Regional differences in mortality risk and in attenuating or aggravating factors in schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

People with schizophrenia die prematurely, yet regional differences are unclear. PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review/random-effects meta-analysis of cohort studies assessing mortality relative risk (RR) versus any control group, and moderators, in people with ICD/DSM-defined schizophrenia, comparing countries and continents. We conducted subgroup, meta-regression analyses, and quality assessment. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were suicide-, /natural-cause- and other-cause-related mortality. We included 135 studies from Europe (n = 70), North-America (n = 29), Asia (n = 33), Oceania (n = 2), Africa (n = 1). In incident plus prevalent schizophrenia, differences across continents emerged for all-cause mortality (highest in Africa, RR=5.98, 95 %C.I.=4.09-8.74, k = 1, lowest in North-America, RR=2.14, 95 %C.I.=1.92-2.38, k = 16), suicide (highest in Oceania, RR=13.5, 95 %C.I.=10.08-18.07, k = 1, lowest in North-America, RR=4.4, 95 %C.I.=4.07-4.76, k = 6), but not for natural-cause mortality. Europe had the largest association between antipsychotics and lower all-cause mortality/suicide (Asia had the smallest or no significant association, respectively), without differences for natural-cause mortality. Higher country socio-demographic index significantly moderated larger suicide-related and smaller natural-cause-related mortality risk in incident schizophrenia, with reversed associations in prevalent schizophrenia. Antipsychotics had a larger/smaller protective association in incident/prevalent schizophrenia regarding all-cause mortality, and smaller protective association for suicide-related mortality in prevalent schizophrenia. Additional regional differences emerged in incident schizophrenia, across countries, and secondary outcomes. Significant regional differences emerged for all-cause, cause-specific and suicide-related mortality. Natural-cause death was homogeneously increased globally. Moderators differed across countries. Global initiatives are needed to improve physical health in people with schizophrenia, local studies to identify actionable moderators.

Residual effects of medications for sleep disorders on driving performance: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: NMA driving and hypnotics.

Sleep medications often carry residual effects potentially affecting driving safety, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA). PubMed/EMBASE/TRID/Clinicaltrials.gov/WHO-ICTRP/WebOfScience were inquired for randomized controlled trials of hypnotic driving studies in persons with insomnia and healthy subjects up to 05/28/2023, considering the vehicle's standard deviation of lateral position - SDLP (Standardized Mean Difference/SMD) and driving impairment rates on the first morning (co-primary outcomes) and endpoint. Risk-of-bias, global/local inconsistencies were measured, and CINeMA was used to assess the confidence in the evidence. Of 4,805 identified records, 26 cross-over RCTs were included in the systematic review, of which 22 entered the NMA, focusing on healthy subjects only. After a single administration, most molecules paralleled the placebo, outperforming zopiclone regarding SDLP. In contrast, ramelteon 8 mg, daridorexant 100 mg, zolpidem 10 mg bedtime, zolpidem middle-of-the-night 10 mg and 20 mg, mirtazapine 15-30 mg, and triazolam 0.5 mg performed significantly worse than placebo. Lemborexant 2.5-5 mg, suvorexant 15-20 mg, and zolpidem 3.5 mg middle-of-the-night associated with lower impairment than zopiclone. Repeated administration (maximum follow-up time of ten days) caused fewer residual effects than acute ones, except for flurazepam. Heterogeneity and inconsistency were negligible. Confidence in the evidence was low/very low. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main analyses. Most FDA-approved hypnotics overlapped placebo at in-label doses, outperforming zopiclone. Repeated administration for 15 days or less reduced residual effects, warranting further research on the matter.

Pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression. METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to Nov 23, 2023 for randomised controlled trials published in any language that assessed pharmacological treatments for individuals of any age with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode with psychotic features, in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in any setting. We excluded continuation or maintenance trials. We screened the study titles and abstracts identified, and we extracted data from relevant studies after full-text review. If full data were not available, we requested data from study authors twice. We analysed treatments for individual drugs (or drug combinations) and by grouping them on the basis of mechanisms of action. The primary outcomes were response rate (ie, the proportion of participants who responded to treatment) and acceptability (ie, the proportion who discontinued treatment for any reason). We calculated risk ratios and did separate frequentist network meta-analyses by using random-effects models. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the confidence in the evidence with the Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023392926. FINDINGS: Of 6313 reports identified, 16 randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and 14 were included in the network meta-analyses. The 16 trials included 1161 people with psychotic depression (mean age 50·5 years [SD 11·4]). 516 (44·4%) participants were female and 422 (36·3%) were male; sex data were not available for the other 223 (19·2%). 489 (42·1%) participants were White, 47 (4·0%) were African American, and 12 (1·0%) were Asian; race or ethnicity data were not available for the other 613 (52·8%). Only the combination of fluoxetine plus olanzapine was associated with a higher proportion of participants with a treatment response compared with placebo (risk ratio 1·91 [95% CI 1·27-2·85]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes compared with placebo. When treatments were grouped by mechanism of action, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a second-generation antipsychotic was associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses than was placebo (1·89 [1·17-3·04]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes. In head-to-head comparisons of active treatments, a significantly higher proportion of participants had a response to amitriptyline plus perphenazine (3·61 [1·23-10·56]) and amoxapine (3·14 [1·01-9·80]) than to perphenazine, and to fluoxetine plus olanzapine compared with olanzapine alone (1·60 [1·09-2·34]). Venlafaxine, venlafaxine plus quetiapine (2·25 [1·09-4·63]), and imipramine (1·95 [1·01-3·79]) were also associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses overall. In head-to-head comparisons grouped by mechanism of action, antipsychotic plus antidepressant combinations consistently outperformed monotherapies from either drug class in terms of the proportion of participants with treatment responses. Heterogeneity was low. No high-risk instances were identified in the bias assessment for our primary outcomes. INTERPRETATION: According to the available evidence, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a second-generation antipsychotic-and particularly of fluoxetine and olanzapine-could be the optimal treatment choice for psychotic depression. These findings should be taken into account in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, these conclusions should be interpreted cautiously in view of the low number of included studies and the limitations of these studies. FUNDING: None.

Nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals in the treatment of schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Sub-optimal response in schizophrenia is frequent, warranting augmentation strategies over treatment-as-usual (TAU). Methods: We assessed nutraceuticals/phytoceutical augmentation strategies via network meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials in schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder were identified via the following databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Change (Standardized Mean Difference=SMD) in total symptomatology and acceptability (Risk Ratio=RR) were co-primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were positive, negative, cognitive, and depressive symptom changes, general psychopathology, tolerability, and response rates. We conducted subset analyses by disease phase and sensitivity analyses by risk of bias and assessed global/local inconsistency, publication bias, risk of bias, and confidence in the evidence. Results: The systematic review included 49 records documenting 50 studies (n=2,384) documenting 22 interventions. Citicoline (SMD=-1.05,95%CI=-1.85; -.24), L-lysine (SMD=-1.04,95%CI=-1.84;-.25), N-acetylcysteine (SMD=-.87,95%CI=-1.27;-.47) and sarcosine (SMD=-.5,95%CI=-.87-.13) outperformed placebo for total symptomatology. High heterogeneity (tau2=.10, I2=55.9%) and global inconsistency (Q=40.79, df=18, p=.002) emerged without publication bias (Egger's test, p=.42). Sarcosine improved negative symptoms (SMD=-.65, 95%CI=-1.10; -.19). N-acetylcysteine improved negative symptoms (SMD=-.90, 95%CI=-1.42; -.39)/general psychopathology (SMD=-.76, 95%CI=-1.39; -.13). No compound improved total symptomatology within acute phase studies (k=7, n=422). Sarcosine (SMD=-1.26,95%CI=-1.91; -.60), citicoline (SMD=-1.05,95%CI=-1.65;-.44), and N-acetylcysteine (SMD=-.55,95%CI=-.92,-.19) outperformed placebo augmentation in clinically stable participants. Sensitivity analyses removing high-risk-of-bias studies confirmed overall findings in all phases and clinically stable samples. In contrast, the acute phase analysis restricted to low risk-of-bias studies showed a superior effect vs. placebo for N-acetylcysteine (SMD=-1.10,95%CI=-1.75,-.45), L-lysine (SMD=-1.05,95%CI=-1.55,-.19), omega-3 fatty acids (SMD=-.83,95%CI=-1.31,-.34) and withania somnifera (SMD=-.71,95%CI=-1.21,-.22). Citicoline (SMD=-1.05,95%CI=-1.86,-.23), L-lysine (SMD=-1.04,95%CI=-1.84,-.24), N-acetylcysteine (SMD=-.89,95%CI=-1.35,-.43) and sarcosine (SMD=-.61,95%CI=-1.02,-.21) outperformed placebo augmentation of TAU ("any phase"). Drop-out due to any cause or adverse events did not differ between nutraceutical/phytoceutical vs. placebo+TAU. Conclusions: Sarcosine, citicoline, and N-acetylcysteine are promising augmentation interventions in stable patients with schizophrenia, yet the quality of evidence is low to very low. Further high-quality trials in acute phases/specific outcomes/difficult-to-treat schizophrenia are warranted.

