Low-dose titrated amitriptyline as second-line treatment for adults with irritable bowel syndrome in primary care: the ATLANTIS RCT.

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome, characterised by abdominal pain and a change in stool form or frequency, is most often managed in primary care. When first-line therapies are ineffective, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines suggest considering low-dose tricyclic antidepressants as second-line treatment, but their effectiveness in primary care is unknown and they are infrequently prescribed by general practitioners. Objective: To evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of low-dose titrated amitriptyline as a second-line treatment for irritable bowel syndrome in primary care. Design: A pragmatic, randomised, multicentre, two-arm, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. A nested, qualitative study explored participant and general practitioner experiences of treatments and trial participation, and implications for wider use of amitriptyline for irritable bowel syndrome in primary care. Participants, clinicians, investigators and analysts were masked to allocation. Setting: Fifty-five general practices in three regions in England (Wessex, West of England, West Yorkshire). Participants: Patients aged ≥ 18 years meeting Rome IV criteria for irritable bowel syndrome with ongoing symptoms after trying first-line treatments and no contraindications to TCAs. Intervention: Amitriptyline 10 mg once-daily, self-titrated by participants to a maximum of 30 mg once-daily or matched placebo for 6 months. Participants randomised 1 : 1 with most having the option to continue blinded treatment for a further 6 months. Main outcome measures: The primary participant-reported outcome was the effect of amitriptyline on global irritable bowel syndrome symptoms at 6 months, measured using the irritable bowel syndrome Severity Scoring System, with a 35-point between-group difference defined as the minimum clinically important difference. The key secondary outcome was the proportion of participants reporting subjective global assessment of relief at 6 months, defined as somewhat, considerable, or complete relief of symptoms. Other secondary outcomes included: effect on global symptoms, via the irritable bowel syndrome Severity Scoring System, and subjective global assessment of relief of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms at 3 and 12 months; effect on somatic symptom-reporting at 6 months; anxiety an-d depression scores; ability to work and participate in other activities at 3, 6 and 12 months; acceptability, tolerability and adherence to trial medication. Results: Four hundred and sixty-three participants were randomised to amitriptyline (232) or placebo (231). An intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome showed a significant difference in favour of amitriptyline for irritable bowel syndrome Severity Scoring System score between arms at 6 months [-27.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) -46.9 to -7.10; p = 0.008]. For the key secondary outcome of subjective global assessment of relief of irritable bowel syndrome symptoms, amitriptyline was superior to placebo at 6 months (odds ratio 1.78, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.66; p = 0.005). Amitriptyline was superior to placebo across a range of other irritable bowel syndrome symptom measures but had no impact on somatoform symptom-reporting, anxiety, depression, or work and social adjustment scores. Adverse event trial withdrawals were more common with amitriptyline (12.9% vs. 8.7% for placebo) but most adverse events were mild. The qualitative study thematically analysed 77 semistructured interviews with 42 participants and 16 GPs. Most participants found the self-titration process acceptable and empowering. Conclusions: General practitioners should offer low-dose amitriptyline to patients with irritable bowel syndrome whose symptoms do not improve with first-line therapies. Guidance and resources should support GP-patient communication to distinguish amitriptyline for irritable bowel syndrome from use as an antidepressant and to support patients managing their own dose titration. Study registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN48075063. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 16/162/01) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment Vol. 28, No. 66. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

People with irritable bowel syndrome experience stomach (abdominal) pain and changes to their bowel movements. Irritable bowel syndrome can have a serious impact on people's lives. Previous small trials suggest that a drug called amitriptyline used at a low dose may help irritable bowel syndrome. Amitriptyline is already used to treat other conditions. It is available for irritable bowel syndrome but is not used much by general practitioners. We recruited adults aged ≥ 18 years with irritable bowel syndrome from UK general practices who did not have any issues preventing the use of amitriptyline. Patients received either low-dose amitriptyline or placebo (a dummy tablet) for 6 months. Patients could adjust the dose according to symptoms and side effects. Neither the researchers nor the patients knew which treatment they were getting. Participants recorded symptoms using a questionnaire containing an irritable bowel syndrome severity score. We looked at the difference in average irritable bowel syndrome severity score between patients receiving amitriptyline and placebo. We also looked at effects of amitriptyline on mood, ability to work, and non-gut symptoms related to irritable bowel syndrome, as well as safety and acceptability. Some patients and general practitioners were interviewed about their experiences. Four hundred and sixty-three patients took part. Participants receiving amitriptyline reported a bigger improvement in their irritable bowel syndrome severity scores at 6 months, compared with patients on placebo. Amitriptyline was better across a range of irritable bowel syndrome symptom measures but did not impact anxiety, depression or ability to work. Forty-six people (19.8%) stopped taking amitriptyline and 59 (25.5%) stopped the placebo before 6 months. Patients liked being able to adjust their dose and valued contact with the research team. This study showed that amitriptyline is more effective than a placebo and is safe. General practitioners should offer low-dose amitriptyline to people with irritable bowel syndrome if symptoms do not improve with other standard treatments. Patients should be supported and helped to adjust their dose as needed. The dose adjustment sheet used in this trial will be made available.

