Article

CASE New-onset auditory hallucinations

Ms. L, age 78, presents to our hospital with worsening anxiety due to auditory hallucinations. She has been hearing music, which she reports is worse at night and consists of songs, usually the song Jingle Bells, sometimes just melodies and other times with lyrics. Ms. L denies paranoia, visual hallucinations, or worsening mood.

Two weeks ago, Ms. L had visited another hospital, describing 5 days of right-side hearing loss accompanied by pain and burning in her ear and face, along with vesicular lesions in a dermatomal pattern extending into her auditory canal. During this visit, Ms. L’s complete blood count, urine culture, urine drug screen, electrolytes, liver panel, thyroid studies, and vitamin levels were unremarkable. A CT scan of her head showed no abnormalities.

Ms. L was diagnosed with Ramsay Hunt syndrome (herpes zoster oticus), which affects cranial nerves, because of physical examination findings with a dermatomal pattern of lesion distribution and associated pain. Ramsay Hunt syndrome can cause facial paralysis and hearing loss in the affected ear. She was discharged with prescriptions for prednisone 60 mg/d for 7 days and valacyclovir 1 g/d for 7 days and told to follow up with her primary care physician. During the present visit to our hospital, Ms. L’s home health nurse reports that she still has her entire bottles of valacyclovir and prednisone left. Ms. L also has left-side hearing loss that began 5 years ago and a history of recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. Due to the recent onset of right-side hearing loss, her hearing impairment requires her to communicate via writing or via a voice-to-text app.

HISTORY Depressed and living alone

Ms. L was diagnosed with MDD more than 4 decades ago and has been receiving medication since then. She reports no prior psychiatric hospitalizations, suicide attempts, manic symptoms, or psychotic symptoms. For more than 20 years, she has seen a nurse practitioner, who had prescribed mirtazapine 30 mg/d for MDD, poor appetite, and sleep. Within the last 5 years, her nurse practitioner added risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night to augment the mirtazapine for tearfulness, irritability, and mood swings.

Ms. L’s medical history also includes hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. She is a retired teacher and lives alone. She has a chore worker who visits her home for 1 hour 5 days a week to help with cleaning and lifting, and support from her son. Ms. L no longer drives and relies on others for transportation, but is able to manage her finances, activities of daily living, cooking, and walking without any assistance.

[polldaddy:12807642]

EVALUATION Identifying the cause of the music

Ms. L is alert and oriented to time and situation, her concentration is appropriate, and her recent and remote memories are preserved. A full cognitive screen is not performed, but she is able to spell WORLD forwards and backwards and adequately perform a serial 7s test. An examination of her ear does not reveal any open vesicular lesions or swelling, but she continues to report pain and tingling in the C7 dermatomal pattern. Her urine drug screen and infectious and autoimmune laboratory testing are unremarkable. She does not have electrolyte, renal function, or blood count abnormalities. An MRI of her brain that is performed to rule out intracranial pathology due to acute hearing loss shows no acute intracranial abnormalities, with some artifact effect due to motion. Because temporal lobe epilepsy can present with hallucinations,¹ an EEG is performed to rule out seizure activity; it shows a normal wake pattern.

Psychiatry is consulted for management of the auditory hallucinations because Ms. L is distressed by hearing music. Ms. L is evaluated by Neurology and Otolaryngology. Neurology recommends a repeat brain MRI in the outpatient setting after seeing an artifact in the inpatient imaging, as well as follow-up with her primary care physician. Otolaryngology believes her symptoms are secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome with incomplete treatment, which is consistent with the initial diagnosis from her previous hospital visit, and recommends another course of oral corticosteroids, along with Audiology and Otolaryngology follow-up.

Continue to: The authors' observations

This is the first case we have seen detailing musical hallucinations (MH) secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome, although musical hallucinations have been associated with other etiologies of hearing loss. MH is a “release phenomenon” believed to be caused by deprivation of stimulation of the auditory cortex.² They are categorized as complex auditory hallucinations made up of melodies and rhythms and may be present in up to 2.5% of patients with hearing impairment.¹ The condition is mostly seen in older adults because this population is more likely to experience hearing loss. MH is more common among women (70% to 80% of cases) and is highly comorbid with psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or (as was the case for Ms. L) MDD.³ Hallucinations secondary to hearing loss may be more common in left-side hearing loss.⁴ In a 2005 study, Warner et al⁵ found religious music such as hymns or Christmas carols was most commonly heard, possibly due to repetitive past exposure.

There is no consensus on treatment for MH. Current treatment guidance comes from case reports and case series. Treatment is generally most successful when the etiology of the hallucination is both apparent and treatable, such as an infectious eitiology.³ In the case of MH due to hearing loss, hallucinations may improve following treatment with hearing aids or cochlear implants,^1,3,6,7 which is what was advised for Ms. L. Table 1^7-9 outlines other possible measures for addressing musical hallucinations.

Anticholinesterases, antidepressants, and antiepileptics may provide some benefit.⁸ However, pharmacotherapy is generally less efficacious and can cause adverse effects, so environmental support and hearing aids may be a safer approach. No medications have been shown to completely cure MH.

TREATMENT Hearing loss management and follow-up

When speaking with the consulting psychiatry team, Ms. L reports her outpatient psychotropic regimen has been helpful. The team decides to continue mirtazapine 30 mg/d and risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night. We recommend that Ms. L discuss tapering off risperidone with her outpatient clinician if they feel it may be indicated to reduce the risk of adverse effects. The treatment team decides not to start corticosteroids due to the risk of steroid-induced psychotic symptoms. The team discusses hallucinations related to hearing loss with Ms. L and advise her to follow up with Audiology and Otolaryngology in the outpatient setting.

The authors’ observations

Approximately 40% of people age >60 struggle with hearing impairment^4,9; this impacts their general quality of life and how clinicians communicate with such patients.¹⁰ People with hearing loss are more likely to develop feelings of social isolation, depression, and delirium (Table 2^8,10,11).¹¹

Risk factors for hearing loss include tobacco use, metabolic syndrome, exposure to loud noises, and exposure to certain ototoxic medications such as chemotherapeutic agents.¹¹ As psychiatrists, it is important to identify patients who may be at risk for hearing loss and refer them to the appropriate medical professional. If hearing loss is new onset, refer the patient to an otolaryngologist for a full evaluation. Unilateral hearing loss should warrant further workup because this could be due to an acoustic neuroma.¹¹

When providing care for a patient who uses a hearing aid, discuss adherence, barriers to adherence, and difficulties with adjusting the hearing aid. A referral to an audiologist may help patients address these barriers. Patients with hearing impairment or loss may benefit from auditory rehabilitation programs that provide communication strategies, ways to adapt to hearing loss, and information about different assistive options.¹¹ Such programs are often run by audiologists or speech language pathologists and contain both counseling and group components.

Continue to: Is is critical for psychiatrists...

It is critical for psychiatrists to ensure appropriate communication with patients who are hearing impaired (Table 3^8-11). The use of assistive devices such as sound amplifiers, written messages, or family members to assist in communication is needed to prevent miscommunication.^9-11

OUTCOME Lack of follow-up

A home health worker visits Ms. L, communicating with her using voice-to-text. Ms. L has not yet gone to her primary care physician, audiologist, or outpatient psychiatrist for follow-up because she needs to arrange transportation. Ms. L remains distressed by the music she is hearing, which is worse at night, along with her acute hearing loss.

Bottom Line

Hearing loss can predispose a person to psychiatric disorders and symptoms, including depression, delirium, and auditory hallucinations. Psychiatrists should strive to ensure clear communication with patients who are hearing impaired and should refer such patients to appropriate resources to improve outcomes.

Related Resources

• Wang J, Patel D, Francois D. Elaborate hallucinations, but is it a psychotic disorder? Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(2):46-50. doi:10.12788/cp.0091
• Sosland MD, Pinninti N. 5 ways to quiet auditory hallucinations. Current Psychiatry. 2005;4(4):110.
• Convery E, Keidser G, McLelland M, et al. A smartphone app to facilitate remote patient-provider communication in hearing health care: usability and effect on hearing aid outcomes. Telemed E-Health. 2020;26(6):798-804. doi:10.1089/ tmj.2019.0109

Drug Brand Names

Mirtazapine • Remeron
Prednisone • Rayos
Risperidone • Risperdal
Valacyclovir • Valtrex

CASE New-onset auditory hallucinations

Ms. L, age 78, presents to our hospital with worsening anxiety due to auditory hallucinations. She has been hearing music, which she reports is worse at night and consists of songs, usually the song Jingle Bells, sometimes just melodies and other times with lyrics. Ms. L denies paranoia, visual hallucinations, or worsening mood.

Two weeks ago, Ms. L had visited another hospital, describing 5 days of right-side hearing loss accompanied by pain and burning in her ear and face, along with vesicular lesions in a dermatomal pattern extending into her auditory canal. During this visit, Ms. L’s complete blood count, urine culture, urine drug screen, electrolytes, liver panel, thyroid studies, and vitamin levels were unremarkable. A CT scan of her head showed no abnormalities.

Ms. L was diagnosed with Ramsay Hunt syndrome (herpes zoster oticus), which affects cranial nerves, because of physical examination findings with a dermatomal pattern of lesion distribution and associated pain. Ramsay Hunt syndrome can cause facial paralysis and hearing loss in the affected ear. She was discharged with prescriptions for prednisone 60 mg/d for 7 days and valacyclovir 1 g/d for 7 days and told to follow up with her primary care physician. During the present visit to our hospital, Ms. L’s home health nurse reports that she still has her entire bottles of valacyclovir and prednisone left. Ms. L also has left-side hearing loss that began 5 years ago and a history of recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. Due to the recent onset of right-side hearing loss, her hearing impairment requires her to communicate via writing or via a voice-to-text app.

HISTORY Depressed and living alone

Ms. L was diagnosed with MDD more than 4 decades ago and has been receiving medication since then. She reports no prior psychiatric hospitalizations, suicide attempts, manic symptoms, or psychotic symptoms. For more than 20 years, she has seen a nurse practitioner, who had prescribed mirtazapine 30 mg/d for MDD, poor appetite, and sleep. Within the last 5 years, her nurse practitioner added risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night to augment the mirtazapine for tearfulness, irritability, and mood swings.

Ms. L’s medical history also includes hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. She is a retired teacher and lives alone. She has a chore worker who visits her home for 1 hour 5 days a week to help with cleaning and lifting, and support from her son. Ms. L no longer drives and relies on others for transportation, but is able to manage her finances, activities of daily living, cooking, and walking without any assistance.

[polldaddy:12807642]

EVALUATION Identifying the cause of the music

Ms. L is alert and oriented to time and situation, her concentration is appropriate, and her recent and remote memories are preserved. A full cognitive screen is not performed, but she is able to spell WORLD forwards and backwards and adequately perform a serial 7s test. An examination of her ear does not reveal any open vesicular lesions or swelling, but she continues to report pain and tingling in the C7 dermatomal pattern. Her urine drug screen and infectious and autoimmune laboratory testing are unremarkable. She does not have electrolyte, renal function, or blood count abnormalities. An MRI of her brain that is performed to rule out intracranial pathology due to acute hearing loss shows no acute intracranial abnormalities, with some artifact effect due to motion. Because temporal lobe epilepsy can present with hallucinations,¹ an EEG is performed to rule out seizure activity; it shows a normal wake pattern.

Psychiatry is consulted for management of the auditory hallucinations because Ms. L is distressed by hearing music. Ms. L is evaluated by Neurology and Otolaryngology. Neurology recommends a repeat brain MRI in the outpatient setting after seeing an artifact in the inpatient imaging, as well as follow-up with her primary care physician. Otolaryngology believes her symptoms are secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome with incomplete treatment, which is consistent with the initial diagnosis from her previous hospital visit, and recommends another course of oral corticosteroids, along with Audiology and Otolaryngology follow-up.

Continue to: The authors' observations

This is the first case we have seen detailing musical hallucinations (MH) secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome, although musical hallucinations have been associated with other etiologies of hearing loss. MH is a “release phenomenon” believed to be caused by deprivation of stimulation of the auditory cortex.² They are categorized as complex auditory hallucinations made up of melodies and rhythms and may be present in up to 2.5% of patients with hearing impairment.¹ The condition is mostly seen in older adults because this population is more likely to experience hearing loss. MH is more common among women (70% to 80% of cases) and is highly comorbid with psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or (as was the case for Ms. L) MDD.³ Hallucinations secondary to hearing loss may be more common in left-side hearing loss.⁴ In a 2005 study, Warner et al⁵ found religious music such as hymns or Christmas carols was most commonly heard, possibly due to repetitive past exposure.

There is no consensus on treatment for MH. Current treatment guidance comes from case reports and case series. Treatment is generally most successful when the etiology of the hallucination is both apparent and treatable, such as an infectious eitiology.³ In the case of MH due to hearing loss, hallucinations may improve following treatment with hearing aids or cochlear implants,^1,3,6,7 which is what was advised for Ms. L. Table 1^7-9 outlines other possible measures for addressing musical hallucinations.

Anticholinesterases, antidepressants, and antiepileptics may provide some benefit.⁸ However, pharmacotherapy is generally less efficacious and can cause adverse effects, so environmental support and hearing aids may be a safer approach. No medications have been shown to completely cure MH.

TREATMENT Hearing loss management and follow-up

When speaking with the consulting psychiatry team, Ms. L reports her outpatient psychotropic regimen has been helpful. The team decides to continue mirtazapine 30 mg/d and risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night. We recommend that Ms. L discuss tapering off risperidone with her outpatient clinician if they feel it may be indicated to reduce the risk of adverse effects. The treatment team decides not to start corticosteroids due to the risk of steroid-induced psychotic symptoms. The team discusses hallucinations related to hearing loss with Ms. L and advise her to follow up with Audiology and Otolaryngology in the outpatient setting.

The authors’ observations

Approximately 40% of people age >60 struggle with hearing impairment^4,9; this impacts their general quality of life and how clinicians communicate with such patients.¹⁰ People with hearing loss are more likely to develop feelings of social isolation, depression, and delirium (Table 2^8,10,11).¹¹

Risk factors for hearing loss include tobacco use, metabolic syndrome, exposure to loud noises, and exposure to certain ototoxic medications such as chemotherapeutic agents.¹¹ As psychiatrists, it is important to identify patients who may be at risk for hearing loss and refer them to the appropriate medical professional. If hearing loss is new onset, refer the patient to an otolaryngologist for a full evaluation. Unilateral hearing loss should warrant further workup because this could be due to an acoustic neuroma.¹¹

When providing care for a patient who uses a hearing aid, discuss adherence, barriers to adherence, and difficulties with adjusting the hearing aid. A referral to an audiologist may help patients address these barriers. Patients with hearing impairment or loss may benefit from auditory rehabilitation programs that provide communication strategies, ways to adapt to hearing loss, and information about different assistive options.¹¹ Such programs are often run by audiologists or speech language pathologists and contain both counseling and group components.

Continue to: Is is critical for psychiatrists...

It is critical for psychiatrists to ensure appropriate communication with patients who are hearing impaired (Table 3^8-11). The use of assistive devices such as sound amplifiers, written messages, or family members to assist in communication is needed to prevent miscommunication.^9-11

OUTCOME Lack of follow-up

A home health worker visits Ms. L, communicating with her using voice-to-text. Ms. L has not yet gone to her primary care physician, audiologist, or outpatient psychiatrist for follow-up because she needs to arrange transportation. Ms. L remains distressed by the music she is hearing, which is worse at night, along with her acute hearing loss.

Bottom Line

Hearing loss can predispose a person to psychiatric disorders and symptoms, including depression, delirium, and auditory hallucinations. Psychiatrists should strive to ensure clear communication with patients who are hearing impaired and should refer such patients to appropriate resources to improve outcomes.

Related Resources

• Wang J, Patel D, Francois D. Elaborate hallucinations, but is it a psychotic disorder? Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(2):46-50. doi:10.12788/cp.0091
• Sosland MD, Pinninti N. 5 ways to quiet auditory hallucinations. Current Psychiatry. 2005;4(4):110.
• Convery E, Keidser G, McLelland M, et al. A smartphone app to facilitate remote patient-provider communication in hearing health care: usability and effect on hearing aid outcomes. Telemed E-Health. 2020;26(6):798-804. doi:10.1089/ tmj.2019.0109

Drug Brand Names

Mirtazapine • Remeron
Prednisone • Rayos
Risperidone • Risperdal
Valacyclovir • Valtrex

CASE New-onset auditory hallucinations

Ms. L, age 78, presents to our hospital with worsening anxiety due to auditory hallucinations. She has been hearing music, which she reports is worse at night and consists of songs, usually the song Jingle Bells, sometimes just melodies and other times with lyrics. Ms. L denies paranoia, visual hallucinations, or worsening mood.

Two weeks ago, Ms. L had visited another hospital, describing 5 days of right-side hearing loss accompanied by pain and burning in her ear and face, along with vesicular lesions in a dermatomal pattern extending into her auditory canal. During this visit, Ms. L’s complete blood count, urine culture, urine drug screen, electrolytes, liver panel, thyroid studies, and vitamin levels were unremarkable. A CT scan of her head showed no abnormalities.

Ms. L was diagnosed with Ramsay Hunt syndrome (herpes zoster oticus), which affects cranial nerves, because of physical examination findings with a dermatomal pattern of lesion distribution and associated pain. Ramsay Hunt syndrome can cause facial paralysis and hearing loss in the affected ear. She was discharged with prescriptions for prednisone 60 mg/d for 7 days and valacyclovir 1 g/d for 7 days and told to follow up with her primary care physician. During the present visit to our hospital, Ms. L’s home health nurse reports that she still has her entire bottles of valacyclovir and prednisone left. Ms. L also has left-side hearing loss that began 5 years ago and a history of recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. Due to the recent onset of right-side hearing loss, her hearing impairment requires her to communicate via writing or via a voice-to-text app.

HISTORY Depressed and living alone

Ms. L was diagnosed with MDD more than 4 decades ago and has been receiving medication since then. She reports no prior psychiatric hospitalizations, suicide attempts, manic symptoms, or psychotic symptoms. For more than 20 years, she has seen a nurse practitioner, who had prescribed mirtazapine 30 mg/d for MDD, poor appetite, and sleep. Within the last 5 years, her nurse practitioner added risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night to augment the mirtazapine for tearfulness, irritability, and mood swings.

Ms. L’s medical history also includes hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. She is a retired teacher and lives alone. She has a chore worker who visits her home for 1 hour 5 days a week to help with cleaning and lifting, and support from her son. Ms. L no longer drives and relies on others for transportation, but is able to manage her finances, activities of daily living, cooking, and walking without any assistance.