Insomnia and related mental health conditions: Essential neurobiological underpinnings towards reduced polypharmacy utilization rates.

Insomnia represents a significant public health burden, with a 10% prevalence in the general population. Reduced sleep affects social and working functioning, productivity, and patient's quality of life, leading to a total of $100 billion per year in direct and indirect healthcare costs. Primary insomnia is unrelated to any other mental or medical illness; secondary insomnia co-occurs with other underlying medical, iatrogenic, or mental conditions. Epidemiological studies found a 40-50% comorbidity prevalence between insomnia and psychiatric disorders, suggesting a high relevance of mental health in insomniacs. Sleep disturbances also worsen the outcomes of several psychiatric disorders, leading to more severe psychopathology and incomplete remission, plausibly contributing to treatment-resistant conditions. Insomnia and psychiatric disorder coexistence can lead to polypharmacy, namely, the concurrent use of two or more medications in the same patient, regardless of their purpose or rationale. Polypharmacy increases the risk of using unnecessary drugs, the likelihood of drug interactions and adverse events, and reduces the patient's compliance due to regimen complexity. The workup of insomnia must consider the patient's sleep habits and inquire about any medical and mental concurrent conditions that must be handled to allow insomnia to be remitted adequately. Monotherapy or limited polypharmacy should be preferred, especially in case of multiple comorbidities, promoting multipurpose molecules with sedative properties and with bedtime administration. Also, non-pharmacological interventions for insomnia, such as sleep hygiene, relaxation training and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy may be useful in secondary insomnia to confront behaviors and thoughts contributing to insomnia and help optimizing the pharmacotherapy. However, insomnia therapy should always be patient-tailored, considering drug indications, contraindications, and pharmacokinetics, besides insomnia phenotype, clinical picture, patient preferences, and side effect profile.

An umbrella review of candidate predictors of response, remission, recovery, and relapse across mental disorders.

We aimed to identify diagnosis-specific/transdiagnostic/transoutcome multivariable candidate predictors (MCPs) of key outcomes in mental disorders. We conducted an umbrella review (protocol  link ), searching MEDLINE/Embase (19/07/2022), including systematic reviews of studies reporting on MCPs of response, remission, recovery, or relapse, in DSM/ICD-defined mental disorders. From published predictors, we filtered MCPs, validating MCP criteria. AMSTAR2/PROBAST measured quality/risk of bias of systematic reviews/individual studies. We included 117 systematic reviews, 403 studies, 299,888 individuals with mental disorders, testing 796 prediction models. Only 4.3%/1.2% of the systematic reviews/individual studies were at low risk of bias. The most frequently targeted outcome was remission (36.9%), the least frequent was recovery (2.5%). Studies mainly focused on depressive (39.4%), substance-use (17.9%), and schizophrenia-spectrum (11.9%) disorders. We identified numerous MCPs within disorders for response, remission and relapse, but none for recovery. Transdiagnostic MCPs of remission included lower disease-specific symptoms (disorders = 5), female sex/higher education (disorders = 3), and quality of life/functioning (disorders = 2). Transdiagnostic MCPs of relapse included higher disease-specific symptoms (disorders = 5), higher depressive symptoms (disorders = 3), and younger age/higher anxiety symptoms/global illness severity/ number of previous episodes/negative life events (disorders = 2). Finally, positive trans-outcome MCPs for depression included less negative life events/depressive symptoms (response, remission, less relapse), female sex (response, remission) and better functioning (response, less relapse); for schizophrenia, less positive symptoms/higher depressive symptoms (remission, less relapse); for substance use disorder, marital status/higher education (remission, less relapse). Male sex, younger age, more clinical symptoms and comorbid mental/physical symptoms/disorders were poor prognostic factors, while positive factors included social contacts and employment, absent negative life events, higher education, early access/intervention, lower disease-specific and comorbid mental and physical symptoms/conditions, across mental disorders. Current data limitations include high risk of bias of studies and extraction of single predictors from multivariable models. Identified MCPs can inform future development, validation or refinement of prediction models of key outcomes in mental disorders.

Adjunctive agents to antipsychotics in schizophrenia: a systematic umbrella review and recommendations for amino acids, hormonal therapies and anti-inflammatory drugs.