Mirtazapine to alleviate severe breathlessness in patients with COPD or interstitial lung diseases (BETTER-B): an international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 mixed-method trial.

BACKGROUND: Breathlessness frequently becomes severe among people with respiratory disease. Mirtazapine, a widely used antidepressant, has shown promise in the modulation of respiratory sensation and the response to it, as well as reducing feelings of panic, which often accompanies breathlessness. We aimed to determine the effectiveness of mirtazapine to alleviate severe persisting breathlessness. METHODS: This international, multicentre, phase 3, parallel-group, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial across 16 centres in seven countries (Australia, Germany, Ireland, Italy, New Zealand, Poland, and the UK), recruited adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung diseases, or both, and grade 3 or 4 of the modified Medical Research Council breathlessness scale. Consenting participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral mirtazapine or matching placebo for 56 days. Randomisation was by minimisation. The initial mirtazapine dose was 15 mg, escalating to a maximum of 45 mg per day, tapered at treatment end. Participants, caregivers, assessors, and investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was worst breathlessness in the preceding 24 h measured on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS), at 56 days post-treatment start, with follow-up to 180 days. The primary analysis was performed in the modified intention-to-treat population using multivariable multi-level repeated measures model. This trial was registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN10487976 and ISRCTN15751764 [Australia and New Zealand]) and EudraCT (2019-002001-21) and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4, 2021 and March 28, 2023, we enrolled 225 eligible participants (148 men and 77 women, 113 to the mirtazapine group and 112 to the placebo group). The median age was 74 years (IQR 67-78). No evidence of a difference was found in worst breathlessness at day 56 between mirtazapine and placebo (difference in adjusted mean NRS score was 0·105 [95% CI -0·407 to 0·618]; p=0·69). Although the study was underpowered, the primary endpoint effect did not reach the pre-specified treatment effect of 0·55 for worst breathlessness score reduction that the study was powered to detect for the primary analysis. There were 215 adverse reactions in 72 (64%) of 113 participants in the mirtazapine group versus 116 in 44 (40%) of 110 participants in the placebo group; 11 serious adverse events in six (5%) participants in the mirtazapine group versus eight in seven (6%) participants in the placebo group; and one (1%) suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction in the mirtazapine group. At day 56, there were three deaths in the mirtazapine group and two deaths in the placebo group. At day 180, there were seven deaths in the mirtazapine group and 11 deaths in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggested that mirtazapine of doses 15 to 45 mg daily over 56 days does not improve severe breathlessness among patients with COPD or interstitial lung diseases and might cause adverse reactions. Based on these findings, we do not recommend mirtazapine as a treatment to alleviate severe breathlessness. FUNDING: EU Horizon 2020 (grant agreement No. 825319); Cicely Saunders International Breathlessness Programme; National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration South London; Australian National Health and Medical Research Council-EU (application ID: APP1170731).

Potentiation of Imipramine-Induced Anti-hyperalgesic and Anti-Nociceptive Effects by Citicoline in the Sciatic Nerve Ligated Mice.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral neuropathic pain is a result of damage/illness of the peripheral nerves. The mechanisms caused by its pathophysiology are not completely understood. METHODS: Imipramine is a tricyclic antidepressant that is sometimes used to treat neuropathic pain. Moreover, citicoline is considered a novel adjuvant for painful disorders such as neuropathic pain. So, a possible interaction between imipramine and citicoline on pain behavior was examined in nerve-ligated mice using tail-flick and hot plate tests. RESULTS: The results indicated that induction of neuropathic pain by sciatic nerve ligation caused hyperalgesia in nerve-ligated mice. On the other hand, intraperitoneal (i.p.) administration of citicoline (50, 75, and 100 mg/kg), and imipramine (2.5 and 5 mg/kg) induced anti-hyperalgesic and anti-nociceptive effects in nerve-ligated mice. Furthermore, citicoline potentiated the anti-hyperalgesic and anti-nociceptive effects of imipramine when they were co-administrated in nerve-ligated mice. Interestingly, there was an additive effect between imipramine and citicoline upon induction of anti-hyperalgesic and anti-nociceptive effects in nerve-ligated mice. CONCLUSION: Therefore, it can be concluded that citicoline (as an adjuvant substance) enhanced the efficacy of imipramine for the modulation of pain behavior in nerve-ligated mice.

