Neurobiological mechanisms of ECT and TMS treatment in depression: study protocol of a multimodal magnetic resonance investigation.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive neurostimulation treatments are increasingly being used to treat major depression, which is a common cause of disability worldwide. While electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) are both effective in treating depressive episodes, their mechanisms of action are, however, not completely understood. ECT is given under general anesthesia, where an electrical pulse is administered through electrodes placed on the patient's head to trigger a seizure. ECT is used for the most severe cases of depression and is usually not prescribed before other options have failed. With TMS, brain stimulation is achieved through rapidly changing magnetic fields that induce electric currents underneath a ferromagnetic coil. Its efficacy in depressive episodes has been well documented. This project aims to identify the neurobiological underpinnings of both the effects and side effects of the neurostimulation techniques ECT and TMS. METHODS: The study will utilize a pre-post case control longitudinal design. The sample will consist of 150 subjects: 100 patients (bipolar and major depressive disorder) who are treated with either ECT (N = 50) or TMS (N = 50) and matched healthy controls (N = 50) not receiving any treatment. All participants will undergo multimodal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as well as neuropsychological and clinical assessments at multiple time points before, during and after treatment. Arterial spin labeling MRI at baseline will be used to test whether brain perfusion can predict outcomes. Signs of brain disruption, potentiation and rewiring will be explored with resting-state functional MRI, magnetic resonance spectroscopy and multishell diffusion weighted imaging (DWI). Clinical outcome will be measured by clinician assessed and patient reported outcome measures. Memory-related side effects will be investigated, and specific tests of spatial navigation to test hippocampal function will be administered both before and after treatment. Blood samples will be stored in a biobank for future analyses. The observation time is 6 months. Data will be explored in light of the recently proposed disrupt, potentiate and rewire (DPR) hypothesis. DISCUSSION: The study will contribute data and novel analyses important for our understanding of neurostimulation as well as for the development of enhanced and more personalized treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05135897.

Does drug use affect the efficacy of amisulpride, aripiprazole and olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders? Results from a pragmatic, randomised study.

OBJECTIVES: Drug use is prevalent in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) but there is limited knowledge about the influence of drug use on the effectiveness of antipsychotic medication. This secondary explorative study compared the effectiveness of three antipsychotics in patients with SSD, with and without drug use. METHODS: The BeSt InTro multi-centre, head to head, rater-blinded randomised study compared amisulpride, aripiprazole and olanzapine over a 1-year follow-up period. All patients (n = 144) were aged ≥18 years and met the ICD-10 criteria for SSD (F20-29). Clinical symptoms were assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The primary outcome was reduction of a PANSS positive subscale score. RESULTS: At baseline, 38% of all patients reported drug use in the last 6 months before inclusion, with cannabis as the main drug (85%), followed by amphetamine-type stimulants (45%), sedatives (26%), hallucinogens (19%), cocaine (13%), opiates (4%), GHB (4%), solvents (4%), analgesics (4%) and anabolic steroids (2%). The predominant pattern was the use of several drugs. There were no significant overall differences in the PANSS positive subscale score reduction for the three studied antipsychotics among patients either with or without drug use. In the drug use group, older patients treated with amisulpride showed a greater PANSS positive subscale score reduction during the treatment period compared to younger patients. CONCLUSION: The current study showed that drug use does not appear to affect the overall effectiveness of amisulpride, aripiprazole and olanzapine in patients with SSD. However, amisulpride may be a particularly suitable choice for older patients with drug use.

Antidepressive Effectiveness of Amisulpride, Aripiprazole, and Olanzapine in Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: A Secondary Outcome Analysis of a Pragmatic, Randomized Trial (BeSt InTro).

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are frequent in schizophrenia and associated with a poorer outcome. Currently, the optimal treatment for depressive symptoms in schizophrenia remains undetermined. Amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine all have antidepressive pharmacodynamic properties, ranging from serotonergic affinities to limbic dopaminergic selectivity. Consequently, in a 12-month pragmatic, randomized clinical trial, we aimed to investigate differences in antidepressive effectiveness among amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine as a secondary outcome, measured by change in the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score in patients within the schizophrenia spectrum. METHODS: Psychotic patients within the schizophrenia spectrum were included, and effectiveness was analyzed with latent growth curve modeling. RESULTS: Of the 144 patients, 51 (35%) were women, the mean age was 31.7 (SD 12.7), and 39% were antipsychotic naive. At inclusion, 68 (47%) participants had a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score >6, indicating severe depressive symptoms. Across the 12-month follow-up, there was a depressive symptom reduction in all medication groups, but no statistically significant differences between the study drugs. Separate analyses of the subcohort with elevated depressive symptoms at inclusion also failed to find differences in depressive symptom reduction between study drugs. The reduction in depressive symptoms mainly occurred within 6 weeks after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: There was a reduction in depressive symptoms under treatment with amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine in acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder, but no differences between the drugs.