QUESTION: This umbrella review and guidelines aimed to provide evidence to support the rational choice of selected adjunctive therapies for schizophrenia. STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP)-grading recommendations, 63 randomised control trials (RCTs) (of which 4219 unique participants have completed the RCTs) and 29 meta-analyses were analysed. FINDINGS: Provisional recommendations (WFSBP-grade 1) could be made for two molecules in augmentation to antipsychotics: (1) N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC, 1200-3600 mg/day, for >12 consecutive weeks) in improving negative symptoms, general psychopathology (positive and negative syndrome scale for schizophrenia (PANSS) general psychopathology factor (G)-G subscale), with the RCTs with the longer duration showing the most robust findings; (2) polyunsaturated fatty acids (3000 mg/day of eicosapentaenoic acid, for >12 weeks) in improving general psychopathology. Weaker recommendations (ie, WFSBP-grade 2) could be drawn for sarcosine (2 g/day) and minocycline (200-300 mg/day) for improving negative symptoms in chronic schizophrenia (not early schizophrenia), and NAC for improving positive symptoms and cognition. Weak recommendations are not ready for clinical practice. There is provisional evidence that oestrogens and raloxifene are effective in some patients, but further research is needed to determine their benefit/risk ratio. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this umbrella review should be interpreted with caution as the number of RCTs included in the meta-analyses was generally small and the effect sizes were weak or medium. For NAC, two RCTs with low risk of bias have provided conflicting results and the WFSBP-grade recommendation included also the results of meta-analyses. These drugs could be provisionally prescribed for patients for whom no other treatments have been effective, but they should be discontinued if they prove ineffective.

An update on the pharmacotherapeutic strategies for the treatment of dysthymic disorder: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Longer treatment times, more comorbidity, more severe impairments in social, psychological, and emotional functioning, increased healthcare use, and more hospitalizations are all factors that are related to dysthymia. Given the significant prevalence of dysthymia (including persistent depressive disorder) worldwide, its comorbidity with several mental disorders, and the detrimental effects of these comorbidities, it is important to conduct a systematic review to compare the effects of pharmacological acute and maintenance treatments for dysthymia with placebo and standard care in the last 10 years, based on the publication of DSM5. AREAS COVERED: This systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Databases, including PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, were searched to assess the effects of pharmacological acute and maintenance treatments for dysthymia in comparison with placebo and treatment as usual. EXPERT OPINION: Our review shows that SSRIs and SNRIs present efficacy for dysthymia treatment, and L-Acetylcarnitine should be investigated further for this condition in elderly patients. The comparison of antidepressant medication versus placebo showed coherent results based on three studies favoring pharmacotherapy as an effective treatment for participants with dysthymia. However, the scarcity of research on continuation and maintenance therapy in people with dysthymia highlights the need for more primary research.

Emotion dysregulation in bipolar disorder compared to other mental illnesses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

People with bipolar disorder (BD) often present emotion dysregulation (ED), a pattern of emotional expression interfering with goal-directed behavior. ED is a transdiagnostic construct, and it is unclear whether it manifests itself similarly in other conditions, such as major depressive disorder (MDD) or borderline personality disorder (BPD), or has specific features in BD. The present systematic review and meta-analysis explored ED and adopted emotion regulation (ER) strategies in BD compared with other psychiatric conditions. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases were systematically searched from inception to April 28th, 2022. Studies implementing validated instruments assessing ED or ER strategies in BD and other psychiatric disorders were reviewed, and meta-analyses were conducted. Twenty-nine studies yielding multiple comparisons were included. BD was compared to MDD in 20 studies (n = 2451), to BPD in six studies (n = 1001), to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in three studies (n = 232), to anxiety disorders in two studies (n = 320), to schizophrenia in one study (n = 223), and to post-traumatic stress disorder in one study (n = 31). BD patients did not differ from MDD patients in adopting most adaptive and maladaptive ER strategies. However, small-to-moderate differences in positive rumination and risk-taking behaviors were observed. In contrast, patients with BPD presented an overall higher degree of ED and more maladaptive ER strategies. There were insufficient data for a meta-analytic comparison with other psychiatric disorders. The present report further supports the idea that ED is a transdiagnostic construct spanning a continuum across different psychiatric disorders, outlining specific clinical features that could represent potential therapeutic targets.

Pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea carries a significant burden, but evidence-based treatment guidance is incomplete, warranting network meta-analysis (NMA) of pharmacological interventions for antipsychotic-related sialorrhea. PubMed Central/PsycInfo/Cochrane Central database/Clinicaltrials.gov/WHO-ICTRP and the Chinese Electronic Journal Database (Qikan.cqvip.com) were searched for published/unpublished RCTs of antipsychotic-induced sialorrhea (any definition) in adults, up to 06/12/2023. We assessed global/local inconsistencies, publication bias, risk of bias (RoB2), and confidence in the evidence, conducting subgroup/sensitivity analyses. Co-primary efficacy outcomes were changes in saliva production (standardized mean difference/SMD) and study-defined response (risk ratios/RRs). The acceptability outcome was all-cause discontinuation (RR). Primary nodes were molecules; the mechanism of action (MoA) was secondary. Thirty-four RCTs entered a systematic review, 33 NMA (n = 1958). All interventions were for clozapine-induced sialorrhea in subjects with mental disorders. Regarding individual agents and response, metoclopramide (RR = 3.11, 95% C.I. = 1.39-6.98), cyproheptadine, (RR = 2.76, 95% C.I. = 2.00-3.82), sulpiride (RR = 2.49, 95% C.I. = 1.65-3.77), propantheline (RR = 2.39, 95% C.I. = 1.97-2.90), diphenhydramine (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.88-2.86), benzhexol (RR = 2.32, 95% C.I. = 1.59-3.38), doxepin (RR = 2.30, 95% C.I. = 1.85-2.88), amisulpride (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.30-3.81), chlorpheniramine (RR = 2.20, 95% C.I. = 1.67-2.89), amitriptyline (RR = 2.09, 95% C.I. = 1.34-3.26), atropine, (RR = 2.03, 95% C.I. = 1.22-3.38), and astemizole, (RR = 1.70, 95% C.I. = 1.28-2.26) outperformed placebo, but not glycopyrrolate or ipratropium. Across secondary nodes (k = 28, n = 1821), antimuscarinics (RR = 2.26, 95% C.I. = 1.91-2.68), benzamides (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.75-3.10), TCAs (RR = 2.23, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.72), and antihistamines (RR = 2.18, 95% C.I. = 1.83-2.59) outperformed placebo. In head-to-head comparisons, astemizole and ipratropium were outperformed by several interventions. All secondary nodes, except benzamides, outperformed the placebo on the continuous efficacy outcome. For nocturnal sialorrhea, neither benzamides nor atropine outperformed the placebo. Active interventions did not differ significantly from placebo regarding constipation or sleepiness/drowsiness. Low-confidence findings prompt caution in the interpretation of the results. Considering primary nodes' co-primary efficacy outcomes and head-to-head comparisons, efficacy for sialorrhea is most consistent for the following agents, decreasing from metoclopramide through cyproheptadine, sulpiride, propantheline, diphenhydramine, benzhexol, doxepin, amisulpride, chlorpheniramine, to amitriptyline, and atropine (the latter not for nocturnal sialorrhea). Shared decision-making with the patient should guide treatment decisions regarding clozapine-related sialorrhea.

Correlation between emotion dysregulation and mood symptoms of bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emotion dysregulation (ED) is a transdiagnostic construct characterized by difficulties regulating intense emotions. People with bipolar disorder (BD) are more likely to show ED and use maladaptive emotion regulation strategies than adaptive ones. However, little is known about whether ED in BD is a trait or it is rather an epiphenomenon of mood symptoms. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence across major literature databases reporting correlations between measures of emotion regulation (overall ED and different emotion regulation strategies) and measures of depressive and (hypo)manic symptoms in BD from inception until April 12th, 2022. RESULTS: Fourteen studies involving 1371 individuals with BD were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 11 reported quantitative information and were included in the meta-analysis. ED and maladaptive strategies were significantly higher during periods with more severe mood symptoms, especially depressive ones, while adaptive strategies were lower. CONCLUSION: ED significantly correlates with BD symptomatology, and it mainly occurs during mood alterations. ED may be a target for specific psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatments, according to precision psychiatry. However, further studies are needed, including patients with mood episodes and longitudinal design, to provide more robust evidence and explore the causal direction of the associations.

The Neurobiological Underpinnings of Obsessive-Compulsive Symptoms in Psychosis, Translational Issues for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia.

Almost 25% of schizophrenia patients suffer from obsessive-compulsive symptoms (OCS) considered a transdiagnostic clinical continuum. The presence of symptoms pertaining to both schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) may complicate pharmacological treatment and could contribute to lack or poor response to the therapy. Despite the clinical relevance, no reviews have been recently published on the possible neurobiological underpinnings of this comorbidity, which is still unclear. An integrative view exploring this topic should take into account the following aspects: (i) the implication for glutamate, dopamine, and serotonin neurotransmission as demonstrated by genetic findings; (ii) the growing neuroimaging evidence of the common brain regions and dysfunctional circuits involved in both diseases; (iii) the pharmacological modulation of dopaminergic, serotoninergic, and glutamatergic systems as current therapeutic strategies in schizophrenia OCS; (iv) the recent discovery of midbrain dopamine neurons and dopamine D1- and D2-like receptors as orchestrating hubs in repetitive and psychotic behaviors; (v) the contribution of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor subunits to both psychosis and OCD neurobiology. Finally, we discuss the potential role of the postsynaptic density as a structural and functional hub for multiple molecular signaling both in schizophrenia and OCD pathophysiology.