[polldaddy:12807642]

EVALUATION Identifying the cause of the music

Ms. L is alert and oriented to time and situation, her concentration is appropriate, and her recent and remote memories are preserved. A full cognitive screen is not performed, but she is able to spell WORLD forwards and backwards and adequately perform a serial 7s test. An examination of her ear does not reveal any open vesicular lesions or swelling, but she continues to report pain and tingling in the C7 dermatomal pattern. Her urine drug screen and infectious and autoimmune laboratory testing are unremarkable. She does not have electrolyte, renal function, or blood count abnormalities. An MRI of her brain that is performed to rule out intracranial pathology due to acute hearing loss shows no acute intracranial abnormalities, with some artifact effect due to motion. Because temporal lobe epilepsy can present with hallucinations,¹ an EEG is performed to rule out seizure activity; it shows a normal wake pattern.

Psychiatry is consulted for management of the auditory hallucinations because Ms. L is distressed by hearing music. Ms. L is evaluated by Neurology and Otolaryngology. Neurology recommends a repeat brain MRI in the outpatient setting after seeing an artifact in the inpatient imaging, as well as follow-up with her primary care physician. Otolaryngology believes her symptoms are secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome with incomplete treatment, which is consistent with the initial diagnosis from her previous hospital visit, and recommends another course of oral corticosteroids, along with Audiology and Otolaryngology follow-up.

Continue to: The authors' observations

This is the first case we have seen detailing musical hallucinations (MH) secondary to Ramsay Hunt syndrome, although musical hallucinations have been associated with other etiologies of hearing loss. MH is a “release phenomenon” believed to be caused by deprivation of stimulation of the auditory cortex.² They are categorized as complex auditory hallucinations made up of melodies and rhythms and may be present in up to 2.5% of patients with hearing impairment.¹ The condition is mostly seen in older adults because this population is more likely to experience hearing loss. MH is more common among women (70% to 80% of cases) and is highly comorbid with psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or (as was the case for Ms. L) MDD.³ Hallucinations secondary to hearing loss may be more common in left-side hearing loss.⁴ In a 2005 study, Warner et al⁵ found religious music such as hymns or Christmas carols was most commonly heard, possibly due to repetitive past exposure.

There is no consensus on treatment for MH. Current treatment guidance comes from case reports and case series. Treatment is generally most successful when the etiology of the hallucination is both apparent and treatable, such as an infectious eitiology.³ In the case of MH due to hearing loss, hallucinations may improve following treatment with hearing aids or cochlear implants,^1,3,6,7 which is what was advised for Ms. L. Table 1^7-9 outlines other possible measures for addressing musical hallucinations.

Anticholinesterases, antidepressants, and antiepileptics may provide some benefit.⁸ However, pharmacotherapy is generally less efficacious and can cause adverse effects, so environmental support and hearing aids may be a safer approach. No medications have been shown to completely cure MH.

TREATMENT Hearing loss management and follow-up

When speaking with the consulting psychiatry team, Ms. L reports her outpatient psychotropic regimen has been helpful. The team decides to continue mirtazapine 30 mg/d and risperidone 0.5 mg/d at night. We recommend that Ms. L discuss tapering off risperidone with her outpatient clinician if they feel it may be indicated to reduce the risk of adverse effects. The treatment team decides not to start corticosteroids due to the risk of steroid-induced psychotic symptoms. The team discusses hallucinations related to hearing loss with Ms. L and advise her to follow up with Audiology and Otolaryngology in the outpatient setting.

The authors’ observations

Approximately 40% of people age >60 struggle with hearing impairment^4,9; this impacts their general quality of life and how clinicians communicate with such patients.¹⁰ People with hearing loss are more likely to develop feelings of social isolation, depression, and delirium (Table 2^8,10,11).¹¹

Risk factors for hearing loss include tobacco use, metabolic syndrome, exposure to loud noises, and exposure to certain ototoxic medications such as chemotherapeutic agents.¹¹ As psychiatrists, it is important to identify patients who may be at risk for hearing loss and refer them to the appropriate medical professional. If hearing loss is new onset, refer the patient to an otolaryngologist for a full evaluation. Unilateral hearing loss should warrant further workup because this could be due to an acoustic neuroma.¹¹

When providing care for a patient who uses a hearing aid, discuss adherence, barriers to adherence, and difficulties with adjusting the hearing aid. A referral to an audiologist may help patients address these barriers. Patients with hearing impairment or loss may benefit from auditory rehabilitation programs that provide communication strategies, ways to adapt to hearing loss, and information about different assistive options.¹¹ Such programs are often run by audiologists or speech language pathologists and contain both counseling and group components.

Continue to: Is is critical for psychiatrists...

It is critical for psychiatrists to ensure appropriate communication with patients who are hearing impaired (Table 3^8-11). The use of assistive devices such as sound amplifiers, written messages, or family members to assist in communication is needed to prevent miscommunication.^9-11

OUTCOME Lack of follow-up

A home health worker visits Ms. L, communicating with her using voice-to-text. Ms. L has not yet gone to her primary care physician, audiologist, or outpatient psychiatrist for follow-up because she needs to arrange transportation. Ms. L remains distressed by the music she is hearing, which is worse at night, along with her acute hearing loss.

Bottom Line

Hearing loss can predispose a person to psychiatric disorders and symptoms, including depression, delirium, and auditory hallucinations. Psychiatrists should strive to ensure clear communication with patients who are hearing impaired and should refer such patients to appropriate resources to improve outcomes.

Related Resources

• Wang J, Patel D, Francois D. Elaborate hallucinations, but is it a psychotic disorder? Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(2):46-50. doi:10.12788/cp.0091
• Sosland MD, Pinninti N. 5 ways to quiet auditory hallucinations. Current Psychiatry. 2005;4(4):110.
• Convery E, Keidser G, McLelland M, et al. A smartphone app to facilitate remote patient-provider communication in hearing health care: usability and effect on hearing aid outcomes. Telemed E-Health. 2020;26(6):798-804. doi:10.1089/ tmj.2019.0109

Drug Brand Names

Mirtazapine • Remeron
Prednisone • Rayos
Risperidone • Risperdal
Valacyclovir • Valtrex

When used to treat anxiety or depressive disorders, antidepressants can cause a variety of adverse effects, including emotional blunting. Emotional blunting has been described as emotional numbness, indifference, decreased responsiveness, or numbing. In a study of 669 patients who had been receiving antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs], or other antidepressants), 46% said they had experienced emotional blunting.¹ A 2019 study found that approximately one-third of patients with unipolar depression or bipolar depression stopped taking their antidepressant due to emotional blunting.²

Historically, there has been difficulty parsing out emotional blunting (a general decrease of all range of emotions) from anhedonia (a restriction of positive emotions). Additionally, some researchers have questioned if the blunting of emotions is part of depressive symptomatology. In a study of 38 adults, most felt able to differentiate emotional blunting due to antidepressants by considering the resolution of other depressive symptoms and timeline of onset.³

A significant limitation has been how clinicians measure or assess emotional blunting. The Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ), previously known as the Oxford Questionnaire on the Emotional Side-effects of Antidepressants, was created based on a qualitative survey of patients who endorsed emotional blunting.⁴ A validated scale, the ODQ divides emotional blunting into 4 dimensions:

• general reduction in emotions
• reduction in positive emotions
• emotional detachment from others
• not caring.⁴

The sections of ODQ focus on exploring specific aspects of patients’ emotional experiences, comparing experiences in the past week to before the development of illness/emotional blunting, and patients’ opinions about antidepressants. Example statements from the ODQ (Table⁴) may help clinicians better understand and explore emotional blunting with their patients.

There are 2 leading theories behind the mechanism of emotional blunting on antidepressants, both focused on serotonin. The first theory offers that SSRIs alter frontal lobe activity through serotonergic effects. The second theory is focused on the downward effects of serotonin on dopamine in reward pathways.⁵ 

Treatment options: Limited evidence

Data on how to address antidepressant-induced emotional blunting are limited and based largely on case reports. One open-label study (N = 143) found that patients experiencing emotional blunting while taking SSRIs and SNRIs who were switched to vortioxetine had a statistically significant decrease in ODQ total score; 50% reported no emotional blunting.⁶ Options to address emotional blunting include decreasing the antidepressant dose, augmenting with or switching to another agent, or considering other treatments such as neuromodulation.⁵ Further research is necessary to clarify which intervention is best.

Clinicians will encounter emotional blunting in patients who are taking antidepressants. It is important to recognize and address these symptoms to help improve patients’ adherence and overall quality of life. 

When used to treat anxiety or depressive disorders, antidepressants can cause a variety of adverse effects, including emotional blunting. Emotional blunting has been described as emotional numbness, indifference, decreased responsiveness, or numbing. In a study of 669 patients who had been receiving antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs], or other antidepressants), 46% said they had experienced emotional blunting.¹ A 2019 study found that approximately one-third of patients with unipolar depression or bipolar depression stopped taking their antidepressant due to emotional blunting.²

Historically, there has been difficulty parsing out emotional blunting (a general decrease of all range of emotions) from anhedonia (a restriction of positive emotions). Additionally, some researchers have questioned if the blunting of emotions is part of depressive symptomatology. In a study of 38 adults, most felt able to differentiate emotional blunting due to antidepressants by considering the resolution of other depressive symptoms and timeline of onset.³

A significant limitation has been how clinicians measure or assess emotional blunting. The Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ), previously known as the Oxford Questionnaire on the Emotional Side-effects of Antidepressants, was created based on a qualitative survey of patients who endorsed emotional blunting.⁴ A validated scale, the ODQ divides emotional blunting into 4 dimensions:

• general reduction in emotions
• reduction in positive emotions
• emotional detachment from others
• not caring.⁴

The sections of ODQ focus on exploring specific aspects of patients’ emotional experiences, comparing experiences in the past week to before the development of illness/emotional blunting, and patients’ opinions about antidepressants. Example statements from the ODQ (Table⁴) may help clinicians better understand and explore emotional blunting with their patients.

There are 2 leading theories behind the mechanism of emotional blunting on antidepressants, both focused on serotonin. The first theory offers that SSRIs alter frontal lobe activity through serotonergic effects. The second theory is focused on the downward effects of serotonin on dopamine in reward pathways.⁵ 

Treatment options: Limited evidence

Data on how to address antidepressant-induced emotional blunting are limited and based largely on case reports. One open-label study (N = 143) found that patients experiencing emotional blunting while taking SSRIs and SNRIs who were switched to vortioxetine had a statistically significant decrease in ODQ total score; 50% reported no emotional blunting.⁶ Options to address emotional blunting include decreasing the antidepressant dose, augmenting with or switching to another agent, or considering other treatments such as neuromodulation.⁵ Further research is necessary to clarify which intervention is best.

Clinicians will encounter emotional blunting in patients who are taking antidepressants. It is important to recognize and address these symptoms to help improve patients’ adherence and overall quality of life. 

When used to treat anxiety or depressive disorders, antidepressants can cause a variety of adverse effects, including emotional blunting. Emotional blunting has been described as emotional numbness, indifference, decreased responsiveness, or numbing. In a study of 669 patients who had been receiving antidepressants (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [SSRIs], serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors [SNRIs], or other antidepressants), 46% said they had experienced emotional blunting.¹ A 2019 study found that approximately one-third of patients with unipolar depression or bipolar depression stopped taking their antidepressant due to emotional blunting.²

Historically, there has been difficulty parsing out emotional blunting (a general decrease of all range of emotions) from anhedonia (a restriction of positive emotions). Additionally, some researchers have questioned if the blunting of emotions is part of depressive symptomatology. In a study of 38 adults, most felt able to differentiate emotional blunting due to antidepressants by considering the resolution of other depressive symptoms and timeline of onset.³

A significant limitation has been how clinicians measure or assess emotional blunting. The Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ), previously known as the Oxford Questionnaire on the Emotional Side-effects of Antidepressants, was created based on a qualitative survey of patients who endorsed emotional blunting.⁴ A validated scale, the ODQ divides emotional blunting into 4 dimensions:

• general reduction in emotions
• reduction in positive emotions
• emotional detachment from others
• not caring.⁴

The sections of ODQ focus on exploring specific aspects of patients’ emotional experiences, comparing experiences in the past week to before the development of illness/emotional blunting, and patients’ opinions about antidepressants. Example statements from the ODQ (Table⁴) may help clinicians better understand and explore emotional blunting with their patients.

There are 2 leading theories behind the mechanism of emotional blunting on antidepressants, both focused on serotonin. The first theory offers that SSRIs alter frontal lobe activity through serotonergic effects. The second theory is focused on the downward effects of serotonin on dopamine in reward pathways.⁵ 

Treatment options: Limited evidence

Data on how to address antidepressant-induced emotional blunting are limited and based largely on case reports. One open-label study (N = 143) found that patients experiencing emotional blunting while taking SSRIs and SNRIs who were switched to vortioxetine had a statistically significant decrease in ODQ total score; 50% reported no emotional blunting.⁶ Options to address emotional blunting include decreasing the antidepressant dose, augmenting with or switching to another agent, or considering other treatments such as neuromodulation.⁵ Further research is necessary to clarify which intervention is best.

Clinicians will encounter emotional blunting in patients who are taking antidepressants. It is important to recognize and address these symptoms to help improve patients’ adherence and overall quality of life. 

Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in Current Psychiatry. All submissions to Readers’ Forum undergo peer review and are subject to editing for length and style. For more information, contact [email protected].

Throughout my psychiatric clerkship, I (JWF) participated in street medicine, the practice of providing care to patients (typically those who are homeless) at the location they currently reside, such as in a homeless encampment or community shelter. Our clinical team drove to locations that provided housing for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, where we assisted with medications and blood draws. I remember pulling up the first day and seeing someone outside smoking a cigarette. I soon learned that many people living in such situations were smokers, and that among the substances they used, tobacco was the most common.

One patient said the cigarettes helped him manage the “voices in his head” as well as some of the adverse effects from medication, such as parkinsonism and akathisia. I asked my attending physician about this and she explained that for some patients, using tobacco was a way to mitigate the positive symptoms of schizophrenia and make the adverse effects of their therapy, particularly extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), more bearable. By the end of my 2-week rotation, I was sure of a trend: our patients with schizophrenia smoked incessantly. Near the end of my rotation, I asked a patient, “Why do you smoke”? The patient looked at me, puzzled, and replied: “I just do.” This exchange only piqued my curiosity, and I could not help but wonder: what is the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia? How is tobacco use related to the pathophysiology of schizophrenia? Does tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia ameliorate aspects of their psychosis? Street medicine offered me a window into a biomedically intriguing question, and I wanted to learn more.

What smoking does for patients with schizophrenia

The high prevalence of smoking among patients with schizophrenia (50% to 88%) greatly exceeds the rates of smoking among patients with other psychiatric illnesses.^1,2 The role of smoking in relation to schizophrenia and other psychoses is multidimensional, and evidence implicates smoking as a risk factor for schizophrenia.^3,4

Two mechanisms may help explain tobacco use in patients with schizophrenia: reducing the adverse effects of antipsychotic medications and promoting neural transmission of dopamine. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are a first-line treatment, but they can produce EPS, metabolic dysregulation, and blood disorders such as hyponatremia and (rarely) agranulocytosis (1% with clozapine).⁵ Compared to those who are nonsmokers, patients with schizophrenia who smoke are more likely to experience more severe symptoms (eg, hallucinations and delusions) and less severe EPS.^5,6 Research suggests that exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons released during smoking induces cytochrome P450 1A2, an enzyme that metabolizes antipsychotic medications such as haloperidol, clozapine, and olanzapine. Increased metabolism results in lower serum concentrations of antipsychotics, lower efficacy, and more severe positive symptoms.^5,6

Additionally, tobacco is an activator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR).⁶ When these receptors become activated, dopamine is released. Dopamine serves as a mediator of reward for nicotine use. In the context of schizophrenia, tobacco use opposes the mechanism of action of SGAs, which is to block neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ The etiology of EPS is related to the blockade of postsynaptic dopamine release in the striatum.⁶ By activating nAChR, smoking induces a downstream release of dopamine that can alleviate iatrogenic EPS by restoring neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ Nicotine may also modulate alpha-7 nicotinic receptor dysfunction, and improve the ability to filter out irrelevant environmental stimuli (impaired sensory gating), which can be overwhelming for patients with schizophrenia. It also can improve cognitive dysfunction and attention by inducing the release of dopamine in mesocortical pathways.⁷ The implications of this neural pathway are significant because smoking is significantly greater in tobacco users who are diagnosed with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who lack a psychiatric diagnosis.^6,7 Smoking may enhance dopaminergic neural transmission to a far greater extent in tobacco users with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who do not develop schizophrenia, which suggests intrinsic differences at the neuronal level. Neural differences between tobacco users with or without schizophrenia may synergize with smoking in clinically and biologically meaningful ways. These pathways require further research to support or disprove these hypotheses.

Aside from the dopaminergic system, mechanisms influencing tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia may also be related to nicotine’s mild antidepressant effects. Evidence suggests a clinically meaningful association between nicotine dependence and mood disorders, and this association may be due to the antidepressant effects of nicotine.^8-13 Patients with schizophrenia may experience respite from depressive symptoms through their tobacco use, eventually leading to nicotine dependence.

Continue to: Treatment of schizophrenia...

Treatment of schizophrenia involves multimodal management of a patient’s life, including reducing maladaptive habits that are harmful to health. Chronic smoking in patients with schizophrenia is associated not only with atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease, but also with poor neurologic functioning, such as significant impairment in attention, working memory, learning, executive function, reasoning, problem-solving and speed of processing.¹⁴ One study found that in patients with schizophrenia, smoking increased the 20-year cardiovascular mortality risk by 86%.¹⁵

Despite challenges to abstinence, smoking cessation should be discussed with these patients, especially given the high prevalence of smoking among this vulnerable population. Bupropion and varenicline have been studied in the context of smoking cessation among patients with schizophrenia. Data on varenicline are mixed. Smokers with schizophrenia who received bupropion showed higher rates of abstinence from smoking compared to those who received placebo.¹⁶

As part of the biopsychosocial model of clinical care, sociodemographic factors must be considered in assessing the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia, because a large proportion of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia are members of underrepresented minority groups.¹⁷ A PubMed database search using keywords “African American” or “Black,” “tobacco,” and “schizophrenia” located only 12 studies, most of which lacked relevance to this question. Han et al¹⁸ is 1 of the few studies to investigate sociodemographic factors as they relate to tobacco use among adults with psychoses. Social determinants of health and other confounding variables also need defining to truly distinguish causation from correlation, especially regarding tobacco use and its association with other health risk behaviors.¹⁹

Without the street medicine component of the medical school training I received, the pattern of smoking among patients with schizophrenia may have remained invisible or insignificant to me, as tobacco use is not permitted in the inpatient and outpatient academic settings. This experience not only raised insightful questions, but also emphasized the clinical value of seeing patients within their living environment.

Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in Current Psychiatry. All submissions to Readers’ Forum undergo peer review and are subject to editing for length and style. For more information, contact [email protected].

Throughout my psychiatric clerkship, I (JWF) participated in street medicine, the practice of providing care to patients (typically those who are homeless) at the location they currently reside, such as in a homeless encampment or community shelter. Our clinical team drove to locations that provided housing for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, where we assisted with medications and blood draws. I remember pulling up the first day and seeing someone outside smoking a cigarette. I soon learned that many people living in such situations were smokers, and that among the substances they used, tobacco was the most common.

One patient said the cigarettes helped him manage the “voices in his head” as well as some of the adverse effects from medication, such as parkinsonism and akathisia. I asked my attending physician about this and she explained that for some patients, using tobacco was a way to mitigate the positive symptoms of schizophrenia and make the adverse effects of their therapy, particularly extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), more bearable. By the end of my 2-week rotation, I was sure of a trend: our patients with schizophrenia smoked incessantly. Near the end of my rotation, I asked a patient, “Why do you smoke”? The patient looked at me, puzzled, and replied: “I just do.” This exchange only piqued my curiosity, and I could not help but wonder: what is the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia? How is tobacco use related to the pathophysiology of schizophrenia? Does tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia ameliorate aspects of their psychosis? Street medicine offered me a window into a biomedically intriguing question, and I wanted to learn more.

What smoking does for patients with schizophrenia

The high prevalence of smoking among patients with schizophrenia (50% to 88%) greatly exceeds the rates of smoking among patients with other psychiatric illnesses.^1,2 The role of smoking in relation to schizophrenia and other psychoses is multidimensional, and evidence implicates smoking as a risk factor for schizophrenia.^3,4

Two mechanisms may help explain tobacco use in patients with schizophrenia: reducing the adverse effects of antipsychotic medications and promoting neural transmission of dopamine. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are a first-line treatment, but they can produce EPS, metabolic dysregulation, and blood disorders such as hyponatremia and (rarely) agranulocytosis (1% with clozapine).⁵ Compared to those who are nonsmokers, patients with schizophrenia who smoke are more likely to experience more severe symptoms (eg, hallucinations and delusions) and less severe EPS.^5,6 Research suggests that exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons released during smoking induces cytochrome P450 1A2, an enzyme that metabolizes antipsychotic medications such as haloperidol, clozapine, and olanzapine. Increased metabolism results in lower serum concentrations of antipsychotics, lower efficacy, and more severe positive symptoms.^5,6

Additionally, tobacco is an activator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR).⁶ When these receptors become activated, dopamine is released. Dopamine serves as a mediator of reward for nicotine use. In the context of schizophrenia, tobacco use opposes the mechanism of action of SGAs, which is to block neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ The etiology of EPS is related to the blockade of postsynaptic dopamine release in the striatum.⁶ By activating nAChR, smoking induces a downstream release of dopamine that can alleviate iatrogenic EPS by restoring neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ Nicotine may also modulate alpha-7 nicotinic receptor dysfunction, and improve the ability to filter out irrelevant environmental stimuli (impaired sensory gating), which can be overwhelming for patients with schizophrenia. It also can improve cognitive dysfunction and attention by inducing the release of dopamine in mesocortical pathways.⁷ The implications of this neural pathway are significant because smoking is significantly greater in tobacco users who are diagnosed with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who lack a psychiatric diagnosis.^6,7 Smoking may enhance dopaminergic neural transmission to a far greater extent in tobacco users with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who do not develop schizophrenia, which suggests intrinsic differences at the neuronal level. Neural differences between tobacco users with or without schizophrenia may synergize with smoking in clinically and biologically meaningful ways. These pathways require further research to support or disprove these hypotheses.

Aside from the dopaminergic system, mechanisms influencing tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia may also be related to nicotine’s mild antidepressant effects. Evidence suggests a clinically meaningful association between nicotine dependence and mood disorders, and this association may be due to the antidepressant effects of nicotine.^8-13 Patients with schizophrenia may experience respite from depressive symptoms through their tobacco use, eventually leading to nicotine dependence.

Continue to: Treatment of schizophrenia...

Treatment of schizophrenia involves multimodal management of a patient’s life, including reducing maladaptive habits that are harmful to health. Chronic smoking in patients with schizophrenia is associated not only with atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease, but also with poor neurologic functioning, such as significant impairment in attention, working memory, learning, executive function, reasoning, problem-solving and speed of processing.¹⁴ One study found that in patients with schizophrenia, smoking increased the 20-year cardiovascular mortality risk by 86%.¹⁵

Despite challenges to abstinence, smoking cessation should be discussed with these patients, especially given the high prevalence of smoking among this vulnerable population. Bupropion and varenicline have been studied in the context of smoking cessation among patients with schizophrenia. Data on varenicline are mixed. Smokers with schizophrenia who received bupropion showed higher rates of abstinence from smoking compared to those who received placebo.¹⁶

As part of the biopsychosocial model of clinical care, sociodemographic factors must be considered in assessing the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia, because a large proportion of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia are members of underrepresented minority groups.¹⁷ A PubMed database search using keywords “African American” or “Black,” “tobacco,” and “schizophrenia” located only 12 studies, most of which lacked relevance to this question. Han et al¹⁸ is 1 of the few studies to investigate sociodemographic factors as they relate to tobacco use among adults with psychoses. Social determinants of health and other confounding variables also need defining to truly distinguish causation from correlation, especially regarding tobacco use and its association with other health risk behaviors.¹⁹

Without the street medicine component of the medical school training I received, the pattern of smoking among patients with schizophrenia may have remained invisible or insignificant to me, as tobacco use is not permitted in the inpatient and outpatient academic settings. This experience not only raised insightful questions, but also emphasized the clinical value of seeing patients within their living environment.

Editor’s note: Readers’ Forum is a department for correspondence from readers that is not in response to articles published in Current Psychiatry. All submissions to Readers’ Forum undergo peer review and are subject to editing for length and style. For more information, contact [email protected].

Throughout my psychiatric clerkship, I (JWF) participated in street medicine, the practice of providing care to patients (typically those who are homeless) at the location they currently reside, such as in a homeless encampment or community shelter. Our clinical team drove to locations that provided housing for patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, where we assisted with medications and blood draws. I remember pulling up the first day and seeing someone outside smoking a cigarette. I soon learned that many people living in such situations were smokers, and that among the substances they used, tobacco was the most common.

One patient said the cigarettes helped him manage the “voices in his head” as well as some of the adverse effects from medication, such as parkinsonism and akathisia. I asked my attending physician about this and she explained that for some patients, using tobacco was a way to mitigate the positive symptoms of schizophrenia and make the adverse effects of their therapy, particularly extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), more bearable. By the end of my 2-week rotation, I was sure of a trend: our patients with schizophrenia smoked incessantly. Near the end of my rotation, I asked a patient, “Why do you smoke”? The patient looked at me, puzzled, and replied: “I just do.” This exchange only piqued my curiosity, and I could not help but wonder: what is the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia? How is tobacco use related to the pathophysiology of schizophrenia? Does tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia ameliorate aspects of their psychosis? Street medicine offered me a window into a biomedically intriguing question, and I wanted to learn more.

What smoking does for patients with schizophrenia

The high prevalence of smoking among patients with schizophrenia (50% to 88%) greatly exceeds the rates of smoking among patients with other psychiatric illnesses.^1,2 The role of smoking in relation to schizophrenia and other psychoses is multidimensional, and evidence implicates smoking as a risk factor for schizophrenia.^3,4

Two mechanisms may help explain tobacco use in patients with schizophrenia: reducing the adverse effects of antipsychotic medications and promoting neural transmission of dopamine. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are a first-line treatment, but they can produce EPS, metabolic dysregulation, and blood disorders such as hyponatremia and (rarely) agranulocytosis (1% with clozapine).⁵ Compared to those who are nonsmokers, patients with schizophrenia who smoke are more likely to experience more severe symptoms (eg, hallucinations and delusions) and less severe EPS.^5,6 Research suggests that exposure to polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons released during smoking induces cytochrome P450 1A2, an enzyme that metabolizes antipsychotic medications such as haloperidol, clozapine, and olanzapine. Increased metabolism results in lower serum concentrations of antipsychotics, lower efficacy, and more severe positive symptoms.^5,6

Additionally, tobacco is an activator of nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR).⁶ When these receptors become activated, dopamine is released. Dopamine serves as a mediator of reward for nicotine use. In the context of schizophrenia, tobacco use opposes the mechanism of action of SGAs, which is to block neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ The etiology of EPS is related to the blockade of postsynaptic dopamine release in the striatum.⁶ By activating nAChR, smoking induces a downstream release of dopamine that can alleviate iatrogenic EPS by restoring neural transmission of dopamine.⁶ Nicotine may also modulate alpha-7 nicotinic receptor dysfunction, and improve the ability to filter out irrelevant environmental stimuli (impaired sensory gating), which can be overwhelming for patients with schizophrenia. It also can improve cognitive dysfunction and attention by inducing the release of dopamine in mesocortical pathways.⁷ The implications of this neural pathway are significant because smoking is significantly greater in tobacco users who are diagnosed with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who lack a psychiatric diagnosis.^6,7 Smoking may enhance dopaminergic neural transmission to a far greater extent in tobacco users with schizophrenia compared to tobacco users who do not develop schizophrenia, which suggests intrinsic differences at the neuronal level. Neural differences between tobacco users with or without schizophrenia may synergize with smoking in clinically and biologically meaningful ways. These pathways require further research to support or disprove these hypotheses.

Aside from the dopaminergic system, mechanisms influencing tobacco use among patients with schizophrenia may also be related to nicotine’s mild antidepressant effects. Evidence suggests a clinically meaningful association between nicotine dependence and mood disorders, and this association may be due to the antidepressant effects of nicotine.^8-13 Patients with schizophrenia may experience respite from depressive symptoms through their tobacco use, eventually leading to nicotine dependence.

Continue to: Treatment of schizophrenia...

Treatment of schizophrenia involves multimodal management of a patient’s life, including reducing maladaptive habits that are harmful to health. Chronic smoking in patients with schizophrenia is associated not only with atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease, but also with poor neurologic functioning, such as significant impairment in attention, working memory, learning, executive function, reasoning, problem-solving and speed of processing.¹⁴ One study found that in patients with schizophrenia, smoking increased the 20-year cardiovascular mortality risk by 86%.¹⁵

Despite challenges to abstinence, smoking cessation should be discussed with these patients, especially given the high prevalence of smoking among this vulnerable population. Bupropion and varenicline have been studied in the context of smoking cessation among patients with schizophrenia. Data on varenicline are mixed. Smokers with schizophrenia who received bupropion showed higher rates of abstinence from smoking compared to those who received placebo.¹⁶

As part of the biopsychosocial model of clinical care, sociodemographic factors must be considered in assessing the relationship between tobacco use and schizophrenia, because a large proportion of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia are members of underrepresented minority groups.¹⁷ A PubMed database search using keywords “African American” or “Black,” “tobacco,” and “schizophrenia” located only 12 studies, most of which lacked relevance to this question. Han et al¹⁸ is 1 of the few studies to investigate sociodemographic factors as they relate to tobacco use among adults with psychoses. Social determinants of health and other confounding variables also need defining to truly distinguish causation from correlation, especially regarding tobacco use and its association with other health risk behaviors.¹⁹

Without the street medicine component of the medical school training I received, the pattern of smoking among patients with schizophrenia may have remained invisible or insignificant to me, as tobacco use is not permitted in the inpatient and outpatient academic settings. This experience not only raised insightful questions, but also emphasized the clinical value of seeing patients within their living environment.

Thank you very much to Drs. Vincent, Good, and El-Mallakh for their guest editorial on interventional psychiatry (“Interventional psychiatry: What are the next steps?” Current Psychiatry, July 2023, p. 7-9, doi:10.12788/cp.0378). Your addressing the “gap in training” regarding “evidence the growth of interventional psychiatry has exceeded the capacity of the current training infrastructure to provide trainees with adequate exposure to these procedures” is right on the mark, as is the observation that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Psychiatry Milestones “do not indicate how competency in these therapies can be achieved.”

The Clinical Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Society (CTMSS) is well aware of these issues and is actively addressing them:

1. We have increased the number of PULSES courses—designed to serve as intensive, introductory courses on TMS—we provide, and increased the number of members on our PULSES team to address this. We have also increased the number of PULSES scholarships for psychiatry residents that cover the costs of the conference and materials.

2. We created a standing Resident Subcommittee of our Education Committee that is focused on psychiatry resident training. We realize not all psychiatric residency programs have active TMS programs or attendings who are trained in TMS. Last year we presented lectures aimed at introducing TMS to PGY-1 and PGY-2 psychiatry residents. These were recorded and are available for free on the CTMSS website (www.clinicaltmssociety.org).

3. The Resident Subcommittee presented the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training with a curriculum submission that was accepted and will be available to all psychiatric residents across the country free of charge. (Current Psychiatry Associate Editor Phillip G. Janicak, MD was very helpful to our subcommittee with this project.)

4. The topic of resident/fellow training in all forms of neuromodulation was discussed during our monthly Grand Rounds webinar and at our annual meeting.

5. The issue of having a broader base of knowledge and training in neuromodulation was a topic at a recent Education Committee meeting, and this year we are adding lectures on electroconvulsive therapy and esketamine to our Grand Rounds webinars. Many CTMSS members are trained and knowledgeable in multiple neuromodulation modalities.

Continue to: 6. Many CTMSS members...

6. Many CTMSS members are involved in academic programs or are invited to training programs to teach psychiatric residents as guest lecturers.

7. The UK's Royal College of Psychiatrists has requested access to our prerecorded lectures, and CTMSS members are working on translating our lectures into Spanish.

Resident education is a key component of the main goals of the CTMSS. Our Board of Directors is fully committed to resident education and has directed the Education Committee to address it. We look forward to moving forward on educating psychiatric residents, with the hope of eventually engaging the ACGME to acknowledge TMS by name in the ACGME guidelines, provide residents with at least basic information on TMS, and clarify how competency in these therapies can be achieved.

Thank you very much to Drs. Vincent, Good, and El-Mallakh for their guest editorial on interventional psychiatry (“Interventional psychiatry: What are the next steps?” Current Psychiatry, July 2023, p. 7-9, doi:10.12788/cp.0378). Your addressing the “gap in training” regarding “evidence the growth of interventional psychiatry has exceeded the capacity of the current training infrastructure to provide trainees with adequate exposure to these procedures” is right on the mark, as is the observation that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Psychiatry Milestones “do not indicate how competency in these therapies can be achieved.”

The Clinical Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Society (CTMSS) is well aware of these issues and is actively addressing them:

1. We have increased the number of PULSES courses—designed to serve as intensive, introductory courses on TMS—we provide, and increased the number of members on our PULSES team to address this. We have also increased the number of PULSES scholarships for psychiatry residents that cover the costs of the conference and materials.

2. We created a standing Resident Subcommittee of our Education Committee that is focused on psychiatry resident training. We realize not all psychiatric residency programs have active TMS programs or attendings who are trained in TMS. Last year we presented lectures aimed at introducing TMS to PGY-1 and PGY-2 psychiatry residents. These were recorded and are available for free on the CTMSS website (www.clinicaltmssociety.org).

3. The Resident Subcommittee presented the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training with a curriculum submission that was accepted and will be available to all psychiatric residents across the country free of charge. (Current Psychiatry Associate Editor Phillip G. Janicak, MD was very helpful to our subcommittee with this project.)

4. The topic of resident/fellow training in all forms of neuromodulation was discussed during our monthly Grand Rounds webinar and at our annual meeting.

5. The issue of having a broader base of knowledge and training in neuromodulation was a topic at a recent Education Committee meeting, and this year we are adding lectures on electroconvulsive therapy and esketamine to our Grand Rounds webinars. Many CTMSS members are trained and knowledgeable in multiple neuromodulation modalities.

Continue to: 6. Many CTMSS members...

6. Many CTMSS members are involved in academic programs or are invited to training programs to teach psychiatric residents as guest lecturers.

7. The UK's Royal College of Psychiatrists has requested access to our prerecorded lectures, and CTMSS members are working on translating our lectures into Spanish.

Resident education is a key component of the main goals of the CTMSS. Our Board of Directors is fully committed to resident education and has directed the Education Committee to address it. We look forward to moving forward on educating psychiatric residents, with the hope of eventually engaging the ACGME to acknowledge TMS by name in the ACGME guidelines, provide residents with at least basic information on TMS, and clarify how competency in these therapies can be achieved.

Thank you very much to Drs. Vincent, Good, and El-Mallakh for their guest editorial on interventional psychiatry (“Interventional psychiatry: What are the next steps?” Current Psychiatry, July 2023, p. 7-9, doi:10.12788/cp.0378). Your addressing the “gap in training” regarding “evidence the growth of interventional psychiatry has exceeded the capacity of the current training infrastructure to provide trainees with adequate exposure to these procedures” is right on the mark, as is the observation that the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Psychiatry Milestones “do not indicate how competency in these therapies can be achieved.”

The Clinical Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Society (CTMSS) is well aware of these issues and is actively addressing them:

1. We have increased the number of PULSES courses—designed to serve as intensive, introductory courses on TMS—we provide, and increased the number of members on our PULSES team to address this. We have also increased the number of PULSES scholarships for psychiatry residents that cover the costs of the conference and materials.

2. We created a standing Resident Subcommittee of our Education Committee that is focused on psychiatry resident training. We realize not all psychiatric residency programs have active TMS programs or attendings who are trained in TMS. Last year we presented lectures aimed at introducing TMS to PGY-1 and PGY-2 psychiatry residents. These were recorded and are available for free on the CTMSS website (www.clinicaltmssociety.org).

3. The Resident Subcommittee presented the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training with a curriculum submission that was accepted and will be available to all psychiatric residents across the country free of charge. (Current Psychiatry Associate Editor Phillip G. Janicak, MD was very helpful to our subcommittee with this project.)

4. The topic of resident/fellow training in all forms of neuromodulation was discussed during our monthly Grand Rounds webinar and at our annual meeting.

5. The issue of having a broader base of knowledge and training in neuromodulation was a topic at a recent Education Committee meeting, and this year we are adding lectures on electroconvulsive therapy and esketamine to our Grand Rounds webinars. Many CTMSS members are trained and knowledgeable in multiple neuromodulation modalities.

Continue to: 6. Many CTMSS members...

6. Many CTMSS members are involved in academic programs or are invited to training programs to teach psychiatric residents as guest lecturers.

