Psychosis with use of amphetamine drugs, methylphenidate and atomoxetine in adolescent and adults.

BACKGROUND: Use of psychostimulants and relative drugs has increased worldwide in treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adolescents and adults. Recent studies suggest a potential association between use of psychostimulants and psychotic symptoms. The risk may not be the same between different psychostimulants. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether amphetamine or atomoxetine use is associated with a higher risk of reporting symptoms of psychosis than methylphenidate use in adolescents and adults, particularly in patients with ADHD. METHODS: Using VigiBase, the WHO's pharmacovigilance database, disproportionality of psychotic symptoms reporting was assessed among adverse drug reactions related to methylphenidate, atomoxetine and amphetamines, from January 2004 to December 2018, in patients aged 13-25 years. The association between psychotic symptoms and psychostimulants was estimated through the calculation of reporting OR (ROR). FINDINGS: Among 13 863 reports with at least one drug of interest, we found 221 cases of psychosis with methylphenidate use, 115 with atomoxetine use and 169 with a prescription of an amphetamine drug. Compared with methylphenidate use, amphetamine use was associated with an increased risk of reporting psychotic symptoms (ROR 1.61 (95% CI 1.26 to 2.06)]. When we restricted the analysis to ADHD indication, we found a close estimate (ROR 1.94 (95% CI 1.43 to 2.64)). No association was found for atomoxetine. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that amphetamine use is associated with a higher reporting of psychotic symptoms, compared with methylphenidate use. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The prescription of psychostimulants should consider this potential adverse effect when assessing the benefit-risk balance.

Cardiac and metabolic safety profile of antipsychotics in youths: A WHO safety database analysis.

A significant heterogeneity prevails in antipsychotics (APs) safety monitoring recommendations. Youths are deemed more vulnerable to cardiometabolic side effects. We aimed to assess age-dependent reporting of cardiac and metabolic disorders in youths, relying on the WHO safety database (VigiBase®). VigiBase® was queried for all reports of cardiac, glucose, lipid and nutritional disorders involving APs. Patients <18 years were classified as pediatric population. Disproportionality analyses relied on the Information Component (IC): the positivity of the lower end of its 95 % confidence interval was required to suspect a signal. We yielded 4,672 pediatric reports. In disproportionality analysis, nutritional disorders were leading in youths (IC 3.9 [3.9-4.0]). Among healthcare professionals' reports, stronger signals were detected in youths than in adults. Children had the greatest signal with nutritional disorders (IC 4.7 [4.6-4.8]). In adolescents, aripiprazole was ascribed to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). Our findings, based on real-world data, support the hypothesis of a greater propensity for nutritional disorders in youths, despite limitations of pharmacovigilance studies. We suggest specific safety profiles, such as aripiprazole and NASH. Pending more answers from population-based studies, a careful anamnesis should seek for risk factors before AP initiation. A cautious monitoring is warranted to allow earlier identification of side effects.

Withdrawal syndrome after antipsychotics discontinuation: an analysis of the WHO database of spontaneous reports (Vigibase) between 2000 and 2022.

RATIONALE: Withdrawal syndrome (WDS) has been described after discontinuation of antipsychotics. WDS could be the consequence of an over-activation of the dopaminergic pathway. Antipsychotics with a higher affinity for dopamine D2 receptors could be associated with a higher risk of WDS. This study aims to address this statement and evaluate the risk difference for withdrawal syndrome between antipsychotics based on pharmacovigilance data. METHODS: We collected individual reports registered in Vigibase® between 01/01/2000 and 31/12/2022 of patients treated with antipsychotics and who had presented WDS. A disproportionality analysis was performed to evaluate the risk of reporting WDS with each antipsychotic compared to all other antipsychotics. We performed a correlation analysis to assess the correlation between the risk of reporting WDS for each antipsychotic in relation with their pKi for D2 and 5HT2A receptors. RESULTS: The most frequent psychiatric withdrawal symptoms after antipsychotic discontinuation were insomnia, anxiety and depression. Tremor, headache and dizziness were among the most frequently reported neurologic withdrawal symptoms. Tiotixene had the highest risk of reporting WDS (ROR 7.08; 95%CI 3.49 - 14.35) followed by pimozide (ROR 4.35; 95%CI 1.93 - 9.77), quetiapine (ROR 4.24; 95%CI 3.87 - 4.64), thioridazine (ROR 4.17; 95%CI 2.50-6.98) and ziprasidone (ROR 2.98; 95%CI 2.41-3.67). We found a poor correlation between D2/5HT2A binding affinity and the risk of reporting withdrawal syndrome (R2 = 0,094). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that there might be a risk difference for WDS between antipsychotics. Tiotixene, pimozide and quetiapine were associated with a higher risk of reporting a WDS whereas this risk was lower with chlorpromazine, clozapine and fluphenazine. We could not address the issue of withdrawal psychosis, withdrawal dyskinesia, rebound psychosis or supersensitivity psychosis due to the lack of specific WHO medDRA coded terms to identify potential cases.