Balancing risks and benefits of cannabis use: umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). DESIGN: Umbrella review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: 101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses) in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive). CONCLUSIONS: Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine but not without adverse events. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018093045. FUNDING: None.

Differences in facial emotion recognition between bipolar disorder and other clinical populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Facial emotion (or expression) recognition (FER) is a domain of affective cognition impaired across various psychiatric conditions, including bipolar disorder (BD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis searching for eligible articles published from inception to April 26, 2023, in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and PsycINFO to examine whether and to what extent FER would differ between people with BD and those with other mental disorders. Thirty-three studies comparing 1506 BD patients with 1973 clinical controls were included in the present systematic review, and twenty-six of them were analyzed in random-effects meta-analyses exploring the discrepancies in discriminating or identifying emotional stimuli at a general and specific level. Individuals with BD were more accurate in identifying each type of emotion during a FER task compared to individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (SCZ) (SMD = 0.27; p-value = 0.006), with specific differences in the perception of anger (SMD = 0.46; p-value = 1.19e-06), fear (SMD = 0.38; p-value = 8.2e-04), and sadness (SMD = 0.33; p-value = 0.026). In contrast, BD patients were less accurate than individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) in identifying each type of emotion (SMD = -0.24; p-value = 0.014), but these differences were more specific for sad emotional stimuli (SMD = -0.31; p-value = 0.009). No significant differences were observed when BD was compared with children and adolescents diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. FER emerges as a potential integrative instrument for guiding diagnosis by enabling discrimination between BD and SCZ or MDD. Enhancing the standardization of adopted tasks could further enhance the accuracy of this tool, leveraging FER potential as a therapeutic target.

The efficacy, safety, and adverse events of azapirones in anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Azapirones have been proposed as anxiety and mood modulators. We assessed azapirones' viability in anxiety disorders via systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis, inquiring PubMed/MEDLINE/CENTRAL/WHO-ICTRP/WebOfScience/VIP up-to 05/01/2023. We conducted sensitivity, and subgroup analyses assessing heterogeneity, publication bias, risk of bias, and confidence in the evidence within the GRADE framework. Symptom reduction (mean difference/MD), study-defined response (risk ratios/RRs), and acceptability were co-primary outcomes. Adverse events and withdrawal were secondary. Seventy studies were included. In generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), azapirones largely outperformed placebo (MD=-4.91, 95%C.I.[-5.91, -3.90], Hedges'g -1.37 [-1.02, -0.73]), k = 22, n = 2,567; RR=1.64, 95%C.I.[1.45, 1.86], k = 9, n = 1,346). While azapirones overlapped benzodiazepines in symptom reduction (MD=-0.12, 95%C.I.[-0.70, 0.45], k = 34, n = 3,160), they were slightly outperformed in response rate (RR=0.94, 95%C.I.[0.90, 0.99], k = 18, n = 2,423). Azapirones overlapped SRIs (MD=0.09, 95%C.I.[-0.49, 0.67], k = 8, n = 747; RR=0.97, 95%C.I.[0.89, 1.07], k = 7, n = 737). Confidence in estimates was high/moderate vs. placebo, moderate/low vs. benzodiazepine, very-low vs. SRIs. Azapirones failed to outperform the placebo in panic and social anxiety disorders. Azapirones overlapped placebo and SRIs in drop-out rates, while they showed higher treatment discontinuation rates than benzodiazepines (RR=1.33, 95%C.I.[1.16, 1.53], k = 23, n = 2,768). Azapirones caused less sedation/fatigue/drowsiness/weakness/cognitive issues than benzodiazepines, resembling placebo. They caused more nausea and dizziness than placebo, more headache and nausea than benzodiazepines, and less nausea and xerostomia than SRIs. Azapirones proved effective and relatively well-tolerated for GAD. They should be preferred over benzodiazepines, especially in the long-term, considering their lower sedation and addiction potential, representing a potential SRI alternative. Further research is warranted to prove efficacy in panic and social anxiety.

Does Screening for Bipolar Disorders Identify a "Dysregulation of Mood, Energy, and Social Rhythms Syndrome" (DYMERS)? A Heuristic Working Hypothesis.