7. The UK's Royal College of Psychiatrists has requested access to our prerecorded lectures, and CTMSS members are working on translating our lectures into Spanish.

Resident education is a key component of the main goals of the CTMSS. Our Board of Directors is fully committed to resident education and has directed the Education Committee to address it. We look forward to moving forward on educating psychiatric residents, with the hope of eventually engaging the ACGME to acknowledge TMS by name in the ACGME guidelines, provide residents with at least basic information on TMS, and clarify how competency in these therapies can be achieved.

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative condition diagnosed pathologically by alpha synuclein–containing Lewy bodies and dopaminergic cell loss in the substantia nigra pars compacta of the midbrain. Loss of dopaminergic input to the caudate and putamen disrupts the direct and indirect basal ganglia pathways for motor control and contributes to the motor symptoms of PD.¹ According to the Movement Disorder Society criteria, PD is diagnosed clinically by bradykinesia (slowness of movement) plus resting tremor and/or rigidity in the presence of supportive criteria, such as levodopa responsiveness and hyposmia, and in the absence of exclusion criteria and red flags that would suggest atypical parkinsonism or an alternative diagnosis.²

Although the diagnosis and treatment of PD focus heavily on the motor symptoms, nonmotor symptoms can arise decades before the onset of motor symptoms and continue throughout the lifespan. Nonmotor symptoms affect patients from head (ie, cognition and mood) to toe (ie, striatal toe pain) and multiple organ systems in between, including the olfactory, integumentary, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and autonomic nervous systems. Thus, it is not surprising that nonmotor symptoms of PD impact health-related quality of life more substantially than motor symptoms.³ A helpful analogy is to consider the motor symptoms of PD as the tip of the iceberg and the nonmotor symptoms as the larger, submerged portions of the iceberg.⁴

Nonmotor symptoms can negatively impact the treatment of motor symptoms. For example, imagine a patient who is very rigid and dyscoordinated in the arms and legs, which limits their ability to dress and walk. If this patient also suffers from nonmotor symptoms of orthostatic hypotension and psychosis—both of which can be exacerbated by levodopa—dose escalation of levodopa for the rigidity and dyscoordination could be compromised, rendering the patient undertreated and less mobile.

In this review, we focus on identifying and managing nonmotor symptoms of PD that are relevant to psychiatric practice, including mood and motivational disorders, anxiety disorders, psychosis, cognitive disorders, and disorders related to the pharmacologic and surgical treatment of PD (Figure 1).

Mood and motivational disorders

Depression

Depression is a common symptom in PD that can occur in the prodromal period years to decades before the onset of motor symptoms, as well as throughout the disease course.⁵ The prevalence of depression in PD varies from 3% to 90%, depending on the methods of assessment, clinical setting of assessment, motor symptom severity, and other factors; clinically significant depression likely affects approximately 35% to 38% of patients.^5,6 How depression in patients with PD differs from depression in the general population is not entirely understood, but there does seem to be less guilt and suicidal ideation and a substantial component of negative affect, including dysphoria and anxiety.⁷ Practically speaking, depression is treated similarly in PD and general populations, with a few considerations.

Despite limited randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for efficacy specifically in patients with PD, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are generally considered first-line treatments. There is also evidence for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), but due to potential worsening of orthostatic hypotension and cognition, TCAs may not be a favorable option for certain patients with PD.^8,9 All antidepressants have the potential to worsen tremor. Theoretically, SNRIs, with noradrenergic activity, may be less tolerable than SSRIs in patients with PD. However, worsening tremor generally has not been a clinically significant adverse event reported in PD depression clinical trials, although it was seen in 17% of patients receiving paroxetine and 21% of patients receiving venlafaxine compared to 7% of patients receiving placebo.^9-11 If tremor worsens, mirtazapine could be considered because it has been reported to cause less tremor than SSRIs or TCAs.¹²

Among medications for PD, pramipexole, a dopamine agonist, may have a beneficial effect on depression.¹³ Additionally, some evidence supports rasagiline, a monoamine oxidase type B inhibitor, as an adjunctive medication for depression in PD.¹⁴ Nevertheless, antidepressant medications remain the standard pharmacologic treatment for PD depression.

Continue to: In terms of nonpharmacologic options...

In terms of nonpharmacologic options, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is likely efficacious, exercise (especially yoga) is likely efficacious, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may be efficacious.^15,16 While further high-quality trials are needed, these treatments are low-risk and can be considered, especially for patients who cannot tolerate medications.

Apathy

Apathy—a loss of motivation and goal-directed behavior—can occur in up to 30% of patients during the prodromal period of PD, and in up to 70% of patients throughout the disease course.¹⁷ Apathy can coexist with depression, which can make apathy difficult to diagnose.¹⁷ Given the time constraints of a clinic visit, a practical approach would be to first screen for depression and cognitive impairment. If there is continued suspicion of apathy, the Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part I question (“In the past week have you felt indifferent to doing activities or being with people?”) can be used to screen for apathy, and more detailed scales, such as the Apathy Scale (AS) or Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS), could be used if indicated.¹⁸

There are limited high-quality positive trials of apathy-specific treatments in PD. In an RCT of patients with PD who did not have depression or dementia, rivastigmine improved LARS scores compared to placebo.¹⁵ Piribedil, a D2/D3 receptor agonist, improved apathy in patients who underwent subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS).¹⁵ Exercise such as individualized physical therapy programs, dance, and Nordic walking as well as mindfulness interventions were shown to significantly reduce apathy scale scores.¹⁹ SSRIs, SNRIs, and rotigotine showed a trend toward reducing AS scores in RCTs.^10,20

Larger, high-quality studies are needed to clarify the treatment of apathy in PD. In the meantime, a reasonable approach is to first treat any comorbid psychiatric or cognitive disorders, since apathy can be associated with these conditions, and to optimize antiparkinsonian medications for motor symptoms, motor fluctuations, and nonmotor fluctuations. Then, the investigational apathy treatments described in this section could be considered on an individual basis.

Anxiety disorders

Anxiety is seen throughout the disease course of PD in approximately 30% to 50% of patients.²¹ It can manifest as generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and other anxiety disorders. There are no high-quality RCTs of pharmacologic treatments of anxiety specifically in patients with PD, except for a negative safety and tolerability study of buspirone in which one-half of patients experienced worsening motor symptoms.^15,22 Thus, the treatment of anxiety in patients with PD is similar to treatments in the general population. SSRIs and SNRIs are typically considered first-line, benzodiazepines are sometimes used with caution (although cognitive adverse effects and fall risk need to be considered), and nonpharma­cologic treatments such as mindfulness yoga, exercise, CBT, and psycho­therapy can be effective.^16,21,23

Continue to: Because there is the lack...

Because there is the lack of evidence-based treatments for anxiety in PD, we highlight 2 PD-specific anxiety disorders: internal tremor, and nonmotor “off” anxiety.

Internal tremor

Internal tremor is a sense of vibration in the axial and/or appendicular muscles that cannot be seen externally by the patient or examiner. It is not yet fully understood if this phenomenon is sensory, anxiety-related, related to subclinical tremor, or the result of a combination of these factors (ie, sensory awareness of a subclinical tremor that triggers or is worsened by anxiety). There is some evidence for subclinical tremor on electromyography, but internal tremor does not respond to antiparkinsonian medications in 70% of patients.²⁴ More electrophysiological research is needed to clarify this phenomenon. Internal tremor has been associated with anxiety in 64% of patients and often improves with anxiolytic therapies.²⁴

Although poorly understood, internal tremor is a documented phenomenon in 33% to 44% of patients with PD, and in some cases, it may be an initial symptom that motivates a patient to seek medical attention for the first time.^24,25 Internal tremor has also been reported in patients with essential tremor and multiple sclerosis.²⁵ Therefore, physicians should be aware of internal tremor because this symptom could herald an underlying neurological disease.

Nonmotor ‘off’ anxiety

Patients with PD are commonly prescribed carbidopa-levodopa, a dopamine precursor, at least 3 times daily. Initially, this medication controls motor symptoms well from 1 dose to the next. However, as the disease progresses, some patients report motor fluctuations in which an individual dose of carbidopa-levodopa may wear off early, take longer than usual to take effect, or not take effect at all. Patients describe these periods as an “off” state in which they do not feel their medications are working. Such motor fluctuations can lead to anxiety and avoidance behaviors, because patients fear being in public at times when the medication does not adequately control their motor symptoms.

In addition to these motor symptom fluctuations and related anxiety, patients can also experience nonmotor symptom fluctuations. A wide variety of nonmotor symptoms, such as mood, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms, have been reported to fluctuate in parallel with motor symptoms.^26,27 One study reported fluctuating restlessness in 39% of patients with PD, excessive worry in 17%, shortness of breath in 13%, excessive sweating and fear in 12%, and palpitations in 10%.²⁷ A patient with fluctuating shortness of breath, sweating, and palpitations (for example) may repeatedly present to the emergency department with a negative cardiac workup and eventually be diagnosed with panic disorder, whereas the patient is truly experiencing nonmotor “off” symptoms. Thus, it is important to be aware of nonmotor fluctuations so this diagnosis can be made and the symptoms appropriately treated. The first step in treating nonmotor fluctuations is to optimize the antiparkinsonian regimen to minimize fluctuations. If “off” anxiety symptoms persist, anxiolytic medications can be prescribed.²¹

Continue to: Psychosis

Psychosis can occur in prodromal and early PD but is most common in advanced PD.²⁸ One study reported that 60% of patients developed hallucinations or delusions after 12 years of follow-up.²⁹ Disease duration, disease severity, dementia, and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder are significant risk factors for psychosis in PD.³⁰ Well-formed visual hallucinations are the most common manifestation of psychosis in patients with PD. Auditory hallucinations and delusions are less common. Delusions are usually seen in patients with dementia and are often paranoid delusions, such as of spousal infidelity.³⁰ Sensory hallucinations can occur, but should not be mistaken with formication, a central pain syndrome in PD that can represent a nonmotor “off” symptom that may respond to dopaminergic medication.³¹ Other more mild psychotic symptoms include illusions or misinterpretation of stimuli, false sense of presence, and passage hallucinations of fleeting figures in the peripheral vision.³⁰

The pathophysiology of PD psychosis is not entirely understood but differs from psychosis in other disorders. It can occur in the absence of antiparkinsonian medication exposure and is thought to be a consequence of the underlying disease process of PD involving neurodegeneration in certain brain regions and aberrant neurotransmission of not only dopamine but also serotonin, acetylcholine, and glutamate.³⁰

Figure 2 outlines the management of psychosis in PD. After addressing medical and medication-related causes, it is important to determine if the psychotic symptom is sufficiently bothersome to and/or potentially dangerous for the patient to warrant treatment. If treatment is indicated, pimavanserin and clozapine are efficacious for psychosis in PD without worsening motor symptoms, and quetiapine is possibly efficacious with a low risk of worsening motor symptoms.¹⁵ Other antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol, can substantially worsen motor symptoms.¹⁵ Both second-generation antipsychotics and pimavanserin have an FDA black-box warning for a higher risk of all-cause mortality in older patients with dementia; however, because psychosis is associated with early mortality in PD, the risk/benefit ratio should be discussed with the patient and family for shared decision-making.³⁰ If the patient also has dementia, rivastigmine—which is FDA-approved for PD dementia (PDD)—may also improve hallucinations.³²

Cognitive disorders

This section focuses on PD mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) and PDD. When a patient with PD reports cognitive concerns, the approach outlined in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder. A detailed history, medication review, and physical examination can identify any medical or psychiatric conditions that could affect cognition. The American Academy of Neurology recommends screening for depression, obtaining blood levels of vitamin B12 and thyroid-stimulating hormone, and obtaining a CT or MRI of the brain to rule out reversible causes of dementia.³³ A validated screening test such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which has higher sensitivity for PD-MCI than the Mini-Mental State Examination, is used to identify and quantify cognitive impairment.³⁴ Neuropsychological testing is the gold standard and can be used to confirm and/or better quantify the degree and domains of cognitive impairment.³⁵ Typically, cognitive deficits in PD affect executive function, attention, and/or visuospatial domains more than memory and language early on, and deficits in visuospatial and language domains have the highest sensitivity for predicting progression to PDD.³⁶

Once reversible causes of dementia are addressed or ruled out and cognitive testing is completed, the Movement Disorder Society (MDS) criteria for PD-MCI and PDD summarized in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder.^37,38 The MDS criteria for PDD require a diagnosis of PD for ≥1 year prior to the onset of dementia to differentiate PDD from dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). If the dementia starts within 1 year of the onset of parkinsonism, the diagnosis would be DLB. PDD and DLB are on the spectrum of Lewy body dementia, with the same Lewy body pathology in different temporal and spatial distributions in the brain.³⁸

Continue to: PD-MCI is present in...

PD-MCI is present in approximately 25% of patients.³⁵ PD-MCI does not always progress to dementia but increases the risk of dementia 6-fold. The prevalence of PDD increases with disease duration; it is present in approximately 50% of patients at 10 years and 80% of patients at 20 years of disease.³⁵ Rivastigmine is the only FDA-approved medication to slow progression of PDD. There is insufficient evidence for other acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine.¹⁵ Unfortunately, RCTs of pharmacotherapy for PD-MCI have failed to show efficacy. However, exercise, cognitive rehabilitation, and neuromodulation are being studied. In the meantime, addressing modifiable risk factors (such as vascular risk factors and alcohol consumption) and treating comorbid orthostatic hypotension, obstructive sleep apnea, and depression may improve cognition.^35,39

Treatment-related disorders

Impulse control disorders

Impulse control disorders (ICDs) are an important medication-related consideration in patients with PD. The ICDs seen in PD include pathological gambling, binge eating, excessive shopping, hypersexual behaviors, and dopamine dysregulation syndrome (Table). These disorders are more common in younger patients with a history of impulsive personality traits and addictive behaviors (eg, history of tobacco or alcohol abuse), and are most strongly associated with dopaminergic therapies, particularly the dopamine agonists.^40,41 In the DOMINION study, the odds of ICDs were 2- to 3.5-fold higher in patients taking dopamine agonists.⁴² This is mainly thought to be due to stimulation of D2/D3 receptors in the mesolimbic system.⁴⁰ High doses of levodopa, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and amantadine are also associated with ICDs.^40-42

The first step in managing ICDs is diagnosing them, which can be difficult because patients often are not forthcoming about these problems due to embarrassment or failure to recognize that the ICD is related to PD medications. If a family member accompanies the patient at the visit, the patient may not want to disclose the amount of money they spend or the extent to which the behavior is a problem. Thus, a screening questionnaire, such as the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease (QUIP) can be a helpful way for patients to alert the clinician to the issue.⁴¹ Education for the patient and family is crucial before the ICD causes significant financial, health, or relationship problems.

The mainstay of treatment is to reduce or taper off the dopamine agonist or other offending agent while monitoring for worsening motor symptoms and dopamine withdrawal syndrome. If this is unsuccessful, there is very limited evidence for further treatment strategies (Table), including antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers.^40,43,44 There is insufficient evidence for naltrexone based on an RCT that failed to meet its primary endpoint, although naltrexone did significantly reduce QUIP scores.^15,44 There is also insufficient evidence for amantadine, which showed benefit in some studies but was associated with ICDs in the DOMINION study.^15,40,42 In terms of nonpharmacologic treatments, CBT is likely efficacious.^15,40 There are mixed results for STN DBS. Some studies showed improvement in the ICD, due at least in part to dopaminergic medication reduction postoperatively, but this treatment has also been reported to increase impulsivity.^40,45

Deep brain stimulation–related disorders

For patients with PD, the ideal lead location for STN DBS is the dorsolateral aspect of the STN, as this is the motor region of the nucleus. The STN functions in indirect and hyperdirect pathways to put the brake on certain motor programs so only the desired movement can be executed. Its function is clinically demonstrated by patients with STN stroke who develop excessive ballistic movements. Adjacent to the motor region of the STN is a centrally located associative region and a medially located limbic region. Thus, when stimulating the dorsolateral STN, current can spread to those regions as well, and the STN’s ability to put the brake on behavioral and emotional programs can be affected.⁴⁶ Stimulation of the STN has been associated with mania, euphoria, new-onset ICDs, decreased verbal fluency, and executive dysfunction. Depression, apathy, and anxiety can also occur, but more commonly result from rapid withdrawal of antiparkinsonian medications after DBS surgery.^46,47 Therefore, for PD patients with DBS with new or worsening psychiatric or cognitive symptoms, it is important to inquire about any recent programming sessions with neurology as well as recent self-increases in stimulation by the patient using their controller. Collaboration with neurology is important to troubleshoot whether stimulation could be contributing to the patient’s psychiatric or cognitive symptoms.

Continue to: Bottom Line

Mood, anxiety, psychotic, and cognitive symptoms and disorders are common psychiatric manifestations associated with Parkinson’s disease (PD). In addition, patients with PD may experience impulsive control disorders and other symptoms related to treatments they receive for PD. Careful assessment and collaboration with neurology is crucial to alleviating the effects of these conditions.

Related Resources

• Weintraub D, Aarsland D, Chaudhuri KR, et al. The neuropsychiatry of Parkinson’s disease: advances and challenges. Lancet Neurology. 2022;21(1):89-102. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00330-6
• Goldman JG, Guerra CM. Treatment of nonmotor symptoms associated with Parkinson disease. Neurologic Clinics. 2020;38(2):269-292. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2019.12.003
• Castrioto A, Lhommee E, Moro E et al. Mood and behavioral effects of subthalamic stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology. 2014;13(3):287-305. doi:10.1016/ S1474-4422(13)70294-1

Drug Brand Names

Amantadine • Gocovri
Carbidopa-levodopa • Sinemet
Clozapine • Clozaril
Haloperidol • Haldol
Memantine • Namenda
Mirtazapine • Remeron
Naltrexone • Vivitrol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Paroxetine • Paxil
Pimavanserin • Nuplazid
Piribedil • Pronoran
Pramipexole • Mirapex
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Rasagiline • Azilect
Risperidone • Risperdal
Rivastigmine • Exelon
Ropinirole • Requip
Rotigotine • Neupro
Venlafaxine • Effexor
Zonisamide • Zonegran

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative condition diagnosed pathologically by alpha synuclein–containing Lewy bodies and dopaminergic cell loss in the substantia nigra pars compacta of the midbrain. Loss of dopaminergic input to the caudate and putamen disrupts the direct and indirect basal ganglia pathways for motor control and contributes to the motor symptoms of PD.¹ According to the Movement Disorder Society criteria, PD is diagnosed clinically by bradykinesia (slowness of movement) plus resting tremor and/or rigidity in the presence of supportive criteria, such as levodopa responsiveness and hyposmia, and in the absence of exclusion criteria and red flags that would suggest atypical parkinsonism or an alternative diagnosis.²

Although the diagnosis and treatment of PD focus heavily on the motor symptoms, nonmotor symptoms can arise decades before the onset of motor symptoms and continue throughout the lifespan. Nonmotor symptoms affect patients from head (ie, cognition and mood) to toe (ie, striatal toe pain) and multiple organ systems in between, including the olfactory, integumentary, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and autonomic nervous systems. Thus, it is not surprising that nonmotor symptoms of PD impact health-related quality of life more substantially than motor symptoms.³ A helpful analogy is to consider the motor symptoms of PD as the tip of the iceberg and the nonmotor symptoms as the larger, submerged portions of the iceberg.⁴

Nonmotor symptoms can negatively impact the treatment of motor symptoms. For example, imagine a patient who is very rigid and dyscoordinated in the arms and legs, which limits their ability to dress and walk. If this patient also suffers from nonmotor symptoms of orthostatic hypotension and psychosis—both of which can be exacerbated by levodopa—dose escalation of levodopa for the rigidity and dyscoordination could be compromised, rendering the patient undertreated and less mobile.