Teaching pharmacovigilance to French medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic: Interest of distance learning clinical reasoning sessions.

BACKGROUND: Considering data from the literature in favor of active educational intervention to teach pharmacovigilance, we describe an innovative model of distance learning clinical reasoning sessions (CRS) of pharmacovigilance with 3rd year medical French students. METHODS: The three main objectives were to identify the elements necessary for the diagnosis of an adverse drug reaction, report an adverse drug reaction and perform drug causality assessment. The training was organized in 3 stages. First, students practiced clinical reasoning (CRS) by conducting fictive pharmacovigilance telehealth consultations. Second, students wrote a medical letter summarizing the telehealth consultation and analyzing the drug causality assessment. This letter was sent to the teacher for a graded evaluation. In the third stage was a debriefing course with all the students. RESULTS: Of the 293 third-year medical students enrolled in this course, 274 participated in the distance learning CRS. The evaluation received feedback from 195 students, with an average score of 8.85 out of 10. The qualitative evaluation had only positive feedback. The students appreciated the different format of the teaching, with the possibility to be active. CONCLUSION: Through distance CRS of pharmacovigilance, medical students' competences to identify and report adverse drug reactions were tested. The students experienced the pharmacovigilance skills necessary to detect adverse drug reactions in a manner directly relevant to patient care. The overall evaluation of the students is in favor of this type of method.

Drug-induced depressive symptoms: An update through the WHO pharmacovigilance database.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a highly incident condition and some drugs have been described as inducing or worsening depression. However, literature on this topic is rare and possibly outdated. METHODS: We performed disproportionality analyses using VigiBase®, the largest pharmacovigilance database worldwide to identify drugs associated with depression. Then we excluded drugs already known as depressogenic according to American Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC). We then reviewed drug mechanism of action, scientific literature and European SPC for each drug identified to assess a level of plausibility. We measured Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) statistically significant and superior to 1, suggesting a significant association between a drug and the reporting of depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Out of the 5237 drugs extracted on VigiBase®, we have retained 89 new drugs associated with depression. More than half of drugs of interest are from nervous system. Opicapone (ROR: 20.66 95 %CI: 15.62-27.33), and gadoversetamide (ROR 18.62, 95 %CI 9.63-35.95) were the drugs with the highest ROR. Among the 89 drugs, 38 were considered already described such as suvorexant or ivacaftor, 20 likely associated such as anti-migraines drugs or new antipsychotic drugs and 31 potentially associated. LIMITATIONS: Pharmacovigilance studies have many inherent limitations, such as under-reporting bias, notoriety effect and protopathic bias. These results are not intended to establish a causal link, only a statistical association. CONCLUSION: We found a strong statistical signal and pharmacological plausibility for 58 new depressogenic drugs. This update list of suspected drugs may prove useful for doctors faced with potential cases of drug-induced depression or to stay aware in case. Other studies are needed to confirm the list.

Risk of abnormal uterine bleeding associated with high-affinity compared with low-affinity serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised about the potential association between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) and the risk of abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), which may be influenced by the affinity of SSRIs/SNRIs for serotonin transporter. Thus, we assessed whether SSRIs/SNRIs with high-affinity for serotonin transporter are associated with AUB compared to SSRIs/SNRIs with low-affinity in non-pregnant women. METHODS: Using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified a cohort of women aged 15-24 years, newly prescribed a high- or low-affinity SSRI/SNRI between 1990 and 2019. Confounding was addressed using standardized morbidity ratio weighting. We used weighted Cox proportional hazards models to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) of AUB associated with high-affinity compared with low-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs. We assessed the risk of anemia as a secondary outcome. RESULTS: The cohort included 156,307 users of high-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs and 102,631 users of low-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs. High-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs were not associated with an increased risk of AUB compared with low-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs (incidence rates: 46.3 versus 42.4 per 1000 person-years, respectively; HR 1.01, 95 % CI 0.93-1.09). Duration of use, age, and comorbidities did not modify the risk. However, high-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs were associated with an increased risk of anemia (HR 1.29, 95 % CI 1.04-1.61) compared with low-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs. LIMITATIONS: Residual confounding may still be present. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of AUB did not differ between high- and low-affinity SSRIs/SNRIs. However, the potential risk of anemia suggests the need for monitoring and further investigation of the risk of AUB with these medications.