The aim of this paper is to verify if people with a positive score on the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) without comorbidity of mood disorders showed a worse level of Health-related Quality of life (HRQol) compared to a control-matched sample of MDQ negatives, identifying a specific syndrome. This is a case-control study based on a database from a community survey. Cases: MDQ-positive without mood disorders; Controls: MDQ negatives matched by sex, age, and psychiatric diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV (DSM-IV) criteria. Tools: MDQ, the Advanced Neuropsychiatric Tools and Assessment Schedule (ANTAS) semi-structured interview for psychiatric diagnosis, and the Health Survey Short Form (SF-12) for measuring HRQol. People scoring positive on the MDQ without a diagnosis of mood disorders showed significantly lower scores on the SF-12 compared to people of the same age and of the same sex with an equal diagnosis of psychiatric disorders not related to mood disorders (35.21 ± 6.30 vs. 41.48 ± 3.39, p < 0.0001). In the debate whether a positive score on the MDQ selects an area of "malaise" due to the presence of disorders differing from Bipolar Disorders, or if a positive score on the MDQ may be considered a "subthreshold" form of bipolar disorder in people who may later develop bipolar disorder, a third hypothesis can be advanced, i.e., that a positive score on the MDQ identifies a specific "Dysregulation of Mood, Energy, and Social Rhythms Syndrome" (DYMERS), characterized by a considerable amount of suffering and not attributable to other disorders, and which might represent a trigger for the previously mentioned disorders with which a positive score on the MDQ is associated, probably including, in severe conditions, bipolar disorder.

Psychopharmacology of eating disorders: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The concurrent assessment of weight and affective psychopathology outcomes relevant to the psychopharmacology of major eating disorders (EDs), namely anorexia nervosa (AN), bulimia nervosa (BN), and binge eating disorder (BED), warrants systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were inquired from inception through August 31st, 2022, for RCTs documenting any psychopharmacological intervention for EDs diagnosed according to validated criteria and reporting weight and psychopathology changes. Adopted keywords were: "anorexia nervosa," "bulimia nervosa," "binge eating disorder," "antidepressant," "antipsychotic," and "mood stabilizer." No language restriction applied. RESULTS: 5122 records were identified, and 203 full-texts were reviewed. Sixty-two studies entered the qualitative synthesis (AN = 22, BN = 23, BED = 17), of which 22 entered the meta-analysis (AN = 9, BN = 10, BED = 3). Concerning BMI increase in AN, olanzapine outperformed placebo (Hedges'g = 0.283, 95%C·I. = 0.051-0.515, I2 = 0 %; p = .017), whereas fluoxetine failed (Hedges'g = 0.351, 95%C.I. = -0.248 to 0.95, I2 = 63.37 %; p = .251). Fluoxetine not significantly changed weight (Hedges'g = 0.147, 95%C.I. = -0.157-0.451, I2 = 0 %; p = .343), reducing binging (Hedges'g = 0.203, 95%C.I. = 0.007-0.399, I2 = 0 %; p = .042), and purging episodes (Hedges'g = 0.328, 95%C.I. = -0.061-0.717, I2 = 58.97 %; p = .099) in BN. Lisdexamfetamine reduced weight (Hedges'g = 0.259, 95%C.I. = 0.071-0.446, I2 = 0 %; p = .007) and binging (Hedges'g = 0.571, 95%C.I. = 0.282-0.860, I2 = 53.84 %; p < .001) in BED. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, short duration, and lack of reliable operational definitions affect most of the included sponsored RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of different drugs varies across different EDs, warranting additional primary studies recording broad psychopathological and cardiometabolic outcomes besides weight, especially against established psychotherapy interventions.

Incidence, prevalence, and global burden of schizophrenia - data, with critical appraisal, from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2019.

Schizophrenia substantially contributes to the burden of mental disorders. Schizophrenia's burden and epidemiological estimates in some countries have been published, but updated estimates of prevalence, incidence, and schizophrenia-related disability at the global level are lacking. Here, we present the data from and critically discuss the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study data, focusing on temporal changes in schizophrenia's prevalence, incidence, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) globally. From 1990 to 2019, schizophrenia raw prevalence (14.2 to 23.6 million), incidence (941,000 to 1.3 million), and DALYs (9.1 to 15.1 million) increased by over 65%, 37%, and 65% respectively, while age-standardized estimates remained stable globally. In countries with high socio-demographic index (SDI), both prevalence and DALYs increased, while in those with low SDI, the age-standardized incidence decreased and DALYs remained stable. The male/female ratio of burden of schizophrenia has remained stable in the overall population over the past 30 years (i.e., M/F = 1.1), yet decreasing from younger to older age groups (raw prevalence in females higher than males after age 65, with males having earlier age of onset, and females longer life expectancy). Results of this work suggest that schizophrenia's raw prevalence, incidence, and burden have been increasing since 1990. Age-adjusted estimates did not reduce. Schizophrenia detection in low SDI countries is suboptimal, and its prevention/treatment in high SDI countries should be improved, considering its increasing prevalence. Schizophrenia sex ratio inverts throughout the lifespan, suggesting different age of onset and survival by sex. However, prevalence and burden estimates for schizophrenia are probably underestimated. GBD does not account for mortality from schizophrenia (and other mental disorders, apart from anorexia nervosa).