Advancing toward precision migraine treatment: Predicting responses to preventive medications with machine learning models based on patient and migraine features.

OBJECTIVE: To develop machine learning models using patient and migraine features that can predict treatment responses to commonly used migraine preventive medications. BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no accurate way to predict response to migraine preventive medications, and the standard trial-and-error approach is inefficient. METHODS: In this cohort study, we analyzed data from the Mayo Clinic Headache database prospectively collected from 2001 to December 2023. Adult patients with migraine completed questionnaires during their initial headache consultation to record detailed clinical features and then at each follow-up to track preventive medication changes and monthly headache days. We included patients treated with at least one of the following migraine preventive medications: topiramate, beta-blockers (propranolol, metoprolol, atenolol, nadolol, timolol), tricyclic antidepressants (amitriptyline, nortriptyline), verapamil, gabapentin, onabotulinumtoxinA, and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) (erenumab, fremanezumab, galcanezumab, eptinezumab). We pre-trained a deep neural network, "TabNet," using 145 variables, then employed TabNet-embedded data to construct prediction models for each medication to predict binary outcomes (responder vs. non-responder). A treatment responder was defined as having at least a 30% reduction in monthly headache days from baseline. All model performances were evaluated, and metrics were reported in the held-out test set (train 85%, test 15%). SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were conducted to determine variable importance. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 4260 patients. The responder rate for each medication ranged from 28.7% to 34.9%, and the mean time to treatment outcome for each medication ranged from 151.3 to 209.5 days. The CGRP mAb prediction model achieved a high area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.825 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.726, 0.920) and an accuracy of 0.80 (95% CI 0.70, 0.88). The AUCs of prediction models for beta-blockers, tricyclic antidepressants, topiramate, verapamil, gabapentin, and onabotulinumtoxinA were: 0.664 (95% CI 0.579, 0.745), 0.611 (95% CI 0.562, 0.682), 0.605 (95% CI 0.520, 0.688), 0.673 (95% CI 0.569, 0.724), 0.628 (0.533, 0.661), and 0.581 (95% CI 0.550, 0.632), respectively. Baseline monthly headache days, age, body mass index (BMI), duration of migraine attacks, responses to previous medication trials, cranial autonomic symptoms, family history of headache, and migraine attack triggers were among the most important variables across all models. A variable could have different contributions; for example, lower BMI predicts responsiveness to CGRP mAbs and beta-blockers, while higher BMI predicts responsiveness to onabotulinumtoxinA, topiramate, and gabapentin. CONCLUSION: We developed an accurate prediction model for CGRP mAbs treatment response, leveraging detailed migraine features gathered from a headache questionnaire before starting treatment. Employing the same methods, the model performances for other medications were less impressive, though similar to the machine learning models reported in the literature for other diseases. This may be due to CGRP mAbs being migraine-specific. Incorporating medical comorbidities, genomic, and imaging factors might enhance the model performance. We demonstrated that migraine characteristics are important in predicting treatment responses and identified the most crucial predictors for each of the seven types of preventive medications. Our results suggest that precision migraine treatment is feasible.

Beneficial and harmful effects of tricyclic antidepressants for adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

QUESTION: Tricyclic antidepressants are used to treat depression worldwide, but the adverse effects have not been systematically assessed. Our objective was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of all tricyclic antidepressants for adults with major depressive disorder. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and other sources from inception to January 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing tricyclic antidepressants versus placebo or 'active placebo' for adults with major depressive disorder. The primary outcomes were depressive symptoms measured on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17), serious adverse events and quality of life. The minimal important difference was defined as three points on the HDRS-17. FINDINGS: We included 103 trials randomising 10 590 participants. All results were at high risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence was very low or low. All trials only assessed outcomes at the end of the treatment period at a maximum of 12 weeks after randomisation. Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis showed evidence of a beneficial effect of tricyclic antidepressants compared with placebo (mean difference -3.77 HDRS-17 points; 95% CI -5.91 to -1.63; 17 trials). Meta-analysis showed evidence of a harmful effect of tricyclic antidepressants compared with placebo on serious adverse events (OR 2.78; 95% CI 2.18 to 3.55; 35 trials), but the required information size was not reached. Only 2 out of 103 trials reported on quality of life and t-tests showed no evidence of a difference. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term effects of tricyclic antidepressants and the effects on quality of life are unknown. Short-term results suggest that tricyclic antidepressants may reduce depressive symptoms while also increasing the risks of serious adverse events, but these results were based on low and very low certainty evidence. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021226161.