Association between C-reactive protein levels and antipsychotic treatment during 12 months follow-up period after acute psychosis.

BACKGROUND: A potential role of inflammatory pathways in the pathology of schizophrenia has been suggested for at least a subgroup of patients. Elevated levels of the inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP) have been observed, with associations to pathogenesis and symptoms. The current evidence regarding effects of antipsychotics on CRP levels is ambiguous. OBJECTIVES: To examine and compare the influence on CRP levels of three pharmacologically diverse new generation antipsychotics during a one-year follow-up in schizophrenia spectrum disorder. METHODS: In a multicenter, pragmatic and rater-blinded randomized trial, the effects of amisulpride, aripiprazole and olanzapine were compared in 128 patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder. All had positive symptoms of psychosis at study entry. Clinical and laboratory assessments including the measurement of CRP levels were conducted at baseline, and 1, 3, 6, 12, 26, 39, and 52 weeks thereafter. RESULTS: For all antipsychotic drugs analysed together, there was an increase in CRP levels during the one-year follow-up. Aripiprazole, as opposed to amisulpride and olanzapine, was associated with a reduced CRP level after one week, after which the CRP level caught up with the other drugs. Compared to those previously exposed to antipsychotic drugs, antipsychotic-naïve patients had lower CRP levels at all follow-up time points, but with the same temporal patterns of change. CONCLUSION: Treatment with amisulpride, aripiprazole and olanzapine showed different effects on CRP levels in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, modified by previous antipsychotics exposure status. This finding suggests that antipsychotic drugs may vary with respect to their influence on pro-inflammatory pathways. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01446328; URL: http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/.

The Influence of Substance Use on Side Effects of Olanzapine, Quetiapine, Risperidone, and Ziprasidone in Psychosis.

BACKGROUND: Side effects restrict the optimal use of antipsychotics. Little is known about the influence of substance use on side effects. The aim of this study was to compare antipsychotic side effects in patients with psychosis with and without substance use, while also taking medication history and diagnosis into consideration. METHODS: All patients (n = 226, mean age 34, females 33%) diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD; F20-F29) or other psychosis (F30-F32; F10-F19), were treated with olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone or ziprasidone, and were assessed at baseline, 4-weeks, 14-weeks, and 27-weeks. The UKU-Side Effects Self-Rating Scale version was used to evaluate the side effect profiles, and the information on substance use was based on the Clinician Drug Use Scale. RESULTS: At baseline, 30% of the patients used substances, 54% were diagnosed with SSD, and 47% were antipsychotic naïve. The occurrence of side effects in total was not different in patients with substance use compared to without after 4-weeks of treatment, nor in the follow-up period. At 4-weeks there were some group differences in relation to substance use, diagnosis, and medication history for single side effects. Patients with substance use showed more increased dream activity, less reduced salivation, and more gynecomastia. Patients with SSD showed less neurological side effects, orgasm dysfunction, and tension/inner unrest. The medication naïve patients showed increased hypokinesia/akinesia. CONCLUSION: Substance use alone does not influence the general magnitude of side effects of antipsychotic medication and does not indicate a different prescription practice in patients with psychosis and substance use.

Differential Effectiveness of Atypical Antipsychotics on Hallucinations: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most studies investigating antipsychotic effectiveness report either total psychopathology or symptom cluster findings. Studies focusing on a separate symptom, such as hallucinations, a hallmark symptom in schizophrenia, are scarce.Therefore, the current study aims to compare the antihallucinatory effectiveness of 3 pharmacologically different antipsychotics: olanzapine, amisulpride, and aripiprazole. METHODS: The present study is part of the Bergen-Stavanger-Innsbruck-Trondheim study, a 12-month prospective, randomized, pragmatic antipsychotic drug trial in active-phase schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The primary outcome of the present study was change of hallucinations as measured by item P3 (hallucinatory behavior) from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale in the subgroup with hallucinations at baseline. Primary analyses were intention to treat. RESULTS: A total of 144 participants were included in the study, where 105 (72%) had a score of 3 or more on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale P3 item at baseline, indicating the presence of hallucinations (HALL subgroup).In the HALL subgroup, a significantly less reduction of hallucinations was revealed for participants using olanzapine in weeks 12, 26, 39, and 52 when compared with amisulpride and in weeks 26 and 52 when compared with aripiprazole. In subanalyses for participants never exposed to antipsychotic drugs (antipsychotic-naive) and those who had used antipsychotics before entering the study, antihallucinatory differences were revealed only in the latter group. CONCLUSIONS: A differential antihallucinatory effect of the 3 study drugs was present. The inferior effect of olanzapine seems to be driven by the subgroup of participants exposed to antipsychotic treatment before entering the study.

Amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (BeSt InTro): a pragmatic, rater-blind, semi-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine are first-line atypical antipsychotics that have not previously been compared head-to-head in a pragmatic trial. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of these agents in a controlled trial. METHODS: This pragmatic, rater-blind, randomised controlled trial was done in three academic centres of psychiatry in Norway, and one in Austria. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (F20-29), and had symptoms of active psychosis. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive oral amisulpride, aripiprazole, or olanzapine. Treatment allocation was open to patients and staff, and starting dose, treatment changes, and adjustments were left to the discretion of the treating physician. Computer-generated randomisation lists for each study centre were prepared by independent statisticians. Patients were followed up for 52 weeks after random assignment, during which assessments were done 8 times by researchers masked to treatment. The primary outcome was reduction of the Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 52 weeks, and primary analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01446328. FINDINGS: Between Oct 20, 2011, and Dec 30, 2016, we assessed 359 patients for eligibility. 215 patients were excluded (107 did not meet inclusion criteria, 82 declined to participate, 26 other reasons). 144 patients (mean baseline PANSS total estimated score 78·4 [SD 1·4]) were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive amisulpride (44 patients), aripiprazole (48 patients) or olanzapine (52 patients). After 52 weeks, the patients allocated to amisulpride had a PANSS total score reduction of 32·7 points (SD 3·1) compared with 21·9 points reduction with aripiprazole (SD 3·9, p=0·027) and 23·3 points with olanzapine (2·9, p=0·025). We observed weight gain and increases of serum lipids and prolactin in all groups. 26 serious adverse events (SAEs) among 20 patients were registered (four [9%] of 44 patients allocated to amisulpride, ten [21%] of 48 patients allocated to aripiprazole, and six [12%] of 52 patients allocated to olanzapine), with no statistically significant differences between the study drugs. 17 (65%) of the 26 SAEs occurred during the use of the study drug, with readmission or protracted hospital admission accounting for 13 SAEs. One death by suicide, one unspecified death, and one life-threatening accident occurred during follow-up, after cessation of treatment. INTERPRETATION: Amisulpride was more efficacious than aripiprazole or olanzapine for reducing the PANSS total scores in adults with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Side-effect differences among the groups were generally small. This study supports the notion that clinically relevant efficacy differences exist between antipsychotic drugs. Future research should aim to compare first-line antipsychotics directly in pragmatic clinical trials that reflect everyday clinical practice. FUNDING: The Research Council of Norway, the Western Norway Regional Health Trust, and participating hospitals and universities.

The influence of substance use on the effectiveness of antipsychotic medication: a prospective, pragmatic study.

Background: Psychosis is associated with a high prevalence of substance use, leading to worsened prognosis. Less is known about how comorbid substance abuse may influence the effectiveness of antipsychotic medications. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of second generation antipsychotics in patients with psychosis with and without substance use. Methods: All patients (n = 226) were aged >18 years old had symptom level scores of ≥4 on selected psychosis items on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and met ICD-10 diagnostic criteria for psychosis. Information on substance use was collected based on the Clinician Drug Use Scale. Patients were grouped at baseline according to the presence of substance use, medication history and diagnosis group. Clinical symptoms at baseline and changes at follow-up were assessed with the PANSS. Results: At baseline about 30% of the patients used substances, most frequently cannabis followed by methamphetamine. About half (47%) of the patients had no prior exposure to antipsychotic medication at inclusion. Patients who had consumed substances showed no substantial differences in the PANSS score reduction as a result of antipsychotic medication compared to patients without substance. There were, however, some group differences in relation to pattern of change that were influenced by medication history. Substance use was found to be related to stronger reduction of positive symptoms from week 4 to week 27. Conclusion: Substance use alone did not influence antipsychotic effectiveness in this sample of patients with psychosis.