In this review, we focus on identifying and managing nonmotor symptoms of PD that are relevant to psychiatric practice, including mood and motivational disorders, anxiety disorders, psychosis, cognitive disorders, and disorders related to the pharmacologic and surgical treatment of PD (Figure 1).

Mood and motivational disorders

Depression

Depression is a common symptom in PD that can occur in the prodromal period years to decades before the onset of motor symptoms, as well as throughout the disease course.⁵ The prevalence of depression in PD varies from 3% to 90%, depending on the methods of assessment, clinical setting of assessment, motor symptom severity, and other factors; clinically significant depression likely affects approximately 35% to 38% of patients.^5,6 How depression in patients with PD differs from depression in the general population is not entirely understood, but there does seem to be less guilt and suicidal ideation and a substantial component of negative affect, including dysphoria and anxiety.⁷ Practically speaking, depression is treated similarly in PD and general populations, with a few considerations.

Despite limited randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for efficacy specifically in patients with PD, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are generally considered first-line treatments. There is also evidence for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), but due to potential worsening of orthostatic hypotension and cognition, TCAs may not be a favorable option for certain patients with PD.^8,9 All antidepressants have the potential to worsen tremor. Theoretically, SNRIs, with noradrenergic activity, may be less tolerable than SSRIs in patients with PD. However, worsening tremor generally has not been a clinically significant adverse event reported in PD depression clinical trials, although it was seen in 17% of patients receiving paroxetine and 21% of patients receiving venlafaxine compared to 7% of patients receiving placebo.^9-11 If tremor worsens, mirtazapine could be considered because it has been reported to cause less tremor than SSRIs or TCAs.¹²

Among medications for PD, pramipexole, a dopamine agonist, may have a beneficial effect on depression.¹³ Additionally, some evidence supports rasagiline, a monoamine oxidase type B inhibitor, as an adjunctive medication for depression in PD.¹⁴ Nevertheless, antidepressant medications remain the standard pharmacologic treatment for PD depression.

Continue to: In terms of nonpharmacologic options...

In terms of nonpharmacologic options, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is likely efficacious, exercise (especially yoga) is likely efficacious, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may be efficacious.^15,16 While further high-quality trials are needed, these treatments are low-risk and can be considered, especially for patients who cannot tolerate medications.

Apathy

Apathy—a loss of motivation and goal-directed behavior—can occur in up to 30% of patients during the prodromal period of PD, and in up to 70% of patients throughout the disease course.¹⁷ Apathy can coexist with depression, which can make apathy difficult to diagnose.¹⁷ Given the time constraints of a clinic visit, a practical approach would be to first screen for depression and cognitive impairment. If there is continued suspicion of apathy, the Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part I question (“In the past week have you felt indifferent to doing activities or being with people?”) can be used to screen for apathy, and more detailed scales, such as the Apathy Scale (AS) or Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS), could be used if indicated.¹⁸

There are limited high-quality positive trials of apathy-specific treatments in PD. In an RCT of patients with PD who did not have depression or dementia, rivastigmine improved LARS scores compared to placebo.¹⁵ Piribedil, a D2/D3 receptor agonist, improved apathy in patients who underwent subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS).¹⁵ Exercise such as individualized physical therapy programs, dance, and Nordic walking as well as mindfulness interventions were shown to significantly reduce apathy scale scores.¹⁹ SSRIs, SNRIs, and rotigotine showed a trend toward reducing AS scores in RCTs.^10,20

Larger, high-quality studies are needed to clarify the treatment of apathy in PD. In the meantime, a reasonable approach is to first treat any comorbid psychiatric or cognitive disorders, since apathy can be associated with these conditions, and to optimize antiparkinsonian medications for motor symptoms, motor fluctuations, and nonmotor fluctuations. Then, the investigational apathy treatments described in this section could be considered on an individual basis.

Anxiety disorders

Anxiety is seen throughout the disease course of PD in approximately 30% to 50% of patients.²¹ It can manifest as generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and other anxiety disorders. There are no high-quality RCTs of pharmacologic treatments of anxiety specifically in patients with PD, except for a negative safety and tolerability study of buspirone in which one-half of patients experienced worsening motor symptoms.^15,22 Thus, the treatment of anxiety in patients with PD is similar to treatments in the general population. SSRIs and SNRIs are typically considered first-line, benzodiazepines are sometimes used with caution (although cognitive adverse effects and fall risk need to be considered), and nonpharma­cologic treatments such as mindfulness yoga, exercise, CBT, and psycho­therapy can be effective.^16,21,23

Continue to: Because there is the lack...

Because there is the lack of evidence-based treatments for anxiety in PD, we highlight 2 PD-specific anxiety disorders: internal tremor, and nonmotor “off” anxiety.

Internal tremor

Internal tremor is a sense of vibration in the axial and/or appendicular muscles that cannot be seen externally by the patient or examiner. It is not yet fully understood if this phenomenon is sensory, anxiety-related, related to subclinical tremor, or the result of a combination of these factors (ie, sensory awareness of a subclinical tremor that triggers or is worsened by anxiety). There is some evidence for subclinical tremor on electromyography, but internal tremor does not respond to antiparkinsonian medications in 70% of patients.²⁴ More electrophysiological research is needed to clarify this phenomenon. Internal tremor has been associated with anxiety in 64% of patients and often improves with anxiolytic therapies.²⁴

Although poorly understood, internal tremor is a documented phenomenon in 33% to 44% of patients with PD, and in some cases, it may be an initial symptom that motivates a patient to seek medical attention for the first time.^24,25 Internal tremor has also been reported in patients with essential tremor and multiple sclerosis.²⁵ Therefore, physicians should be aware of internal tremor because this symptom could herald an underlying neurological disease.

Nonmotor ‘off’ anxiety

Patients with PD are commonly prescribed carbidopa-levodopa, a dopamine precursor, at least 3 times daily. Initially, this medication controls motor symptoms well from 1 dose to the next. However, as the disease progresses, some patients report motor fluctuations in which an individual dose of carbidopa-levodopa may wear off early, take longer than usual to take effect, or not take effect at all. Patients describe these periods as an “off” state in which they do not feel their medications are working. Such motor fluctuations can lead to anxiety and avoidance behaviors, because patients fear being in public at times when the medication does not adequately control their motor symptoms.

In addition to these motor symptom fluctuations and related anxiety, patients can also experience nonmotor symptom fluctuations. A wide variety of nonmotor symptoms, such as mood, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms, have been reported to fluctuate in parallel with motor symptoms.^26,27 One study reported fluctuating restlessness in 39% of patients with PD, excessive worry in 17%, shortness of breath in 13%, excessive sweating and fear in 12%, and palpitations in 10%.²⁷ A patient with fluctuating shortness of breath, sweating, and palpitations (for example) may repeatedly present to the emergency department with a negative cardiac workup and eventually be diagnosed with panic disorder, whereas the patient is truly experiencing nonmotor “off” symptoms. Thus, it is important to be aware of nonmotor fluctuations so this diagnosis can be made and the symptoms appropriately treated. The first step in treating nonmotor fluctuations is to optimize the antiparkinsonian regimen to minimize fluctuations. If “off” anxiety symptoms persist, anxiolytic medications can be prescribed.²¹

Continue to: Psychosis

Psychosis can occur in prodromal and early PD but is most common in advanced PD.²⁸ One study reported that 60% of patients developed hallucinations or delusions after 12 years of follow-up.²⁹ Disease duration, disease severity, dementia, and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder are significant risk factors for psychosis in PD.³⁰ Well-formed visual hallucinations are the most common manifestation of psychosis in patients with PD. Auditory hallucinations and delusions are less common. Delusions are usually seen in patients with dementia and are often paranoid delusions, such as of spousal infidelity.³⁰ Sensory hallucinations can occur, but should not be mistaken with formication, a central pain syndrome in PD that can represent a nonmotor “off” symptom that may respond to dopaminergic medication.³¹ Other more mild psychotic symptoms include illusions or misinterpretation of stimuli, false sense of presence, and passage hallucinations of fleeting figures in the peripheral vision.³⁰

The pathophysiology of PD psychosis is not entirely understood but differs from psychosis in other disorders. It can occur in the absence of antiparkinsonian medication exposure and is thought to be a consequence of the underlying disease process of PD involving neurodegeneration in certain brain regions and aberrant neurotransmission of not only dopamine but also serotonin, acetylcholine, and glutamate.³⁰

Figure 2 outlines the management of psychosis in PD. After addressing medical and medication-related causes, it is important to determine if the psychotic symptom is sufficiently bothersome to and/or potentially dangerous for the patient to warrant treatment. If treatment is indicated, pimavanserin and clozapine are efficacious for psychosis in PD without worsening motor symptoms, and quetiapine is possibly efficacious with a low risk of worsening motor symptoms.¹⁵ Other antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol, can substantially worsen motor symptoms.¹⁵ Both second-generation antipsychotics and pimavanserin have an FDA black-box warning for a higher risk of all-cause mortality in older patients with dementia; however, because psychosis is associated with early mortality in PD, the risk/benefit ratio should be discussed with the patient and family for shared decision-making.³⁰ If the patient also has dementia, rivastigmine—which is FDA-approved for PD dementia (PDD)—may also improve hallucinations.³²

Cognitive disorders

This section focuses on PD mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) and PDD. When a patient with PD reports cognitive concerns, the approach outlined in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder. A detailed history, medication review, and physical examination can identify any medical or psychiatric conditions that could affect cognition. The American Academy of Neurology recommends screening for depression, obtaining blood levels of vitamin B12 and thyroid-stimulating hormone, and obtaining a CT or MRI of the brain to rule out reversible causes of dementia.³³ A validated screening test such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which has higher sensitivity for PD-MCI than the Mini-Mental State Examination, is used to identify and quantify cognitive impairment.³⁴ Neuropsychological testing is the gold standard and can be used to confirm and/or better quantify the degree and domains of cognitive impairment.³⁵ Typically, cognitive deficits in PD affect executive function, attention, and/or visuospatial domains more than memory and language early on, and deficits in visuospatial and language domains have the highest sensitivity for predicting progression to PDD.³⁶

Once reversible causes of dementia are addressed or ruled out and cognitive testing is completed, the Movement Disorder Society (MDS) criteria for PD-MCI and PDD summarized in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder.^37,38 The MDS criteria for PDD require a diagnosis of PD for ≥1 year prior to the onset of dementia to differentiate PDD from dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). If the dementia starts within 1 year of the onset of parkinsonism, the diagnosis would be DLB. PDD and DLB are on the spectrum of Lewy body dementia, with the same Lewy body pathology in different temporal and spatial distributions in the brain.³⁸

Continue to: PD-MCI is present in...

PD-MCI is present in approximately 25% of patients.³⁵ PD-MCI does not always progress to dementia but increases the risk of dementia 6-fold. The prevalence of PDD increases with disease duration; it is present in approximately 50% of patients at 10 years and 80% of patients at 20 years of disease.³⁵ Rivastigmine is the only FDA-approved medication to slow progression of PDD. There is insufficient evidence for other acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine.¹⁵ Unfortunately, RCTs of pharmacotherapy for PD-MCI have failed to show efficacy. However, exercise, cognitive rehabilitation, and neuromodulation are being studied. In the meantime, addressing modifiable risk factors (such as vascular risk factors and alcohol consumption) and treating comorbid orthostatic hypotension, obstructive sleep apnea, and depression may improve cognition.^35,39

Treatment-related disorders

Impulse control disorders

Impulse control disorders (ICDs) are an important medication-related consideration in patients with PD. The ICDs seen in PD include pathological gambling, binge eating, excessive shopping, hypersexual behaviors, and dopamine dysregulation syndrome (Table). These disorders are more common in younger patients with a history of impulsive personality traits and addictive behaviors (eg, history of tobacco or alcohol abuse), and are most strongly associated with dopaminergic therapies, particularly the dopamine agonists.^40,41 In the DOMINION study, the odds of ICDs were 2- to 3.5-fold higher in patients taking dopamine agonists.⁴² This is mainly thought to be due to stimulation of D2/D3 receptors in the mesolimbic system.⁴⁰ High doses of levodopa, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and amantadine are also associated with ICDs.^40-42

The first step in managing ICDs is diagnosing them, which can be difficult because patients often are not forthcoming about these problems due to embarrassment or failure to recognize that the ICD is related to PD medications. If a family member accompanies the patient at the visit, the patient may not want to disclose the amount of money they spend or the extent to which the behavior is a problem. Thus, a screening questionnaire, such as the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease (QUIP) can be a helpful way for patients to alert the clinician to the issue.⁴¹ Education for the patient and family is crucial before the ICD causes significant financial, health, or relationship problems.

The mainstay of treatment is to reduce or taper off the dopamine agonist or other offending agent while monitoring for worsening motor symptoms and dopamine withdrawal syndrome. If this is unsuccessful, there is very limited evidence for further treatment strategies (Table), including antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers.^40,43,44 There is insufficient evidence for naltrexone based on an RCT that failed to meet its primary endpoint, although naltrexone did significantly reduce QUIP scores.^15,44 There is also insufficient evidence for amantadine, which showed benefit in some studies but was associated with ICDs in the DOMINION study.^15,40,42 In terms of nonpharmacologic treatments, CBT is likely efficacious.^15,40 There are mixed results for STN DBS. Some studies showed improvement in the ICD, due at least in part to dopaminergic medication reduction postoperatively, but this treatment has also been reported to increase impulsivity.^40,45

Deep brain stimulation–related disorders

For patients with PD, the ideal lead location for STN DBS is the dorsolateral aspect of the STN, as this is the motor region of the nucleus. The STN functions in indirect and hyperdirect pathways to put the brake on certain motor programs so only the desired movement can be executed. Its function is clinically demonstrated by patients with STN stroke who develop excessive ballistic movements. Adjacent to the motor region of the STN is a centrally located associative region and a medially located limbic region. Thus, when stimulating the dorsolateral STN, current can spread to those regions as well, and the STN’s ability to put the brake on behavioral and emotional programs can be affected.⁴⁶ Stimulation of the STN has been associated with mania, euphoria, new-onset ICDs, decreased verbal fluency, and executive dysfunction. Depression, apathy, and anxiety can also occur, but more commonly result from rapid withdrawal of antiparkinsonian medications after DBS surgery.^46,47 Therefore, for PD patients with DBS with new or worsening psychiatric or cognitive symptoms, it is important to inquire about any recent programming sessions with neurology as well as recent self-increases in stimulation by the patient using their controller. Collaboration with neurology is important to troubleshoot whether stimulation could be contributing to the patient’s psychiatric or cognitive symptoms.

Continue to: Bottom Line

Mood, anxiety, psychotic, and cognitive symptoms and disorders are common psychiatric manifestations associated with Parkinson’s disease (PD). In addition, patients with PD may experience impulsive control disorders and other symptoms related to treatments they receive for PD. Careful assessment and collaboration with neurology is crucial to alleviating the effects of these conditions.

Related Resources

• Weintraub D, Aarsland D, Chaudhuri KR, et al. The neuropsychiatry of Parkinson’s disease: advances and challenges. Lancet Neurology. 2022;21(1):89-102. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00330-6
• Goldman JG, Guerra CM. Treatment of nonmotor symptoms associated with Parkinson disease. Neurologic Clinics. 2020;38(2):269-292. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2019.12.003
• Castrioto A, Lhommee E, Moro E et al. Mood and behavioral effects of subthalamic stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology. 2014;13(3):287-305. doi:10.1016/ S1474-4422(13)70294-1

Drug Brand Names

Amantadine • Gocovri
Carbidopa-levodopa • Sinemet
Clozapine • Clozaril
Haloperidol • Haldol
Memantine • Namenda
Mirtazapine • Remeron
Naltrexone • Vivitrol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Paroxetine • Paxil
Pimavanserin • Nuplazid
Piribedil • Pronoran
Pramipexole • Mirapex
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Rasagiline • Azilect
Risperidone • Risperdal
Rivastigmine • Exelon
Ropinirole • Requip
Rotigotine • Neupro
Venlafaxine • Effexor
Zonisamide • Zonegran

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative condition diagnosed pathologically by alpha synuclein–containing Lewy bodies and dopaminergic cell loss in the substantia nigra pars compacta of the midbrain. Loss of dopaminergic input to the caudate and putamen disrupts the direct and indirect basal ganglia pathways for motor control and contributes to the motor symptoms of PD.¹ According to the Movement Disorder Society criteria, PD is diagnosed clinically by bradykinesia (slowness of movement) plus resting tremor and/or rigidity in the presence of supportive criteria, such as levodopa responsiveness and hyposmia, and in the absence of exclusion criteria and red flags that would suggest atypical parkinsonism or an alternative diagnosis.²

Although the diagnosis and treatment of PD focus heavily on the motor symptoms, nonmotor symptoms can arise decades before the onset of motor symptoms and continue throughout the lifespan. Nonmotor symptoms affect patients from head (ie, cognition and mood) to toe (ie, striatal toe pain) and multiple organ systems in between, including the olfactory, integumentary, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and autonomic nervous systems. Thus, it is not surprising that nonmotor symptoms of PD impact health-related quality of life more substantially than motor symptoms.³ A helpful analogy is to consider the motor symptoms of PD as the tip of the iceberg and the nonmotor symptoms as the larger, submerged portions of the iceberg.⁴

Nonmotor symptoms can negatively impact the treatment of motor symptoms. For example, imagine a patient who is very rigid and dyscoordinated in the arms and legs, which limits their ability to dress and walk. If this patient also suffers from nonmotor symptoms of orthostatic hypotension and psychosis—both of which can be exacerbated by levodopa—dose escalation of levodopa for the rigidity and dyscoordination could be compromised, rendering the patient undertreated and less mobile.