Therapeutic Effects, Side Effects, and Adverse Effects of Neuropsychiatric Drugs in the Context of Treating Cancer-Related Anorexia With Olanzapine and Mirtazapine.

Drugs have actions that may be classified as therapeutic effects and side effects; side effects are actions that do not contribute to therapeutic benefit. Some side effects are neutral; others, experienced as undesirable or unpleasant, are recorded as adverse effects. Some drug actions are therapeutic for some disorders and adverse for others; or therapeutic during acute illness and adverse during maintenance treatment. As an example, anticholinergic action may be adverse when a tricyclic antidepressant is used to treat depression but therapeutic when the drug is used to treat irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea. In clinical practice, side or adverse effects of a drug may be leveraged to manage troublesome symptoms. As an example, the sedative effect of a low dose of trazodone may be useful for some patients with insomnia. With this background, studies have examined whether the increase in appetite and weight associated with olanzapine and mirtazapine may be effective against anorexia and cachexia associated with cancer and cancer chemotherapy. The subject is important because cachexia may be present in 30%-50% of patients with cancer (with higher prevalence in patients with more advanced cancer) and because the presence of cachexia is associated with a higher risk of disease progression and mortality. Many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined pharmacologic interventions such as progestins, corticosteroids, anamorelin, and medical cannabis for cancer related cachexia; most results have been disappointing. A recent RCT found that olanzapine (2.5 mg/d for 12 weeks) improved appetite, weight, other nutritional parameters, and quality of life in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer treated with chemotherapy. Another RCT, however, found that mirtazapine (30 mg/d for 8 weeks) brought no nutritional or anthropometric gain in patients with cancer and anorexia. It is concluded that olanzapine but not mirtazapine merits further investigation in patients with cancer who have anorexia and cachexia.

A phase 3 randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of mirtazapine as a pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder: a study protocol for the Tina Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are no approved pharmacotherapies for methamphetamine use disorder. Two preliminary phase 2 randomised controlled trials have found mirtazapine, a tetracyclic antidepressant, to be effective in reducing methamphetamine use. The proposed Tina Trial is the first phase 3 placebo-controlled randomised trial to examine the effectiveness and safety of mirtazapine as an outpatient pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder. METHODS: This is a multi-site phase 3 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel trial. Participants are randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either mirtazapine (30 mg/day for 12 weeks) or matched placebo, delivered as a take-home medication. The target population is 340 people aged 18-65 years who have moderate to severe methamphetamine use disorder. The trial is being conducted through outpatient alcohol and other drug treatment clinics in Australia. The primary outcome is measured as self-reported days of methamphetamine use in the past 4 weeks at week 12. Secondary outcomes are methamphetamine-negative oral fluid samples, depressive symptoms, sleep quality, HIV risk behaviour and quality of life. Other outcomes include safety (adverse events), tolerability, and health service use. Medication adherence is being monitored using MEMS® Smart Caps fitted to medication bottles. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide information on the safety and effectiveness of mirtazapine as a pharmacotherapy for methamphetamine use disorder when delivered as an outpatient medication in routine clinical practice. If found to be safe and effective, this trial will support an application for methamphetamine use disorder to be included as a therapeutic indication for the prescription of mirtazapine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000235707. Registered on February 9, 2022.

Evaluation of tricyclic antidepressant deprescribing in the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy within federally qualified health centers.

BACKGROUND: Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are a treatment option for diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Existing evidence demonstrates the prolonged use of TCA therapy increases the risk of cognitive decline and dementia, likely due to the anticholinergic effects of these medications. Anticholinergic activity is thought to contribute significantly to the observed increase in cognitive decline and dementia risks associated with long-term TCA use. There is little information available to describe the usage patterns of TCAs in DPN, particularly within underserved populations who receive care at federally qualified health centers. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to characterize (1) prescribing patterns of TCAs as a treatment for DPN and (2) evidence of deprescribing attempts in an FQHC population. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of electronic medical record data for patients at 2 different FQHCs was performed. A convenience sample of 100 adults ≥ 18 years of age was stratified into 2 age groups, 18-55 years and 55+ years. All patients had a diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus and had been prescribed TCAs in the previous 4 years and had a visit with a primary care provider in the past 12 months. RESULTS: The study population was comprised of 100 individuals. Seventy-four of 100 were persistent users of TCAs at the time of data collection, and the mean duration of utilization was 54.8 months. In total, 104 TCAs were prescribed across 100 individual patients. Of all 104 prescribed TCAs, 66 (63%) were prescribed at a rate that exceeded thresholds associated with a higher risk of dementia. Black older adults prescribed TCAs were more likely to exceed this dose threshold. CONCLUSION: Sixty-five percent of patients used TCAs with a strength, frequency, and duration that exceeded risk thresholds for dementia in an older adult population. Interventions preventing use of or deprescribing TCAs in patients with DPN should be conducted for the potential benefits of preventing or delaying cognitive impairment and promoting equitable care.