[Funding of psychiatry in France, the problem of expensive drugs. Example of Esketamine in the case of resistant depressive episodes]. / Financement de la psychiatrie en France, la question des médicaments onéreux : exemple de l'Esketamine dans l'épisode dépressif caractérisé résistant.

In France, the funding of mental health institutions relies on an annual budget allocation. Esketamine, a non-competitive NMDA glutamate receptor antagonist, has been approved for adults with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder since 2019. However, due to its high cost (€200 per 28 mg device, excluding tax), the aim of this work was to evaluate whether the income received by an institution for the management of a patient treated with Esketamine could cover the purchase of devices, based on real clinical data. Within our institution, seven patients underwent treatment with Esketamine during the study period resulting in a total usage of 714 devices, amounting to a purchase cost of €142,800. Over the course of the follow-up period, the institution received €149,054 in revenue for the treatment of these patients. Our analysis reveals that the expense associated with Esketamine constitutes 95.8 % of the income generated from caring for these patients. This not only raises questions about the pricing of this drug but also highlights the lack of a funding system for costly psychiatric drugs. This concern extends to somatic treatments associated with psychiatric care.

Drug-induced psychiatric disorders: A pharmacovigilance update.

The psychiatric risks associated with drugs are sometimes one of the few restrictions on the use of certain drug classes, such as corticosteroids in patients with a history of severe psychotic episodes associated with this drug class. In this non-exhaustive review, we propose to deal with the most recent issues concerning psychiatric disorders induced by drugs and encountered in doctors' clinical practice. Firstly, we look at depressive disorders and suicide risks, secondly at psychotic and manic disorders and thirdly at anxiety and sleep disorders. While lot of drugs are associated with psychiatric disorders, the confounding by indication represents an important methodological gap since information on the psychiatric profile of patients is not always available. This is particularly the case for serotonin reuptake inhibitors and esketamine used as antidepressants. Recent pharmacovigilance concerns of psychiatric disorders emerged with montelukast, orexin receptor antagonists or cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) modulators.

Quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs: systematic review.

Objective: To assess the quality of reporting of adverse events in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs based on the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) harms extension and according to clinical trial design, and to examine reporting of serious adverse events in drug trials published on PubMed versus clinical trial summaries on ClinicalTrials.gov. Design: Systematic review. Data sources: PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched from 1 December 2019 to 17 February 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Randomised clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19 disease in participants of all ages with suspected, probable, or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. Clinical trials were screened on title, abstract, and text by two authors independently. Only articles published in French and English were selected. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) was used to assess risk of bias. Results: The search strategy identified 1962 randomised clinical trials assessing the efficacy and safety of drugs used to treat covid-19, published in the PubMed database; 1906 articles were excluded after screening and 56 clinical trials were included in the review. Among the 56 clinical trials, no study had a high score for quality of reporting of adverse events, 60.7% had a moderate score, 33.9% had a low score, and 5.4% had a very low score. All clinical trials with a very low score for quality of reporting of adverse events were randomised open label trials. For reporting of serious adverse events, journal articles published on PubMed under-reported 51% of serious adverse events compared with clinical trial summaries published on ClinicalTrials.gov. Conclusions: In one in three published clinical trials on covid-19 drugs, the quality of reporting of adverse events was low or very low. Differences were found in the number of serious adverse events reported in journal articles versus clinical trial summaries. During the covid-19 pandemic, risk assessment of drugs in clinical trials of covid-19 drugs did not comply with good practice recommendations for publication of results. Systematic review registration: European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacovigilance (ENCePP) EUPAS45959.

What clinical analysis of antipsychotic-induced catatonia and neuroleptic malignant syndrome tells us about the links between these two syndromes: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Antipsychotic-induced catatonia (AIC) and neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) are life-threatening adverse reactions to antipsychotic medication. We conducted a systematic review of literature following the PRISMA statement guidelines to obtain a description of these syndromes (population, context of occurrence, antipsychotic agents implicated) and draw conclusions about their links. METHODS: We searched Medline and Web of science databases from January 1951 to May 2019 (further restricted from 2000 to 2019) using search terms including "catatonia", "neuroleptic malignant syndrome" and "antipsychotic agents" for case reports, case series and analytic studies. After screening 4082 records, 410 full-text articles (describing 555 events) were assessed for eligibility. We included events of AIC and/or NMS according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) criteria and extracted data about patients' characteristics, context of occurrence, antipsychotic agent(s) involved and treatment outcomes. RESULTS: We included 165 events (16 AIC, 129 NMS and 20 AIC + NMS) from 144 case reports and case series. The most reported diagnosis was schizophrenia. Comorbid pre-existing conditions such as central nervous system diseases and acute medical events were common. Most of the events (63.3 %) occurred during antipsychotic monotherapy. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs, 63.8 %) were overall more implicated than first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs, 36.2 %). DISCUSSION: Our findings highlight that any antipsychotic medication, even SGA monotherapy prescribed at recommended dose, is at risk for these side effects. FGAs and polypharmacy seem to represent risk factors for malignant catatonia in AIC. The clinical overlap observed between AIC and NMS events in our review suggests a clinical continuum between catatonia and NMS.