In this review, we focus on identifying and managing nonmotor symptoms of PD that are relevant to psychiatric practice, including mood and motivational disorders, anxiety disorders, psychosis, cognitive disorders, and disorders related to the pharmacologic and surgical treatment of PD (Figure 1).

Mood and motivational disorders

Depression

Depression is a common symptom in PD that can occur in the prodromal period years to decades before the onset of motor symptoms, as well as throughout the disease course.⁵ The prevalence of depression in PD varies from 3% to 90%, depending on the methods of assessment, clinical setting of assessment, motor symptom severity, and other factors; clinically significant depression likely affects approximately 35% to 38% of patients.^5,6 How depression in patients with PD differs from depression in the general population is not entirely understood, but there does seem to be less guilt and suicidal ideation and a substantial component of negative affect, including dysphoria and anxiety.⁷ Practically speaking, depression is treated similarly in PD and general populations, with a few considerations.

Despite limited randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for efficacy specifically in patients with PD, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) are generally considered first-line treatments. There is also evidence for tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), but due to potential worsening of orthostatic hypotension and cognition, TCAs may not be a favorable option for certain patients with PD.^8,9 All antidepressants have the potential to worsen tremor. Theoretically, SNRIs, with noradrenergic activity, may be less tolerable than SSRIs in patients with PD. However, worsening tremor generally has not been a clinically significant adverse event reported in PD depression clinical trials, although it was seen in 17% of patients receiving paroxetine and 21% of patients receiving venlafaxine compared to 7% of patients receiving placebo.^9-11 If tremor worsens, mirtazapine could be considered because it has been reported to cause less tremor than SSRIs or TCAs.¹²

Among medications for PD, pramipexole, a dopamine agonist, may have a beneficial effect on depression.¹³ Additionally, some evidence supports rasagiline, a monoamine oxidase type B inhibitor, as an adjunctive medication for depression in PD.¹⁴ Nevertheless, antidepressant medications remain the standard pharmacologic treatment for PD depression.

Continue to: In terms of nonpharmacologic options...

In terms of nonpharmacologic options, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is likely efficacious, exercise (especially yoga) is likely efficacious, and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may be efficacious.^15,16 While further high-quality trials are needed, these treatments are low-risk and can be considered, especially for patients who cannot tolerate medications.

Apathy

Apathy—a loss of motivation and goal-directed behavior—can occur in up to 30% of patients during the prodromal period of PD, and in up to 70% of patients throughout the disease course.¹⁷ Apathy can coexist with depression, which can make apathy difficult to diagnose.¹⁷ Given the time constraints of a clinic visit, a practical approach would be to first screen for depression and cognitive impairment. If there is continued suspicion of apathy, the Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale part I question (“In the past week have you felt indifferent to doing activities or being with people?”) can be used to screen for apathy, and more detailed scales, such as the Apathy Scale (AS) or Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS), could be used if indicated.¹⁸

There are limited high-quality positive trials of apathy-specific treatments in PD. In an RCT of patients with PD who did not have depression or dementia, rivastigmine improved LARS scores compared to placebo.¹⁵ Piribedil, a D2/D3 receptor agonist, improved apathy in patients who underwent subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation (STN DBS).¹⁵ Exercise such as individualized physical therapy programs, dance, and Nordic walking as well as mindfulness interventions were shown to significantly reduce apathy scale scores.¹⁹ SSRIs, SNRIs, and rotigotine showed a trend toward reducing AS scores in RCTs.^10,20

Larger, high-quality studies are needed to clarify the treatment of apathy in PD. In the meantime, a reasonable approach is to first treat any comorbid psychiatric or cognitive disorders, since apathy can be associated with these conditions, and to optimize antiparkinsonian medications for motor symptoms, motor fluctuations, and nonmotor fluctuations. Then, the investigational apathy treatments described in this section could be considered on an individual basis.

Anxiety disorders

Anxiety is seen throughout the disease course of PD in approximately 30% to 50% of patients.²¹ It can manifest as generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and other anxiety disorders. There are no high-quality RCTs of pharmacologic treatments of anxiety specifically in patients with PD, except for a negative safety and tolerability study of buspirone in which one-half of patients experienced worsening motor symptoms.^15,22 Thus, the treatment of anxiety in patients with PD is similar to treatments in the general population. SSRIs and SNRIs are typically considered first-line, benzodiazepines are sometimes used with caution (although cognitive adverse effects and fall risk need to be considered), and nonpharma­cologic treatments such as mindfulness yoga, exercise, CBT, and psycho­therapy can be effective.^16,21,23

Continue to: Because there is the lack...

Because there is the lack of evidence-based treatments for anxiety in PD, we highlight 2 PD-specific anxiety disorders: internal tremor, and nonmotor “off” anxiety.

Internal tremor

Internal tremor is a sense of vibration in the axial and/or appendicular muscles that cannot be seen externally by the patient or examiner. It is not yet fully understood if this phenomenon is sensory, anxiety-related, related to subclinical tremor, or the result of a combination of these factors (ie, sensory awareness of a subclinical tremor that triggers or is worsened by anxiety). There is some evidence for subclinical tremor on electromyography, but internal tremor does not respond to antiparkinsonian medications in 70% of patients.²⁴ More electrophysiological research is needed to clarify this phenomenon. Internal tremor has been associated with anxiety in 64% of patients and often improves with anxiolytic therapies.²⁴

Although poorly understood, internal tremor is a documented phenomenon in 33% to 44% of patients with PD, and in some cases, it may be an initial symptom that motivates a patient to seek medical attention for the first time.^24,25 Internal tremor has also been reported in patients with essential tremor and multiple sclerosis.²⁵ Therefore, physicians should be aware of internal tremor because this symptom could herald an underlying neurological disease.

Nonmotor ‘off’ anxiety

Patients with PD are commonly prescribed carbidopa-levodopa, a dopamine precursor, at least 3 times daily. Initially, this medication controls motor symptoms well from 1 dose to the next. However, as the disease progresses, some patients report motor fluctuations in which an individual dose of carbidopa-levodopa may wear off early, take longer than usual to take effect, or not take effect at all. Patients describe these periods as an “off” state in which they do not feel their medications are working. Such motor fluctuations can lead to anxiety and avoidance behaviors, because patients fear being in public at times when the medication does not adequately control their motor symptoms.

In addition to these motor symptom fluctuations and related anxiety, patients can also experience nonmotor symptom fluctuations. A wide variety of nonmotor symptoms, such as mood, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms, have been reported to fluctuate in parallel with motor symptoms.^26,27 One study reported fluctuating restlessness in 39% of patients with PD, excessive worry in 17%, shortness of breath in 13%, excessive sweating and fear in 12%, and palpitations in 10%.²⁷ A patient with fluctuating shortness of breath, sweating, and palpitations (for example) may repeatedly present to the emergency department with a negative cardiac workup and eventually be diagnosed with panic disorder, whereas the patient is truly experiencing nonmotor “off” symptoms. Thus, it is important to be aware of nonmotor fluctuations so this diagnosis can be made and the symptoms appropriately treated. The first step in treating nonmotor fluctuations is to optimize the antiparkinsonian regimen to minimize fluctuations. If “off” anxiety symptoms persist, anxiolytic medications can be prescribed.²¹

Continue to: Psychosis

Psychosis can occur in prodromal and early PD but is most common in advanced PD.²⁸ One study reported that 60% of patients developed hallucinations or delusions after 12 years of follow-up.²⁹ Disease duration, disease severity, dementia, and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder are significant risk factors for psychosis in PD.³⁰ Well-formed visual hallucinations are the most common manifestation of psychosis in patients with PD. Auditory hallucinations and delusions are less common. Delusions are usually seen in patients with dementia and are often paranoid delusions, such as of spousal infidelity.³⁰ Sensory hallucinations can occur, but should not be mistaken with formication, a central pain syndrome in PD that can represent a nonmotor “off” symptom that may respond to dopaminergic medication.³¹ Other more mild psychotic symptoms include illusions or misinterpretation of stimuli, false sense of presence, and passage hallucinations of fleeting figures in the peripheral vision.³⁰

The pathophysiology of PD psychosis is not entirely understood but differs from psychosis in other disorders. It can occur in the absence of antiparkinsonian medication exposure and is thought to be a consequence of the underlying disease process of PD involving neurodegeneration in certain brain regions and aberrant neurotransmission of not only dopamine but also serotonin, acetylcholine, and glutamate.³⁰

Figure 2 outlines the management of psychosis in PD. After addressing medical and medication-related causes, it is important to determine if the psychotic symptom is sufficiently bothersome to and/or potentially dangerous for the patient to warrant treatment. If treatment is indicated, pimavanserin and clozapine are efficacious for psychosis in PD without worsening motor symptoms, and quetiapine is possibly efficacious with a low risk of worsening motor symptoms.¹⁵ Other antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol, can substantially worsen motor symptoms.¹⁵ Both second-generation antipsychotics and pimavanserin have an FDA black-box warning for a higher risk of all-cause mortality in older patients with dementia; however, because psychosis is associated with early mortality in PD, the risk/benefit ratio should be discussed with the patient and family for shared decision-making.³⁰ If the patient also has dementia, rivastigmine—which is FDA-approved for PD dementia (PDD)—may also improve hallucinations.³²

Cognitive disorders

This section focuses on PD mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI) and PDD. When a patient with PD reports cognitive concerns, the approach outlined in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder. A detailed history, medication review, and physical examination can identify any medical or psychiatric conditions that could affect cognition. The American Academy of Neurology recommends screening for depression, obtaining blood levels of vitamin B12 and thyroid-stimulating hormone, and obtaining a CT or MRI of the brain to rule out reversible causes of dementia.³³ A validated screening test such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which has higher sensitivity for PD-MCI than the Mini-Mental State Examination, is used to identify and quantify cognitive impairment.³⁴ Neuropsychological testing is the gold standard and can be used to confirm and/or better quantify the degree and domains of cognitive impairment.³⁵ Typically, cognitive deficits in PD affect executive function, attention, and/or visuospatial domains more than memory and language early on, and deficits in visuospatial and language domains have the highest sensitivity for predicting progression to PDD.³⁶

Once reversible causes of dementia are addressed or ruled out and cognitive testing is completed, the Movement Disorder Society (MDS) criteria for PD-MCI and PDD summarized in Figure 3 can be used to diagnose the cognitive disorder.^37,38 The MDS criteria for PDD require a diagnosis of PD for ≥1 year prior to the onset of dementia to differentiate PDD from dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). If the dementia starts within 1 year of the onset of parkinsonism, the diagnosis would be DLB. PDD and DLB are on the spectrum of Lewy body dementia, with the same Lewy body pathology in different temporal and spatial distributions in the brain.³⁸

Continue to: PD-MCI is present in...

PD-MCI is present in approximately 25% of patients.³⁵ PD-MCI does not always progress to dementia but increases the risk of dementia 6-fold. The prevalence of PDD increases with disease duration; it is present in approximately 50% of patients at 10 years and 80% of patients at 20 years of disease.³⁵ Rivastigmine is the only FDA-approved medication to slow progression of PDD. There is insufficient evidence for other acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and memantine.¹⁵ Unfortunately, RCTs of pharmacotherapy for PD-MCI have failed to show efficacy. However, exercise, cognitive rehabilitation, and neuromodulation are being studied. In the meantime, addressing modifiable risk factors (such as vascular risk factors and alcohol consumption) and treating comorbid orthostatic hypotension, obstructive sleep apnea, and depression may improve cognition.^35,39

Treatment-related disorders

Impulse control disorders

Impulse control disorders (ICDs) are an important medication-related consideration in patients with PD. The ICDs seen in PD include pathological gambling, binge eating, excessive shopping, hypersexual behaviors, and dopamine dysregulation syndrome (Table). These disorders are more common in younger patients with a history of impulsive personality traits and addictive behaviors (eg, history of tobacco or alcohol abuse), and are most strongly associated with dopaminergic therapies, particularly the dopamine agonists.^40,41 In the DOMINION study, the odds of ICDs were 2- to 3.5-fold higher in patients taking dopamine agonists.⁴² This is mainly thought to be due to stimulation of D2/D3 receptors in the mesolimbic system.⁴⁰ High doses of levodopa, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and amantadine are also associated with ICDs.^40-42

The first step in managing ICDs is diagnosing them, which can be difficult because patients often are not forthcoming about these problems due to embarrassment or failure to recognize that the ICD is related to PD medications. If a family member accompanies the patient at the visit, the patient may not want to disclose the amount of money they spend or the extent to which the behavior is a problem. Thus, a screening questionnaire, such as the Questionnaire for Impulsive-Compulsive Disorders in Parkinson’s Disease (QUIP) can be a helpful way for patients to alert the clinician to the issue.⁴¹ Education for the patient and family is crucial before the ICD causes significant financial, health, or relationship problems.

The mainstay of treatment is to reduce or taper off the dopamine agonist or other offending agent while monitoring for worsening motor symptoms and dopamine withdrawal syndrome. If this is unsuccessful, there is very limited evidence for further treatment strategies (Table), including antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers.^40,43,44 There is insufficient evidence for naltrexone based on an RCT that failed to meet its primary endpoint, although naltrexone did significantly reduce QUIP scores.^15,44 There is also insufficient evidence for amantadine, which showed benefit in some studies but was associated with ICDs in the DOMINION study.^15,40,42 In terms of nonpharmacologic treatments, CBT is likely efficacious.^15,40 There are mixed results for STN DBS. Some studies showed improvement in the ICD, due at least in part to dopaminergic medication reduction postoperatively, but this treatment has also been reported to increase impulsivity.^40,45

Deep brain stimulation–related disorders

For patients with PD, the ideal lead location for STN DBS is the dorsolateral aspect of the STN, as this is the motor region of the nucleus. The STN functions in indirect and hyperdirect pathways to put the brake on certain motor programs so only the desired movement can be executed. Its function is clinically demonstrated by patients with STN stroke who develop excessive ballistic movements. Adjacent to the motor region of the STN is a centrally located associative region and a medially located limbic region. Thus, when stimulating the dorsolateral STN, current can spread to those regions as well, and the STN’s ability to put the brake on behavioral and emotional programs can be affected.⁴⁶ Stimulation of the STN has been associated with mania, euphoria, new-onset ICDs, decreased verbal fluency, and executive dysfunction. Depression, apathy, and anxiety can also occur, but more commonly result from rapid withdrawal of antiparkinsonian medications after DBS surgery.^46,47 Therefore, for PD patients with DBS with new or worsening psychiatric or cognitive symptoms, it is important to inquire about any recent programming sessions with neurology as well as recent self-increases in stimulation by the patient using their controller. Collaboration with neurology is important to troubleshoot whether stimulation could be contributing to the patient’s psychiatric or cognitive symptoms.

Continue to: Bottom Line

Mood, anxiety, psychotic, and cognitive symptoms and disorders are common psychiatric manifestations associated with Parkinson’s disease (PD). In addition, patients with PD may experience impulsive control disorders and other symptoms related to treatments they receive for PD. Careful assessment and collaboration with neurology is crucial to alleviating the effects of these conditions.

Related Resources

• Weintraub D, Aarsland D, Chaudhuri KR, et al. The neuropsychiatry of Parkinson’s disease: advances and challenges. Lancet Neurology. 2022;21(1):89-102. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(21)00330-6
• Goldman JG, Guerra CM. Treatment of nonmotor symptoms associated with Parkinson disease. Neurologic Clinics. 2020;38(2):269-292. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2019.12.003
• Castrioto A, Lhommee E, Moro E et al. Mood and behavioral effects of subthalamic stimulation in Parkinson’s disease. Lancet Neurology. 2014;13(3):287-305. doi:10.1016/ S1474-4422(13)70294-1

Drug Brand Names

Amantadine • Gocovri
Carbidopa-levodopa • Sinemet
Clozapine • Clozaril
Haloperidol • Haldol
Memantine • Namenda
Mirtazapine • Remeron
Naltrexone • Vivitrol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Paroxetine • Paxil
Pimavanserin • Nuplazid
Piribedil • Pronoran
Pramipexole • Mirapex
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Rasagiline • Azilect
Risperidone • Risperdal
Rivastigmine • Exelon
Ropinirole • Requip
Rotigotine • Neupro
Venlafaxine • Effexor
Zonisamide • Zonegran

It is well known that the best outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are achieved with a treat-to-target strategy, but recent research has also focused on tapering therapy, especially biologics, in patients who are in prolonged disease remission without synovitis. In the open-label, randomized, noninferiority ARCTIC REWIND trial, Lillegraven and colleagues looked at the effects of tapering tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in 84 patients at different sites in Norway. Patients who had been in remission for a year or more on stable therapy (including TNFi and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARD]) were included in the study. Of the 43 randomly assigned to tapering TNFi therapy, nearly two-thirds had a flare in 12 months of follow-up, compared with 5% in the stable TNFi group; thus, noninferiority of tapering TNFi was not supported. This study is small and seems to highlight a greater disparity between the two groups than expected from prior studies. Given the stark difference between the two groups, however, caution is advised in tapering TNFi therapy in patients with RA, even those in "deep remission." This information is reassuring in that most patients who flared had a good response to reinstating TNFi therapy, and it is helpful in counseling patients who prefer to try to reduce their medication burden despite the potential for flare.

The impact of chronic steroid use in RA has also received a lot of scrutiny in recent literature due to possible long-term side effects such as bone loss, hyperglycemia, and accelerated atherosclerotic disease. Palmowski and colleagues conducted a pooled analysis of several European randomized trials comparing the use of low-dose glucocorticoids (< 7.5 mg/d prednisone) vs placebo in combination with targeted therapy for RA. Data from over 1100 patients in five trials were analyzed. Over the course of 2 years, participants in both groups had gained weight, more so in the glucocorticoid group compared with the control group (1.8 kg vs 0.7 kg), with negligible effects on blood pressure. While use of moderate and high doses of glucocorticoids is not advisable for the long term, the use of low doses appears to be tolerable, with relatively minor effects on weight and blood pressure.

Given the chronic nature of RA and increasing incidence with age, comorbidities and multimorbidity (two or more comorbidities) are common in patients with RA. Stevens and colleagues used a national claims database to examine the burden of multimorbidity in people with RA and its association with sex and age in two different age groups (18-50 years and older than 51 years). Over 154,000 patients with RA were matched 1:1 to those without. The risk for multimorbidity was higher in women vs men with RA, though the absolute difference in risk was not large. The magnitude of these differences (between women and men, and between those with and without RA) was more pronounced in the younger age group and, as expected, decreased in the older age group. Of note, men with RA, compared with women with RA, had a higher risk for cardiovascular disease, including hypertension, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease, valvular disease, and heart failure. Women with RA had more psychological, neurologic, and comorbid noninflammatory musculoskeletal conditions, such as chronic lower back pain. These differences stress the need for attention to individualized care to improve patients' quality of life and reduce adverse effects on other areas of health.