Functional Dyspepsia and Tricyclic Antidepressant Use in a Naval Flight Officer.

BACKGROUND: Functional dyspepsia is a disorder of gut-brain interaction that has the potential to impact aviation performance. Proton pump inhibitors are well-tolerated but are only effective in one half of cases. Second-line treatments, including tricyclic antidepressants, are associated with drowsiness and are not routinely approved for use in aviators. We present a case of a Naval Flight Officer with functional dyspepsia who was successfully treated with amitriptyline and returned to flying status.CASE REPORT: A 23-yr-old male Naval Flight Officer presented with postprandial fullness and epigastric pain. His symptoms were refractory to trials of acid suppression and lifestyle modification. An extensive evaluation by Gastroenterology, including upper endoscopy, did not reveal an organic cause of his symptoms and he was diagnosed with functional dyspepsia. The patient's symptoms resolved with a trial of amitriptyline. Neuropsychological testing demonstrated no medication effect on cognitive performance. A waiver to resume flying duties on amitriptyline was submitted to the Naval Aerospace Medical Institute and was approved.DISCUSSION: We present the second known waiver issued in U.S. Naval aviation history for the use of amitriptyline to treat a gastrointestinal disorder. Amitriptyline is not commonly waived due to the potential for unacceptable cognitive side-effects in the flight environment. However, neuropsychological testing to assess for a possible medication effect on performance can be used to inform an aeromedical disposition and, in this case, allowed for a return to flight status.Crutcher R, Kolasinski N. Functional dyspepsia and tricyclic antidepressant use in a naval flight officer. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(6):337-340.

Irritable bowel syndrome: low dose antidepressant improves symptoms.

The studyFord AC, Wright-Hughes A, Alderson SL, et al. Amitriptyline at low-dose and titrated for irritable bowel syndrome as second-line treatment in primary care (ATLANTIS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 2023;402:1773-85.To read the full NIHR Alert, go to: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/irritable-bowel-syndrome-low-dose-antidepressant-improves-symptoms/.

Use of antidepressants in the treatment of chronic orofacial pain caused by temporomandibular disorders: A randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are a common pathology, associated with pain in the facial territory and with associated psychological disorders, such as anxiety and depression. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of antidepressants in the treatment of pain associated with TMD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty four patients suffering from chronic orofacial pain, randomly distributed in 3 groups: control group treated with night splint, group treated with 10mg/day of citalopram and group treated with 25mg/day of amitriptyline. Pain intensity was assessed, randomly, by a single blinded evaluator, according to the VAS at baseline and after one, three, six and nine weeks. RESULTS: All groups showed a reduction of pain throughout the period of time evaluated, however, the group treated with amitriptyline showed the best pain reduction results 3.3±1.5, 1.5±1.4 and 0.9±1.3 at 3, 6 and 9 weeks, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Low doses of amitriptyline appear to be a good therapeutic option in patients with TMDs suffering from chronic orofacial pain.

Central Neuromodulators in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Why, How, and When.

Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is responsive to treatments using central neuromodulators. Central neuromodulators work by enhancing the synaptic transmission of 5-hydroxytryptamine, noradrenalin, and dopamine, achieving a slower regulation or desensitization of their postsynaptic receptors. Central neuromodulators act on receptors along the brain-gut axis, so they are useful in treating psychiatric comorbidities, modifying gut motility, improving central downregulation of visceral signals, and enhancing neurogenesis in patients with IBS. Choosing a central neuromodulator for treating IBS should be according to the pharmacological properties and predominant symptoms. The first-line treatment for pain management in IBS is using tricyclic antidepressants. An alternative for pain management is the serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are useful when symptoms of anxiety and hypervigilance are dominant but are not helpful for treating abdominal pain. The predominant bowel habit is helpful when choosing a neuromodulator to treat IBS; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors help constipation, not pain, but may cause diarrhea; tricyclic antidepressants help diarrhea but may cause constipation. A clinical response may occur in 6-8 weeks, but long-term treatment (usually 6-12 months) is required after the initial response to prevent relapse. Augmentation therapy may be beneficial when the therapeutic effect of the first agent is incomplete or associated with side effects. It is recommended to reduce the dose of the first agent and add a second complementary treatment. This may include an atypical antipsychotic or brain-gut behavioral treatment. When tapering central neuromodulators, the dose should be reduced slowly over 4 weeks but may take longer when discontinuation effects occur.