Sublingual/Buccal buprenorphine and dental problems: a pharmacovigilance study.

BACKGROUND: The association between dental problems and sublingual/buccal buprenorphine is unclear. We conducted an analysis of dental adverse drug reactions reported with sublingual/buccal buprenorphine in VigiBase®, the pharmacovigilance database of the World Health Organization. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed disproportionality analyses to compare the reporting rates of dental problems with sublingual/buccal buprenorphine, compared to other buprenorphine formulations and methadone. Significant signals were considered if the lower boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) was > 1; cases were ≥ 3 and p-value <0.05. We conducted sensitivity analyses by calculating the ROR according to the reporter's qualification and the reporting continent (United States of America and Europe). RESULTS: We included 30,769 reports with all buprenorphine forms. We found 20 cases of dental problems with sublingual/buccal buprenorphine. Sublingual/buccal buprenorphine was associated with an overreporting of dental problems compared to other buprenorphine formulations (ROR = 15.10; 95% CI [7.50-30.39]; p < 0.005) and compared to methadone (ROR = 6.02; 95% CI [3.21-11.30]; p < 0.005). Overreporting of dental problems was consistent in sensitivity analyses, except in Europe compared with other buprenorphine formulations and with methadone. CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual/buccal buprenorphine might increase the risk of reporting dental problems. However, these results do not modify the benefits of sublingual/buccal buprenorphine in the treatment of opioid use disorders.

Will artificial intelligence chatbots replace clinical pharmacologists? An exploratory study in clinical practice.

PURPOSE: Recently, there has been a growing interest in using ChatGPT for various applications in Medicine. We evaluated the interest of OpenAI chatbot (GPT 4.0) for drug information activities at Toulouse Pharmacovigilance Center. METHODS: Based on a series of 50 randomly selected questions sent to our pharmacovigilance center by healthcare professionals or patients, we compared the level of responses from the chatbot GPT 4.0 with those provided by specialists in pharmacovigilance. RESULTS: Chatbot answers were globally not acceptable. Responses to inquiries regarding the assessment of drug causality were not consistently precise or clinically meaningful. CONCLUSION: The interest of chatbot assistance needs to be confirmed or rejected through further studies conducted in other pharmacovigilance centers.

Drug-related catatonia in youths: real-world insights from the WHO Safety Database.

Catatonia is characterized by psychomotor alterations and reduced contact with the environment. Initially linked to schizophrenia, it also occurs in mood disorders or organic conditions. In children, catatonia remains poorly delineated, despite dramatically increasing the risk of premature death. As data on pediatric drug-induced catatonia bears many uncertainties, we aimed to characterize its age-dependent patterns, using real-world data from the WHO safety database (VigiBase®).VigiBase® was queried for all reports of catatonia registered up to December 8th 2022. Reports involving patients <18 years were classified into 3 groups: ≤23 months, 2-11 years, and 12-17 years. Disproportionality analyses relied on the Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), and the positivity of the lower end of the 95% confidence interval of the Information Component (IC) was required to suspect a signal. Catatonia was evoked in 421 pediatric reports. In infants, vaccines were leading. In children, the main signals involved haloperidol (ROR 104.3; 95% CI 45.6-238.5), ondansetron (ROR 40.5; 95% CI 16.5-99.5), and ciclosporin (ROR 27.4; 95% CI 13.8-54.1). In adolescents, chlorpromazine (ROR 199.1; 95% CI 134.8-294.1), benzatropine (ROR 193; 95% CI 104.1-361.6), and olanzapine (ROR 135.7; 95% CI 104.6-175.9) reached the highest RORs. In infants, catatonia was related to vaccines, it was ascribed to multiple drugs in children, and mainly to psychotropic drugs in adolescents. Less suspected drugs, such as ondansetron, were highlighted. Despite limitations inherent in spontaneous reporting systems, this study supports that a careful anamnesis is warranted to separate catatonia associated with medical conditions from drug-induced catatonia in pediatric patients.