It is well known that the best outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are achieved with a treat-to-target strategy, but recent research has also focused on tapering therapy, especially biologics, in patients who are in prolonged disease remission without synovitis. In the open-label, randomized, noninferiority ARCTIC REWIND trial, Lillegraven and colleagues looked at the effects of tapering tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in 84 patients at different sites in Norway. Patients who had been in remission for a year or more on stable therapy (including TNFi and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARD]) were included in the study. Of the 43 randomly assigned to tapering TNFi therapy, nearly two-thirds had a flare in 12 months of follow-up, compared with 5% in the stable TNFi group; thus, noninferiority of tapering TNFi was not supported. This study is small and seems to highlight a greater disparity between the two groups than expected from prior studies. Given the stark difference between the two groups, however, caution is advised in tapering TNFi therapy in patients with RA, even those in "deep remission." This information is reassuring in that most patients who flared had a good response to reinstating TNFi therapy, and it is helpful in counseling patients who prefer to try to reduce their medication burden despite the potential for flare.

The impact of chronic steroid use in RA has also received a lot of scrutiny in recent literature due to possible long-term side effects such as bone loss, hyperglycemia, and accelerated atherosclerotic disease. Palmowski and colleagues conducted a pooled analysis of several European randomized trials comparing the use of low-dose glucocorticoids (< 7.5 mg/d prednisone) vs placebo in combination with targeted therapy for RA. Data from over 1100 patients in five trials were analyzed. Over the course of 2 years, participants in both groups had gained weight, more so in the glucocorticoid group compared with the control group (1.8 kg vs 0.7 kg), with negligible effects on blood pressure. While use of moderate and high doses of glucocorticoids is not advisable for the long term, the use of low doses appears to be tolerable, with relatively minor effects on weight and blood pressure.

Given the chronic nature of RA and increasing incidence with age, comorbidities and multimorbidity (two or more comorbidities) are common in patients with RA. Stevens and colleagues used a national claims database to examine the burden of multimorbidity in people with RA and its association with sex and age in two different age groups (18-50 years and older than 51 years). Over 154,000 patients with RA were matched 1:1 to those without. The risk for multimorbidity was higher in women vs men with RA, though the absolute difference in risk was not large. The magnitude of these differences (between women and men, and between those with and without RA) was more pronounced in the younger age group and, as expected, decreased in the older age group. Of note, men with RA, compared with women with RA, had a higher risk for cardiovascular disease, including hypertension, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease, valvular disease, and heart failure. Women with RA had more psychological, neurologic, and comorbid noninflammatory musculoskeletal conditions, such as chronic lower back pain. These differences stress the need for attention to individualized care to improve patients' quality of life and reduce adverse effects on other areas of health.

It is well known that the best outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) are achieved with a treat-to-target strategy, but recent research has also focused on tapering therapy, especially biologics, in patients who are in prolonged disease remission without synovitis. In the open-label, randomized, noninferiority ARCTIC REWIND trial, Lillegraven and colleagues looked at the effects of tapering tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) in 84 patients at different sites in Norway. Patients who had been in remission for a year or more on stable therapy (including TNFi and conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [csDMARD]) were included in the study. Of the 43 randomly assigned to tapering TNFi therapy, nearly two-thirds had a flare in 12 months of follow-up, compared with 5% in the stable TNFi group; thus, noninferiority of tapering TNFi was not supported. This study is small and seems to highlight a greater disparity between the two groups than expected from prior studies. Given the stark difference between the two groups, however, caution is advised in tapering TNFi therapy in patients with RA, even those in "deep remission." This information is reassuring in that most patients who flared had a good response to reinstating TNFi therapy, and it is helpful in counseling patients who prefer to try to reduce their medication burden despite the potential for flare.

The impact of chronic steroid use in RA has also received a lot of scrutiny in recent literature due to possible long-term side effects such as bone loss, hyperglycemia, and accelerated atherosclerotic disease. Palmowski and colleagues conducted a pooled analysis of several European randomized trials comparing the use of low-dose glucocorticoids (< 7.5 mg/d prednisone) vs placebo in combination with targeted therapy for RA. Data from over 1100 patients in five trials were analyzed. Over the course of 2 years, participants in both groups had gained weight, more so in the glucocorticoid group compared with the control group (1.8 kg vs 0.7 kg), with negligible effects on blood pressure. While use of moderate and high doses of glucocorticoids is not advisable for the long term, the use of low doses appears to be tolerable, with relatively minor effects on weight and blood pressure.

Given the chronic nature of RA and increasing incidence with age, comorbidities and multimorbidity (two or more comorbidities) are common in patients with RA. Stevens and colleagues used a national claims database to examine the burden of multimorbidity in people with RA and its association with sex and age in two different age groups (18-50 years and older than 51 years). Over 154,000 patients with RA were matched 1:1 to those without. The risk for multimorbidity was higher in women vs men with RA, though the absolute difference in risk was not large. The magnitude of these differences (between women and men, and between those with and without RA) was more pronounced in the younger age group and, as expected, decreased in the older age group. Of note, men with RA, compared with women with RA, had a higher risk for cardiovascular disease, including hypertension, high cholesterol, coronary artery disease, valvular disease, and heart failure. Women with RA had more psychological, neurologic, and comorbid noninflammatory musculoskeletal conditions, such as chronic lower back pain. These differences stress the need for attention to individualized care to improve patients' quality of life and reduce adverse effects on other areas of health.

The treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) continues to evolve. In the front-line setting, studies are evaluating the role of novel therapies as well as consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation. In the relapsed/refractory setting, patients can be considered for treatment with Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors, other targeted therapies, or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Other novel therapies, including bispecific antibodies and novel antibody drug conjugates, are being studied as well.

Despite the availability of novel agents, a subset of patients continues to have difficult-to-treat disease and a poor prognosis. Established prognostic tools that aid in identifying high-risk patients include alternations in TP53, high proliferation rates, nonclassic morphology, and the Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score, which incorporates age, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase levels, and white blood cell count. The Nordic study group recently published a paper which provides additional prognostic information beyond these known variables (Rodrigues et al). They examined MYC expression in a cohort of 251 patients with MCL and structural aberrations in MYC and MYC mRNA levels in a smaller cohort. They found that patients with tumors comprising 20% or more cells with MYC overexpression (MYC^high tumors) vs MYC^low tumors had significantly higher risks for death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.03; P = .007) and disease progression (aHR 2.20; P = .04), when adjusted for additional high-risk features. Patients with tumors with concomitant MYC^high expression and TP53/p53 alterations vs MYC^low tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, with significantly increased risks for progression (HR 16.90) and death (HR 7.83) with a median overall survival of only 0.9 years (both P < .001). Though MYC overexpression was rare, this study identified a high-risk group of patients, especially those harboring concurrent TP53 aberrations, that may benefit from novel treatment approaches.

Another study recently aimed to identify patients who are at risk for poor outcomes after treatment with brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) infusion. Though brexu-cel is an active therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, there are known toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome, neurologic toxicity, and hematologic toxicity. Given the potential for prolonged cytopenias and immune suppression, patients are also at risk for severe infections, which currently represent the driving determinant of nonrelapse mortality.¹ The CAR-HEMATOTOX (HT) score was previously found to identify patients who are at increased risk for hematologic toxicity after CAR T-cell therapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.² In the current multicenter observational study, which included 103 patients receiving brexu-cel, the authors reported an association between baseline HT score and outcome in MCL as well. Patients with high (2-7) vs low (0-1) HT scores had significantly longer median duration of severe neutropenia (P < .0001), higher rates of severe infections (P = .001), and lower overall response rates (P = .003). The HT score represented an independent predictor of poor progression-free (aHR 3.7; P < .001) and overall (aHR 5.6; P = .002) survival. This tool may provide a helpful guide when counseling patients on treatment options and allow for more personalized toxicity management.

Despite availability of BTK inhibitors and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with MCL, relapses remain common. As upregulation of phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) is known to play a critical role in lymphomagenesis, there has been interest in targeting this pathway across lymphoma subtypes. Though PI3K inhibitors have been found to be active agents, they have also been associated with poor tolerability and safety concerns. Parsaclisib is a selective PI3K delta inhibitor that showed encouraging data in the phase 1/2 study in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.³ More recently, the phase 2 CITADEL-205 study, which included adult patients with relapsed or refractory MCL previously treated with one to three systemic therapies, with (n = 53) or without (n = 108) prior BTK inhibitor treatment, was published (Zinazni et al). Patients received 20 mg parsaclisib once daily for 8 weeks followed by either 20 mg parsaclisib once weekly or 2.5 mg parsaclisib once daily. Among BTK inhibitor–naive patients who received parsaclisib once daily, 70.1% (95% CI 58.6%-80.0%) and 15.6% (95% CI 8.3%-25.6%) achieved an objective response and a complete response, respectively, with the median duration of response being 12.1 months (95% CI 9.0 to not evaluable). Responses were not thought to be clinically meaningful in the patients treated with prior BTK inhibitors. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were low grade and manageable by dose interruptions or reductions. A total of 30% of patients required drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Though parsaclisib demonstrated activity in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, the role of this drug in clinical practice is not clear given the increased use of BTK inhibitors as a preferred second-line therapy and ongoing concerns regarding PI3K inhibitor-related toxicity.

Additional References

1.      Wang Y, Jain P, Locke FL, et al. Brexucabtagene autoleucel for relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma in standard-of-care practice: Results from the US Lymphoma CAR T Consortium. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:2594-2606. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.01797

2.      Rejeski K, Perez A, Sesques P, et al. CAR-HEMATOTOX: A model for CAR T-cell-related hematologic toxicity in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2021;138:2499-2513. doi: 10.1182/blood.2020010543

3.      Forero-Torres A, Ramchandren R, Yacoub A, et al. Parsaclisib, a potent and highly selective PI3Kδ inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Blood. 2019;133:1742-1752. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-867499

The treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) continues to evolve. In the front-line setting, studies are evaluating the role of novel therapies as well as consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation. In the relapsed/refractory setting, patients can be considered for treatment with Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors, other targeted therapies, or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Other novel therapies, including bispecific antibodies and novel antibody drug conjugates, are being studied as well.

Despite the availability of novel agents, a subset of patients continues to have difficult-to-treat disease and a poor prognosis. Established prognostic tools that aid in identifying high-risk patients include alternations in TP53, high proliferation rates, nonclassic morphology, and the Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score, which incorporates age, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase levels, and white blood cell count. The Nordic study group recently published a paper which provides additional prognostic information beyond these known variables (Rodrigues et al). They examined MYC expression in a cohort of 251 patients with MCL and structural aberrations in MYC and MYC mRNA levels in a smaller cohort. They found that patients with tumors comprising 20% or more cells with MYC overexpression (MYC^high tumors) vs MYC^low tumors had significantly higher risks for death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.03; P = .007) and disease progression (aHR 2.20; P = .04), when adjusted for additional high-risk features. Patients with tumors with concomitant MYC^high expression and TP53/p53 alterations vs MYC^low tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, with significantly increased risks for progression (HR 16.90) and death (HR 7.83) with a median overall survival of only 0.9 years (both P < .001). Though MYC overexpression was rare, this study identified a high-risk group of patients, especially those harboring concurrent TP53 aberrations, that may benefit from novel treatment approaches.

Another study recently aimed to identify patients who are at risk for poor outcomes after treatment with brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) infusion. Though brexu-cel is an active therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, there are known toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome, neurologic toxicity, and hematologic toxicity. Given the potential for prolonged cytopenias and immune suppression, patients are also at risk for severe infections, which currently represent the driving determinant of nonrelapse mortality.¹ The CAR-HEMATOTOX (HT) score was previously found to identify patients who are at increased risk for hematologic toxicity after CAR T-cell therapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.² In the current multicenter observational study, which included 103 patients receiving brexu-cel, the authors reported an association between baseline HT score and outcome in MCL as well. Patients with high (2-7) vs low (0-1) HT scores had significantly longer median duration of severe neutropenia (P < .0001), higher rates of severe infections (P = .001), and lower overall response rates (P = .003). The HT score represented an independent predictor of poor progression-free (aHR 3.7; P < .001) and overall (aHR 5.6; P = .002) survival. This tool may provide a helpful guide when counseling patients on treatment options and allow for more personalized toxicity management.

Despite availability of BTK inhibitors and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with MCL, relapses remain common. As upregulation of phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) is known to play a critical role in lymphomagenesis, there has been interest in targeting this pathway across lymphoma subtypes. Though PI3K inhibitors have been found to be active agents, they have also been associated with poor tolerability and safety concerns. Parsaclisib is a selective PI3K delta inhibitor that showed encouraging data in the phase 1/2 study in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.³ More recently, the phase 2 CITADEL-205 study, which included adult patients with relapsed or refractory MCL previously treated with one to three systemic therapies, with (n = 53) or without (n = 108) prior BTK inhibitor treatment, was published (Zinazni et al). Patients received 20 mg parsaclisib once daily for 8 weeks followed by either 20 mg parsaclisib once weekly or 2.5 mg parsaclisib once daily. Among BTK inhibitor–naive patients who received parsaclisib once daily, 70.1% (95% CI 58.6%-80.0%) and 15.6% (95% CI 8.3%-25.6%) achieved an objective response and a complete response, respectively, with the median duration of response being 12.1 months (95% CI 9.0 to not evaluable). Responses were not thought to be clinically meaningful in the patients treated with prior BTK inhibitors. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were low grade and manageable by dose interruptions or reductions. A total of 30% of patients required drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Though parsaclisib demonstrated activity in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, the role of this drug in clinical practice is not clear given the increased use of BTK inhibitors as a preferred second-line therapy and ongoing concerns regarding PI3K inhibitor-related toxicity.

Additional References

1.      Wang Y, Jain P, Locke FL, et al. Brexucabtagene autoleucel for relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma in standard-of-care practice: Results from the US Lymphoma CAR T Consortium. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:2594-2606. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.01797

2.      Rejeski K, Perez A, Sesques P, et al. CAR-HEMATOTOX: A model for CAR T-cell-related hematologic toxicity in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2021;138:2499-2513. doi: 10.1182/blood.2020010543

3.      Forero-Torres A, Ramchandren R, Yacoub A, et al. Parsaclisib, a potent and highly selective PI3Kδ inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Blood. 2019;133:1742-1752. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-867499

The treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) continues to evolve. In the front-line setting, studies are evaluating the role of novel therapies as well as consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation. In the relapsed/refractory setting, patients can be considered for treatment with Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors, other targeted therapies, or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy. Other novel therapies, including bispecific antibodies and novel antibody drug conjugates, are being studied as well.

Despite the availability of novel agents, a subset of patients continues to have difficult-to-treat disease and a poor prognosis. Established prognostic tools that aid in identifying high-risk patients include alternations in TP53, high proliferation rates, nonclassic morphology, and the Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score, which incorporates age, performance status, lactate dehydrogenase levels, and white blood cell count. The Nordic study group recently published a paper which provides additional prognostic information beyond these known variables (Rodrigues et al). They examined MYC expression in a cohort of 251 patients with MCL and structural aberrations in MYC and MYC mRNA levels in a smaller cohort. They found that patients with tumors comprising 20% or more cells with MYC overexpression (MYC^high tumors) vs MYC^low tumors had significantly higher risks for death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.03; P = .007) and disease progression (aHR 2.20; P = .04), when adjusted for additional high-risk features. Patients with tumors with concomitant MYC^high expression and TP53/p53 alterations vs MYC^low tumors had a particularly poor prognosis, with significantly increased risks for progression (HR 16.90) and death (HR 7.83) with a median overall survival of only 0.9 years (both P < .001). Though MYC overexpression was rare, this study identified a high-risk group of patients, especially those harboring concurrent TP53 aberrations, that may benefit from novel treatment approaches.

Another study recently aimed to identify patients who are at risk for poor outcomes after treatment with brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel) infusion. Though brexu-cel is an active therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, there are known toxicities, including cytokine release syndrome, neurologic toxicity, and hematologic toxicity. Given the potential for prolonged cytopenias and immune suppression, patients are also at risk for severe infections, which currently represent the driving determinant of nonrelapse mortality.¹ The CAR-HEMATOTOX (HT) score was previously found to identify patients who are at increased risk for hematologic toxicity after CAR T-cell therapy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.² In the current multicenter observational study, which included 103 patients receiving brexu-cel, the authors reported an association between baseline HT score and outcome in MCL as well. Patients with high (2-7) vs low (0-1) HT scores had significantly longer median duration of severe neutropenia (P < .0001), higher rates of severe infections (P = .001), and lower overall response rates (P = .003). The HT score represented an independent predictor of poor progression-free (aHR 3.7; P < .001) and overall (aHR 5.6; P = .002) survival. This tool may provide a helpful guide when counseling patients on treatment options and allow for more personalized toxicity management.

Despite availability of BTK inhibitors and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with MCL, relapses remain common. As upregulation of phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) is known to play a critical role in lymphomagenesis, there has been interest in targeting this pathway across lymphoma subtypes. Though PI3K inhibitors have been found to be active agents, they have also been associated with poor tolerability and safety concerns. Parsaclisib is a selective PI3K delta inhibitor that showed encouraging data in the phase 1/2 study in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.³ More recently, the phase 2 CITADEL-205 study, which included adult patients with relapsed or refractory MCL previously treated with one to three systemic therapies, with (n = 53) or without (n = 108) prior BTK inhibitor treatment, was published (Zinazni et al). Patients received 20 mg parsaclisib once daily for 8 weeks followed by either 20 mg parsaclisib once weekly or 2.5 mg parsaclisib once daily. Among BTK inhibitor–naive patients who received parsaclisib once daily, 70.1% (95% CI 58.6%-80.0%) and 15.6% (95% CI 8.3%-25.6%) achieved an objective response and a complete response, respectively, with the median duration of response being 12.1 months (95% CI 9.0 to not evaluable). Responses were not thought to be clinically meaningful in the patients treated with prior BTK inhibitors. Most treatment-emergent adverse events were low grade and manageable by dose interruptions or reductions. A total of 30% of patients required drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Though parsaclisib demonstrated activity in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, the role of this drug in clinical practice is not clear given the increased use of BTK inhibitors as a preferred second-line therapy and ongoing concerns regarding PI3K inhibitor-related toxicity.