An Overview of Degradation Strategies for Amitriptyline.

Antidepressant drugs play a crucial role in the treatment of mental health disorders, but their efficacy and safety can be compromised by drug degradation. Recent reports point to several drugs found in concentrations ranging from the limit of detection (LOD) to hundreds of ng/L in wastewater plants around the globe; hence, antidepressants can be considered emerging pollutants with potential consequences for human health and wellbeing. Understanding and implementing effective degradation strategies are essential not only to ensure the stability and potency of these medications but also for their safe disposal in line with current environment remediation goals. This review provides an overview of degradation pathways for amitriptyline, a typical tricyclic antidepressant drug, by exploring chemical routes such as oxidation, hydrolysis, and photodegradation. Connex issues such as stability-enhancing approaches through formulation and packaging considerations, regulatory guidelines, and quality control measures are also briefly noted. Specific case studies of amitriptyline degradation pathways forecast the future perspectives and challenges in this field, helping researchers and pharmaceutical manufacturers to provide guidelines for the most effective degradation pathways employed for minimal environmental impact.

Acupuncture versus tricyclic antidepressants in the prophylactic treatment of tension-type headaches: an indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acupuncture showed better improvement than sham acupuncture in reducing attack frequency of tension-type headache (TTH), but its effectiveness relative to first-line drugs for TTH is unknown, which impedes the recommendation of acupuncture for patients who are intolerant to drugs for TTH. We aimed to estimate the relative effectiveness between acupuncture and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) through indirect treatment comparison (ITC) meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library from database inception until April 13, 2023. Randomized controlled trials of TCAs or acupuncture in the prevention of TTH in adults were included. The primary outcome was headache frequency. The secondary outcomes were headache intensity, responder rate, and adverse event rate. Bayesian random-effect models were used to perform ITC meta-analysis, and confidence of evidence was evaluated by using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: A total of 34 trials involving 4426 participants were included. Acupuncture had similar effect with TCAs in decreasing TTH frequency (amitriptyline: mean difference [MD] -1.29, 95% CI -5.28 to 3.02; amitriptylinoxide: MD -0.05, 95% CI -6.86 to 7.06) and reducing TTH intensity (amitriptyline: MD 2.35, 95% CI -1.20 to 5.78; clomipramine: MD 1.83, 95% CI -4.23 to 8.20). Amitriptyline had a higher rate of adverse events than acupuncture (OR 4.73, 95% CI 1.42 to 14.23). CONCLUSION: Acupuncture had similar effect as TCAs in reducing headache frequency of TTH, and acupuncture had a lower adverse events rate than amitriptyline, as shown by very low certainty of evidence.

Antidepressant deprescribing: State of the art and recommendations-A literature overview.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, the consumption of antidepressants has arisen. However, deprescribing antidepressant therapy is very complicated. The aim of this study was to implement practical recommendations for the development of guidelines to be used for antidepressant deprescription in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature search has been conducted on March 13, 2023, using Scopus and PubMed databases. The following search string has been used: "antidepressants AND (deprescribing OR deprescription)". All studies reporting a deprescribing intervention for antidepressant medication, regardless of the study design, have been included. Studies that did not report antidepressant drug deprescription interventions and non-English-language papers have been excluded. RESULTS: From the literature search, a total of 230 articles have been extracted. Applying the exclusion criteria, 26 articles have been considered eligible. Most of the analyzed studies (16, 61%) have been carried out in the real world, 3 (11%) were RCTs, 5 (19%) were qualitative studies, in particular expert opinions, 1 (4%) was a literature review, and 1 (4%) was a post-trial observational follow-up of an RCT. In 8 out of 26 studies (31%), the analyzed antidepressants have been specified: 2 (8%) focused on anticholinergics, 2 (8%) on SSRIs, 3 (11%) on tricyclic antidepressants, and 1 (4%) on esketamine. Nineteen out of 26 studies (73%) did not stratify antidepressants by therapeutic class. The sample sizes analyzed in the studies ranged from a minimum of 4 patients to a maximum of 113,909, and 12 studies included geriatric age as an inclusion criterion. A patient's therapy review has been the main deprescribing intervention, and it has been identified in 14 (54%) articles. Interventions have been carried out by clinicians in 4 (15%) studies, general practitioners in 5 (19%) studies, nurses in 2 (8%) studies, pharmacists in 4 (15%) studies, multidisciplinary teams in 10 (38%) studies, and patients in 1 (4%) study. CONCLUSIONS: From the literature review, it emerged that there is no clear evidence useful to support clinicians in antidepressant deprescribing interventions.