Reporting of harms in clinical trials of esketamine in depression: a systematic review.

While previous systematic reviews of trials evaluating conventional antidepressants highlighted inadequacies and inconsistencies in adverse event (AE) reporting, no evaluation is available on esketamine in resistant depression. The objective of this review was to assess quality of reporting AEs in all published clinical trials studying esketamine. It also aimed to compare the proportions of AEs reported in journal articles to those recorded in the ClinicalTrial.gov Registers. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of esketamine in depression were searched using Medline and ClinicalTrials.gov. The quality of reporting harms was assessed using a 21-item checklist from the CONSORT Extension of Harms (1 point by item). The total quality score was graded into four categories: high (17-21), moderate (12-16), low (7-11) and very low (0-6). Ten clinical trials were included in the analysis. Nine trials were classified as 'low quality' with regard to safety, one trial was classified as 'moderate quality'. Compared to AEs recorded in ClinicalTrials.gov, we found that 41.5% of serious AEs and 39% of non-serious AEs were not reported in the published articles. Among them, the majority were psychiatric events but also cardiovascular events and 94% concerned patients from esketamine groups. Quality of AEs reporting in published clinical trials of esketamine was poor and harms were reported less frequently in journal publications than in ClinicalTrial.gov Registers. The study suggests that an assessment of the benefits/risks balance of esketamine based on the results reported in trial publications is flawed due to the poor accuracy and completeness of harm data.

French pharmacovigilance survey of casirivimab - imdevimab monoclonal antibodies in coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

INTRODUCTION: Casirivimab and imdevimab (Ronapreve®) are two recombinant human monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that bind to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein, preventing the virus from entering cells. In March 2021, this drug was granted emergency use authorisation (EUA) in France for early treatment of COVID-19 in patients at increased risk of progression to severe COVID-19. In August/September 2021, the indication was expanded to COVID-19 prevention (pre- or post-exposure prophylaxis) and treatment of hospitalised patients requiring non-invasive oxygen therapy. The aim of the study was to better describe the adverse drug reaction (ADR) profile and detect safety signals of this new drug used in COVID-19 treatment. METHODS: We described ADR profile with casirivimab/imdevimab reported as suspect/interacting drug to the French pharmacovigilance network and the pharmaceutical company between 17/03/2021 and 30/06/2022. Data presented correspond to the 2 periods of the pharmacovigilance survey: the first carried out by the pharmaceutical company for curative and prophylactic uses and the second by Toulouse university regional pharmacovigilance center (RPVC). RESULTS: A total of 384 reports were analysed and 256 were "serious". ADR profile was comparable between the 2 periods and between curative and prophylactic use, corresponding to expected ADRs such as infusion-related reactions and hypersensitivity, inefficiencies or worsened infections and deaths. Two potential pharmacovigilance signals were also studied: acute pulmonary oedemas and sudden deaths. DISCUSSION: No pharmacovigilance signal emerged from this 15 months French pharmacovigilance survey. Moreover data from published studies are also reassuring. This pharmacovigilance survey was the first one for the new version of EUA and with a new ADR reporting process i.e. declaration to the RPVC instead of the pharmaceutical company. Casirivimab/imdevimab is no longer used in France today but we continue to monitor this drug for any future evidence of resurgent activity on a new variant of Sars-CoV-2.

Testosterone treatment and the risk of osteonecrosis: a pharmacovigilance analysis in Vigibase.

PURPOSE: Recent reports have raised concerns about a potential risk of osteonecrosis associated with testosterone treatment (TT). The aim of this pharmacovigilance study was to assess the risk of reporting osteonecrosis associated with the use of TT compared with use of any other medication. METHODS: We performed a disproportionality analysis to investigate the risk of reporting osteonecrosis with TT using the WHO database VigiBase®. We estimated the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of reporting osteonecrosis with use of TT vs all other drugs, and the adjusted ROR with use of TT vs use of drugs for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). RESULTS: Among men at least 18 years of age between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2019, we identified 3479 reports of osteonecrosis, 84 of which were associated with TT use, out of a total of 4,667,754 adverse event reports. Reports of osteonecrosis in TT users occurred with both transdermal and injectable forms, and the mean age at report was 55.4 years. TT use was associated with a greater risk of reporting osteonecrosis compared to all other drugs (ROR, 5.13; 95% CI, 4.13-6.37) and compared with use of drugs for BPH (ROR, 3.00; 95% CI, 2.08-4.30). Half of the osteonecrosis reports associated with TT indicated concomitant use of corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: TT was associated with a greater risk of reports of osteonecrosis compared to use of any other drug and use of drugs for BPH. This signal should be confirmed in complementary studies.