONSORT guidelines in the reporting of results.

The preclinical discovery and development of quetiapine for the treatment of mania and depression.

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder is a chronic disabling condition characterized by alternating manic and depressive episodes. Bipolar disorder has been associated with functional impairment, poor quality of life, morbidity and mortality. Despite its significant clinical, social and economic burden, treatment options for bipolar disorder are still limited. Several clinical trials have shown efficacy of the atypical antipsychotic quetiapine (QTP) in the treatment of this condition. However, the mechanisms underlying the antidepressant and anti-manic effects of QTP remain poorly understood. Areas covered: The article provides the emerging evidence from pre-clinical studies regarding the antidepressant and anti-manic mechanisms of action of QTP. In combination with its primary active metabolite norquetiapine, QTP modulates several neurotransmitter systems, including serotonin, dopamine, noradrenaline and histamine. QTP also seems to influence mediators of the immune system. Expert opinion: Pre-clinical studies have provided valuable information on the potential antidepressant mechanisms of action of QTP, but pre-clinical studies on QTP's anti-manic effects are still scarce. A major problem refers to the lack of valid experimental models for bipolar disorder. Additionally, immune and genetic based studies are largely descriptive. The role of the QTP metabolite norquetiapine in modulating non-neurotransmitter systems also needs to be further addressed.

Analgesic effect of quetiapine in a mouse model of cancer-induced bone pain.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Cancer-induced bone pain (CIBP) is one of the most common pains in patients with advanced neoplasms. Because of treatment-associated side effects, more than half of cancer patients are reported to have inadequate and undermanaged pain control. New mechanism-based therapies must be developed to reduce cancer pain. Quetiapine is a commonly used atypical antipsychotic drug. We report a study of the potential analgesic effects of quetiapine in a mouse model of CIBP and examine the mechanism of bone pain by analyzing the expression of various nociceptors. METHODS: Fifteen male C3H/HeN mice were arbitrarily divided into five groups: control and, CIBP with no treatment, quetiapine treatment, opioid treatment, and melatonin treatment. The mice were tested for mechanical hyperalgesia by determining the nociceptive hind paw withdrawal pressure threshold. Tissues from tibia were removed and subjected to quantitative and qualitative evaluations of transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1), TRPV4, acid-sensing ion channel 1 (ASIC1), ASIC2, and ASIC3 expression. RESULTS: Paw withdrawal pressure threshold was improved in the quetiapine treatment group compared with the CIBP group. Expression of TRPV1, TRPV4, ASIC1, ASIC2, and ASIC3 in the CIBP with quetiapine treatment group was significantly lower than that in the CIBP group. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest an analgesic effect of quetiapine in the CIBP animal model and implicate TRPV and ASICs as potential targets for cancer pain management.