Improved Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Profile of Deuterium-Reinforced Tricyclic Antidepressants Doxepin, Dosulepin, and Clomipramine in Animal Models.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Doxepin, dosulepin, and clomipramine are tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) that act as serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors. The metabolites formed by N-dealkylation of these tricyclic antidepressants contribute to overall poor pharmacokinetics and efficacy. Deuteration of the methyl groups at metabolically active sites has been reported to be a useful strategy for developing more selective and potent antidepressants. This isotopic deuteration can lead to better bioavailability and overall effectiveness. The objective is to study the effect of site-selective deuteration of TCAs on their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile by comparison with their nondeuterated counterparts. METHODS: In the current study, the pharmacokinetic profile and antidepressant behavior of deuterated TCAs were evaluated using the forced swim test (FST) and tail suspension test (TST), using male Wistar rats and male Swiss albino mice, respectively; additionally, a synaptosomal reuptake study was carried out. RESULTS: Compared with the nondeuterated parent drugs, deuterated forms showed improved efficacy in the behavior paradigm, indicating improved pharmacological activity. The pharmacokinetic parameters indicated increased maximum concentration in the plasma (Cmax), elimination half-life (t1/2), and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)  in deuterated compounds. This can have a positive clinical impact on antidepressant treatment. Synaptosomal reuptake studies indicated marked inhibition of the reuptake mechanism of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine. CONCLUSIONS: Deuterated TCAs can prove to be potentially better molecules in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders as compared with nondeuterated compounds. In addition, we have demonstrated a concept that metabolically active, site-selective deuteration can be beneficial for improving the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of TCAs. A further toxicological study of these compounds is needed to validate their future clinical use.

Pharmacological treatments in panic disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, churning stomach, faintness and breathlessness. Other recognised panic attack symptoms involve fearful cognitions, such as the fear of collapse, going mad or dying, and derealisation (the sensation that the world is unreal). Panic disorder is common in the general population with a prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants and benzodiazepines. OBJECTIVES: To compare, via network meta-analysis, individual drugs (antidepressants and benzodiazepines) or placebo in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. To rank individual active drugs for panic disorder (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To rank drug classes for panic disorder (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), mono-amine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and benzodiazepines (BDZs) and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To explore heterogeneity and inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, CENTRAL, CDSR, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and PsycINFO to 26 May 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people aged 18 years or older of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. We included trials that compared the effectiveness of antidepressants and benzodiazepines with each other or with a placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data and continuous data as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD): response to treatment (i.e. substantial improvement from baseline as defined by the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), total number of dropouts due to any reason (as a proxy measure of treatment acceptability: dichotomous outcome), remission (i.e. satisfactory end state as defined by global judgement of the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), panic symptom scales and global judgement (continuous outcome), frequency of panic attacks (as recorded, for example, by a panic diary; continuous outcome), agoraphobia (dichotomous outcome). We assessed the certainty of evidence using threshold analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, we included 70 trials in this review. Sample sizes ranged between 5 and 445 participants in each arm, and the total sample size per study ranged from 10 to 1168. Thirty-five studies included sample sizes of over 100 participants. There is evidence from 48 RCTs (N = 10,118) that most medications are more effective in the response outcome than placebo. In particular, diazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, paroxetine, venlafaxine, clomipramine, fluoxetine and adinazolam showed the strongest effect, with diazepam, alprazolam and clonazepam ranking as the most effective. We found heterogeneity in most of the comparisons, but our threshold analyses suggest that this is unlikely to impact the findings of the network meta-analysis. Results from 64 RCTs (N = 12,310) suggest that most medications are associated with either a reduced or similar risk of dropouts to placebo. Alprazolam and diazepam were associated with a lower dropout rate compared to placebo and were ranked as the most tolerated of all the medications examined. Thirty-two RCTs (N = 8569) were included in the remission outcome. Most medications were more effective than placebo, namely desipramine, fluoxetine, clonazepam, diazepam, fluvoxamine, imipramine, venlafaxine and paroxetine, and their effects were clinically meaningful. Amongst these medications, desipramine and alprazolam were ranked highest. Thirty-five RCTs (N = 8826) are included in the continuous outcome reduction in panic scale scores. Brofaromine, clonazepam and reboxetine had the strongest reductions in panic symptoms compared to placebo, but results were based on either one trial or very small trials. Forty-one RCTs (N = 7853) are included in the frequency of panic attack outcome. Only clonazepam and alprazolam showed a strong reduction in the frequency of panic attacks compared to placebo, and were ranked highest. Twenty-six RCTs (N = 7044) provided data for agoraphobia. The strongest reductions in agoraphobia symptoms were found for citalopram, reboxetine, escitalopram, clomipramine and diazepam, compared to placebo. For the pooled intervention classes, we examined the two primary outcomes (response and dropout). The classes of medication were: SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs. For the response outcome, all classes of medications examined were more effective than placebo. TCAs as a class ranked as the most effective, followed by BDZs and MAOIs. SSRIs as a class ranked fifth on average, while SNRIs were ranked lowest. When we compared classes of medication with each other for the response outcome, we found no difference between classes. Comparisons between MAOIs and TCAs and between BDZs and TCAs also suggested no differences between these medications, but the results were imprecise. For the dropout outcome, BDZs were the only class associated with a lower dropout compared to placebo and were ranked first in terms of tolerability. The other classes did not show any difference in dropouts compared to placebo. In terms of ranking, TCAs are on average second to BDZs, followed by SNRIs, then by SSRIs and lastly by MAOIs. BDZs were associated with lower dropout rates compared to SSRIs, SNRIs and TCAs. The quality of the studies comparing antidepressants with placebo was moderate, while the quality of the studies comparing BDZs with placebo and antidepressants was low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In terms of efficacy, SSRIs, SNRIs (venlafaxine), TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs may be effective, with little difference between classes. However, it is important to note that the reliability of these findings may be limited due to the overall low quality of the studies, with all having unclear or high risk of bias across multiple domains. Within classes, some differences emerged. For example, amongst the SSRIs paroxetine and fluoxetine seem to have stronger evidence of efficacy than sertraline. Benzodiazepines appear to have a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability (incidence of dropouts) over other classes.