Insulin effects on core neurotransmitter pathways involved in schizophrenia neurobiology: a meta-analysis of preclinical studies. Implications for the treatment.

Impairment of insulin action and metabolic dysregulation have traditionally been associated with schizophrenia, although the molecular basis of such association remains still elusive. The present meta-analysis aims to assess the impact of insulin action manipulations (i.e., hyperinsulinemia, hypoinsulinemia, systemic or brain insulin resistance) on glutamatergic, dopaminergic, γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)ergic, and serotonergic pathways in the central nervous system. More than one hundred outcomes, including transcript or protein levels, kinetic parameters, and other components of the neurotransmitter pathways, were collected from cultured cells, animals, or humans, and meta-analyzed by applying a random-effects model and adopting Hedges'g to compare means. Two hundred fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 180 entered the quantitative synthesis. Significant impairments in key regulators of synaptic plasticity processes were detected as the result of insulin handlings. Specifically, protein levels of N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) subunits including type 2A (NR2A) (Hedges' g = -0.95, 95%C.I. = -1.50, -0.39; p = 0.001; I2 = 47.46%) and 2B (NR2B) (Hedges'g = -0.69, 95%C.I. = -1.35, -0.02; p = 0.043; I2 = 62.09%), and Postsynaptic density protein 95 (PSD-95) (Hedges'g = -0.91, 95%C.I. = -1.51, -0.32; p = 0.003; I2 = 77.81%) were found reduced in insulin-resistant animal models. Moreover, insulin-resistant animals showed significantly impaired dopamine transporter activity, whereas the dopamine D2 receptor mRNA expression (Hedges'g = 3.259; 95%C.I. = 0.497, 6.020; p = 0.021; I2 = 90.61%) increased under insulin deficiency conditions. Insulin action modulated glutamate and GABA release, as well as several enzymes involved in GABA and serotonin synthesis. These results suggest that brain neurotransmitter systems are susceptible to insulin signaling abnormalities, resembling the discrete psychotic disorders' neurobiology and possibly contributing to the development of neurobiological hallmarks of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Efficacy and safety of selegiline across different psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of oral and transdermal formulations.

Selegiline is an irreversible, selective type-B monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI) approved for Parkison's disease-oral and major depressive disorder-transdermal formulation) resulting in non-selective MAOI activity at oral doses≥20 mg/day. The present systematic review and meta-analysis appraises the evidence of different formulations/dosages of selegiline across different psychiatric conditions. We inquired PubMed/MEDLINE/Cochrane-Central/WHO-ICTRP/Clarivate-WebOfScience and the Chinese-Electronic-Journal Database from inception to 10/26/2022 for selegiline trials involving psychiatric patients. Random-effects meta-analyses assessed heterogeneity, publication/risk biases, and confidence in the evidence, followed by sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses. Co-primary outcomes were: changes in symptom score (standardized mean difference=SMD) and author-defined response (risk ratios=RRs). RRs of adverse events and all-cause discontinuation were secondary and acceptability outcomes, respectively. Systematic-review included 42 studies; meta-analysis, 23. Selegiline outperformed placebo in depressive symptom reduction (SMD=-0.96, 95%C.I.=-1.78, -0.14, k = 10, n = 1,308), depression (RR=1.61, 95%C.I.=1.20, 2.15, k = 9, n = 1,238) and atypical-depression response (RR=2.23, 95%C.I.=1.35, 3.68, k = 3, n = 136). Selegiline failed to outperform the placebo in negative (k = 4) or positive symptoms of schizophrenia (k = 4), attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms reduction (k = 2), and smoking abstinence rate (k = 4). Selegiline did not differ from methylphenidate and ADHD scores (k = 2). No significant difference emerged in acceptability, incident diarrhea, headache, dizziness, and nausea RRs, in contrast to xerostomia (RR=1.58, 95%C.I. =1.03, 2.43, k = 6, n = 1,134), insomnia (RR=1.61, 95%C.I.=1.19, 2.17, k = 10, n = 1,768), and application-site reaction for transdermal formulation (RR=1.81, 95%C.I.=1.40, 2.33, k = 6, n = 1,662). Confidence in findings was low/very-low for most outcomes; moderate for depressive symptoms reduction (transdermal). Selegiline proved effective, safe, and well-tolerated for depressive disorders, yet further evidence is warranted about specific psychiatric disorders.