Chronic Pain Syndromes: Chronic Neuropathic Pain.

Neuropathic pain affects 7% to 10% of the population and has major effects on quality of life. It is defined as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system and may be central or peripheral. Diagnostic testing may yield inconclusive or inconsistent results, so physicians often rely on clinical judgment based on the history and physical examination findings. Questionnaires and scoring systems can aid in diagnosis. Neuropathic pain is differentiated from other types of chronic pain by abnormal sensory symptoms, such as shooting pain, burning pain, or numbness. It is difficult to manage and can be accompanied by mood and sleep disturbances. Referral for psychotherapy may be useful for these patients. Nonpharmacotherapy options include mindfulness training, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and massage. Acupuncture also may be effective, but the data are mixed. Topical drugs (eg, lidocaine, capsaicin), gabapentinoids, tricyclic antidepressants, and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors are considered first-line drugs. Tramadol is considered a second-line drug, but may considered first-line for certain patients. For persistent pain, physicians can consider referring patients to a pain specialist for nerve blocks or other procedural interventions. Opioids may be considered for refractory pain, but their additional benefit has been shown to be modest compared with those of other treatments.

Tianeptine promotes lasting antiallodynic effects in a mouse model of neuropathic pain.

Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), such as desipramine (DMI), are effective at managing neuropathic pain symptoms but often take several weeks to become effective and also lead to considerable side effects. Tianeptine (TIAN) is an atypical antidepressant that activates the mu-opioid receptor but does not produce analgesic tolerance or withdrawal in mice, nor euphoria in humans, at clinically-relevant doses. Here, we evaluate the efficacy of TIAN at persistently alleviating mechanical allodynia in the spared nerve injury (SNI) model of neuropathic pain, even well after drug clearance. After finding an accelerated onset of antiallodynic action compared to DMI, we used genetically modified mice to gain insight into RGS protein-associated pathways that modulate the efficacy of TIAN relative to DMI in models of neuropathic pain. Because we observed similar behavioral responses to both TIAN and DMI treatment in RGS4, RGSz1, and RGS9 knockout mice, we performed RNA sequencing on the NAc of TIAN- and DMI-treated mice after prolonged SNI to further clarify potential mechanisms underlying TIANs faster therapeutic actions. Our bioinformatic analysis revealed distinct transcriptomic signatures between the two drugs, with TIAN more directly reversing SNI-induced differentially expressed genes, and further predicted several upstream regulators that may be implicated in onset of action. This new understanding of the molecular pathways underlying TIAN action may enable the development of novel and more efficacious pharmacological approaches for the management of neuropathic pain.