Additional References

1.      Wang Y, Jain P, Locke FL, et al. Brexucabtagene autoleucel for relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma in standard-of-care practice: Results from the US Lymphoma CAR T Consortium. J Clin Oncol. 2023;41:2594-2606. doi: 10.1200/JCO.22.01797

2.      Rejeski K, Perez A, Sesques P, et al. CAR-HEMATOTOX: A model for CAR T-cell-related hematologic toxicity in relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2021;138:2499-2513. doi: 10.1182/blood.2020010543

3.      Forero-Torres A, Ramchandren R, Yacoub A, et al. Parsaclisib, a potent and highly selective PI3Kδ inhibitor, in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignancies. Blood. 2019;133:1742-1752. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-08-867499

Endocrine therapy (ET) remains the backbone of treatment for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer; however, 15%-20% of tumors are initially resistant to ET and endocrine resistance develops over time in approximately 30%-40%.² In an effort to overcome limitations with historical standard-of-care endocrine agents, the class of oral potent selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERD) is evolving. The phase 2, randomized, controlled coopERA Breast Cancer trial evaluated the antiproliferative effect of giredestrant (a highly potent nonsteroidal oral SERD) compared with anastrozole (each combined with palbociclib after 2-week window-of-opportunity phase) among postmenopausal women with early-stage (cT1c-cT4) ER+/HER2- breast cancer with a Ki67 score ≥ 5% (Hurvitz et al). Among 221 enrolled patients (giredestrant group n = 112, and anastrozole group n = 109), giredestrant led to a significantly greater relative geometric mean reduction of Ki67 at 2 weeks from baseline compared with anastrozole (-75% vs -67%; P = 0.043). Neutropenia (26% and 27%) and decreased neutrophil count (15% and 15%) were the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the giredestrant-palbociclib and anastrozole-palbociclib groups, respectively. The value of Ki67 as a biomarker for efficacy and outcome was demonstrated in the phase 3 POETIC trial, which showed that the degree of Ki67 reduction after 2 weeks of ET correlated with 5-year recurrence risk.³ These data encourage further investigation of oral SERD combinations, predictors of response, and long-term outcomes that may influence agent selection and sequencing.

Anticancer properties have been demonstrated with aspirin, statins, and metformin, although the data on the prognostic impact of these agents in breast cancer have shown mixed results.⁴ A nationwide population-based cohort study including 26,190 women aged 50 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer and surviving 12 months or more after diagnosis was performed to evaluate the postdiagnosis use of aspirin, statins, and metformin and association with breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (Löfling et al). At 6.1 years of follow-up, there were 2169 deaths related to breast cancer and the results supported an association of postdiagnostic use of statins and metformin with survival (hazard ratio for association between use of statins vs no use and BCSS was 0.84 [95% CI 0.75-0.94]; hazard ratio for association between metformin use vs use of nonmetformin antidiabetics and BCSS was 0.70 [95% CI 0.51-0.96]). Furthermore, there appeared to be differences in association by ER status. An important relationship exists between cardiovascular health and breast cancer, and future efforts should continue to study pharmacologic and lifestyle interventions that may optimize metabolic profiles and improve outcomes for patients.

Additional References

1. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, et al. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:585-594. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2207586  
2. Lei JT, Anurag M, Haricharan S, et al. Endocrine therapy resistance: New insights. Breast. 2019;48:S26-S30. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9776(19)31118-X  
3. Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): An open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:1443-1454. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30458-7
4. Nowakowska MK, Lei X, Thompson MT, et al. Association of statin use with clinical outcomes in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer. 2021;127:4142-4150. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33797

Endocrine therapy (ET) remains the backbone of treatment for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer; however, 15%-20% of tumors are initially resistant to ET and endocrine resistance develops over time in approximately 30%-40%.² In an effort to overcome limitations with historical standard-of-care endocrine agents, the class of oral potent selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERD) is evolving. The phase 2, randomized, controlled coopERA Breast Cancer trial evaluated the antiproliferative effect of giredestrant (a highly potent nonsteroidal oral SERD) compared with anastrozole (each combined with palbociclib after 2-week window-of-opportunity phase) among postmenopausal women with early-stage (cT1c-cT4) ER+/HER2- breast cancer with a Ki67 score ≥ 5% (Hurvitz et al). Among 221 enrolled patients (giredestrant group n = 112, and anastrozole group n = 109), giredestrant led to a significantly greater relative geometric mean reduction of Ki67 at 2 weeks from baseline compared with anastrozole (-75% vs -67%; P = 0.043). Neutropenia (26% and 27%) and decreased neutrophil count (15% and 15%) were the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the giredestrant-palbociclib and anastrozole-palbociclib groups, respectively. The value of Ki67 as a biomarker for efficacy and outcome was demonstrated in the phase 3 POETIC trial, which showed that the degree of Ki67 reduction after 2 weeks of ET correlated with 5-year recurrence risk.³ These data encourage further investigation of oral SERD combinations, predictors of response, and long-term outcomes that may influence agent selection and sequencing.

Anticancer properties have been demonstrated with aspirin, statins, and metformin, although the data on the prognostic impact of these agents in breast cancer have shown mixed results.⁴ A nationwide population-based cohort study including 26,190 women aged 50 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer and surviving 12 months or more after diagnosis was performed to evaluate the postdiagnosis use of aspirin, statins, and metformin and association with breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (Löfling et al). At 6.1 years of follow-up, there were 2169 deaths related to breast cancer and the results supported an association of postdiagnostic use of statins and metformin with survival (hazard ratio for association between use of statins vs no use and BCSS was 0.84 [95% CI 0.75-0.94]; hazard ratio for association between metformin use vs use of nonmetformin antidiabetics and BCSS was 0.70 [95% CI 0.51-0.96]). Furthermore, there appeared to be differences in association by ER status. An important relationship exists between cardiovascular health and breast cancer, and future efforts should continue to study pharmacologic and lifestyle interventions that may optimize metabolic profiles and improve outcomes for patients.

Additional References

1. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, et al. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:585-594. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2207586  
2. Lei JT, Anurag M, Haricharan S, et al. Endocrine therapy resistance: New insights. Breast. 2019;48:S26-S30. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9776(19)31118-X  
3. Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): An open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:1443-1454. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30458-7
4. Nowakowska MK, Lei X, Thompson MT, et al. Association of statin use with clinical outcomes in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer. 2021;127:4142-4150. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33797

Endocrine therapy (ET) remains the backbone of treatment for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer; however, 15%-20% of tumors are initially resistant to ET and endocrine resistance develops over time in approximately 30%-40%.² In an effort to overcome limitations with historical standard-of-care endocrine agents, the class of oral potent selective estrogen receptor degraders (SERD) is evolving. The phase 2, randomized, controlled coopERA Breast Cancer trial evaluated the antiproliferative effect of giredestrant (a highly potent nonsteroidal oral SERD) compared with anastrozole (each combined with palbociclib after 2-week window-of-opportunity phase) among postmenopausal women with early-stage (cT1c-cT4) ER+/HER2- breast cancer with a Ki67 score ≥ 5% (Hurvitz et al). Among 221 enrolled patients (giredestrant group n = 112, and anastrozole group n = 109), giredestrant led to a significantly greater relative geometric mean reduction of Ki67 at 2 weeks from baseline compared with anastrozole (-75% vs -67%; P = 0.043). Neutropenia (26% and 27%) and decreased neutrophil count (15% and 15%) were the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the giredestrant-palbociclib and anastrozole-palbociclib groups, respectively. The value of Ki67 as a biomarker for efficacy and outcome was demonstrated in the phase 3 POETIC trial, which showed that the degree of Ki67 reduction after 2 weeks of ET correlated with 5-year recurrence risk.³ These data encourage further investigation of oral SERD combinations, predictors of response, and long-term outcomes that may influence agent selection and sequencing.

Anticancer properties have been demonstrated with aspirin, statins, and metformin, although the data on the prognostic impact of these agents in breast cancer have shown mixed results.⁴ A nationwide population-based cohort study including 26,190 women aged 50 years or older diagnosed with breast cancer and surviving 12 months or more after diagnosis was performed to evaluate the postdiagnosis use of aspirin, statins, and metformin and association with breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (Löfling et al). At 6.1 years of follow-up, there were 2169 deaths related to breast cancer and the results supported an association of postdiagnostic use of statins and metformin with survival (hazard ratio for association between use of statins vs no use and BCSS was 0.84 [95% CI 0.75-0.94]; hazard ratio for association between metformin use vs use of nonmetformin antidiabetics and BCSS was 0.70 [95% CI 0.51-0.96]). Furthermore, there appeared to be differences in association by ER status. An important relationship exists between cardiovascular health and breast cancer, and future efforts should continue to study pharmacologic and lifestyle interventions that may optimize metabolic profiles and improve outcomes for patients.

Additional References

1. Kunkler IH, Williams LJ, Jack WJL, et al. Breast-conserving surgery with or without irradiation in early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:585-594. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2207586  
2. Lei JT, Anurag M, Haricharan S, et al. Endocrine therapy resistance: New insights. Breast. 2019;48:S26-S30. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9776(19)31118-X  
3. Smith I, Robertson J, Kilburn L, et al. Long-term outcome and prognostic value of Ki67 after perioperative endocrine therapy in postmenopausal women with hormone-sensitive early breast cancer (POETIC): An open-label, multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:1443-1454. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30458-7
4. Nowakowska MK, Lei X, Thompson MT, et al. Association of statin use with clinical outcomes in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer. 2021;127:4142-4150. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33797

A recently published study by Rugo and colleagues presented the final analysis of overall survival and endpoints by trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) expression. Results showed that at the 12.5-month median follow-up, sacituzumab govitecan vs chemotherapy improved overall survival by 3.2 months (hazard ratio 0.79; P = .020). The survival benefit was consistent across different levels of Trop-2 expression. No new adverse events were reported; however, one fatal adverse event (septic shock caused by neutropenic colitis) was determined to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. These updated data continue to support the use of sacituzumab govitecan as a new treatment option for patients with endocrine-resistant HR+ and HER2- MBC.

It remains unclear whether anti-HER2 therapy alone (without chemotherapy) is an effective treatment approach for patients with ERBB2-positive MBC in the first-line setting. Huober and the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, the Unicancer Breast Group, and the Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group report a phase 2 trial that included 210 patients with ERBB2+ MBC who were randomly assigned to receive pertuzumab plus trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy followed by trastuzumab-emtansine as the second-line therapy in both groups. Despite worse progression-free survival in the nonchemotherapy vs the chemotherapy group (8.4 months [95% CI 7.9-12.0] vs 23.3 months [95% CI 18.9-33.1]), overall survival rates were comparable at 2 years of follow-up (79.0% [90% CI 71.4%-85.4%] vs 78.1% [90% CI 70.4%-84.5%]). Furthermore, adverse events were more frequent in the chemotherapy cohort, with small quality-of-life improvements from baseline in the nonchemotherapy cohort. Further prospective data are needed to confirm whether a chemotherapy-free approach is an acceptable treatment approach in certain population of patients, without unfavorable effects on overall survival.

Prior results from the SOFT and TEXT trials have shown improved survival with the addition of ovarian function suppression (OFS) in premenopausal women after chemotherapy. The ASTRRA trial is a similar phase 3 study that included 1282 premenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive BC who remained premenopausal or regained ovarian function after chemotherapy and were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen with or without OFS. The results showed a consistent disease-free survival benefit in women who received tamoxifen plus OFS vs tamoxifen alone (85.4% vs 80.2%; hazard ratio 0.67; P = .003) after a median follow-up of 8 years. There were no significant differences in 8-year OS rates between the two groups (P = .305), although both cohorts had high OS rates overall (> 95%). This trial highlights the overall excellent prognosis in this patient population and underscores the importance of OFS in the subgroup of patients who remain in a premenopausal state or resume ovarian function after chemotherapy.

The ICE study (Ibandronate with or without Capecitabine in Elderly patients with early breast cancer) was a phase 3 trial looking at 1358 patients age ≥ 65 years with node-positive or high-risk node-negative early BC who were randomly assigned to receive 2 years of ibandronate with or without capecitabine for six cycles in the adjuvant setting. At a median follow-up of 61 months, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rates were similar amongst patients treated with adjuvant ibandronate plus capecitabine and ibandronate alone (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.78-1.19). Outcomes were independent of age, nodal status, and hormone receptor status. The incidences of high-grade gastrointestinal disorders (6.7% vs 1.0%; P < .001) and skin toxicity (14.6% vs 0.6%; P < .01) were significantly higher in the capecitabine plus ibandronate arm vs the ibandronate alone arm.

Adjuvant capecitabine plus ibandronate failed to show improved survival outcomes compared with ibandronate alone in older patients with node-positive/high-risk node-negative BC. This was similar to results of the CALGB 49907 trial, which showed inferior survival for adjuvant capecitabine compared with standard adjuvant chemotherapy in patients ≥ 65 years of age.¹ Therefore, although oral capecitabine may be more tolerable than intravenous polychemotherapy in older patients with high-risk BC, this should be weighed against lower efficacy.

Additional Reference

1. Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al, for the CALGB Investigators. Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2055-2065. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810266

A recently published study by Rugo and colleagues presented the final analysis of overall survival and endpoints by trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) expression. Results showed that at the 12.5-month median follow-up, sacituzumab govitecan vs chemotherapy improved overall survival by 3.2 months (hazard ratio 0.79; P = .020). The survival benefit was consistent across different levels of Trop-2 expression. No new adverse events were reported; however, one fatal adverse event (septic shock caused by neutropenic colitis) was determined to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. These updated data continue to support the use of sacituzumab govitecan as a new treatment option for patients with endocrine-resistant HR+ and HER2- MBC.

It remains unclear whether anti-HER2 therapy alone (without chemotherapy) is an effective treatment approach for patients with ERBB2-positive MBC in the first-line setting. Huober and the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, the Unicancer Breast Group, and the Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group report a phase 2 trial that included 210 patients with ERBB2+ MBC who were randomly assigned to receive pertuzumab plus trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy followed by trastuzumab-emtansine as the second-line therapy in both groups. Despite worse progression-free survival in the nonchemotherapy vs the chemotherapy group (8.4 months [95% CI 7.9-12.0] vs 23.3 months [95% CI 18.9-33.1]), overall survival rates were comparable at 2 years of follow-up (79.0% [90% CI 71.4%-85.4%] vs 78.1% [90% CI 70.4%-84.5%]). Furthermore, adverse events were more frequent in the chemotherapy cohort, with small quality-of-life improvements from baseline in the nonchemotherapy cohort. Further prospective data are needed to confirm whether a chemotherapy-free approach is an acceptable treatment approach in certain population of patients, without unfavorable effects on overall survival.

Prior results from the SOFT and TEXT trials have shown improved survival with the addition of ovarian function suppression (OFS) in premenopausal women after chemotherapy. The ASTRRA trial is a similar phase 3 study that included 1282 premenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive BC who remained premenopausal or regained ovarian function after chemotherapy and were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen with or without OFS. The results showed a consistent disease-free survival benefit in women who received tamoxifen plus OFS vs tamoxifen alone (85.4% vs 80.2%; hazard ratio 0.67; P = .003) after a median follow-up of 8 years. There were no significant differences in 8-year OS rates between the two groups (P = .305), although both cohorts had high OS rates overall (> 95%). This trial highlights the overall excellent prognosis in this patient population and underscores the importance of OFS in the subgroup of patients who remain in a premenopausal state or resume ovarian function after chemotherapy.

The ICE study (Ibandronate with or without Capecitabine in Elderly patients with early breast cancer) was a phase 3 trial looking at 1358 patients age ≥ 65 years with node-positive or high-risk node-negative early BC who were randomly assigned to receive 2 years of ibandronate with or without capecitabine for six cycles in the adjuvant setting. At a median follow-up of 61 months, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rates were similar amongst patients treated with adjuvant ibandronate plus capecitabine and ibandronate alone (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.78-1.19). Outcomes were independent of age, nodal status, and hormone receptor status. The incidences of high-grade gastrointestinal disorders (6.7% vs 1.0%; P < .001) and skin toxicity (14.6% vs 0.6%; P < .01) were significantly higher in the capecitabine plus ibandronate arm vs the ibandronate alone arm.

Adjuvant capecitabine plus ibandronate failed to show improved survival outcomes compared with ibandronate alone in older patients with node-positive/high-risk node-negative BC. This was similar to results of the CALGB 49907 trial, which showed inferior survival for adjuvant capecitabine compared with standard adjuvant chemotherapy in patients ≥ 65 years of age.¹ Therefore, although oral capecitabine may be more tolerable than intravenous polychemotherapy in older patients with high-risk BC, this should be weighed against lower efficacy.

Additional Reference

1. Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al, for the CALGB Investigators. Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2055-2065. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810266

A recently published study by Rugo and colleagues presented the final analysis of overall survival and endpoints by trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) expression. Results showed that at the 12.5-month median follow-up, sacituzumab govitecan vs chemotherapy improved overall survival by 3.2 months (hazard ratio 0.79; P = .020). The survival benefit was consistent across different levels of Trop-2 expression. No new adverse events were reported; however, one fatal adverse event (septic shock caused by neutropenic colitis) was determined to be related to sacituzumab govitecan treatment. These updated data continue to support the use of sacituzumab govitecan as a new treatment option for patients with endocrine-resistant HR+ and HER2- MBC.

It remains unclear whether anti-HER2 therapy alone (without chemotherapy) is an effective treatment approach for patients with ERBB2-positive MBC in the first-line setting. Huober and the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, the Unicancer Breast Group, and the Dutch Breast Cancer Research Group report a phase 2 trial that included 210 patients with ERBB2+ MBC who were randomly assigned to receive pertuzumab plus trastuzumab with or without chemotherapy followed by trastuzumab-emtansine as the second-line therapy in both groups. Despite worse progression-free survival in the nonchemotherapy vs the chemotherapy group (8.4 months [95% CI 7.9-12.0] vs 23.3 months [95% CI 18.9-33.1]), overall survival rates were comparable at 2 years of follow-up (79.0% [90% CI 71.4%-85.4%] vs 78.1% [90% CI 70.4%-84.5%]). Furthermore, adverse events were more frequent in the chemotherapy cohort, with small quality-of-life improvements from baseline in the nonchemotherapy cohort. Further prospective data are needed to confirm whether a chemotherapy-free approach is an acceptable treatment approach in certain population of patients, without unfavorable effects on overall survival.

Prior results from the SOFT and TEXT trials have shown improved survival with the addition of ovarian function suppression (OFS) in premenopausal women after chemotherapy. The ASTRRA trial is a similar phase 3 study that included 1282 premenopausal women with estrogen receptor–positive BC who remained premenopausal or regained ovarian function after chemotherapy and were randomly assigned to receive tamoxifen with or without OFS. The results showed a consistent disease-free survival benefit in women who received tamoxifen plus OFS vs tamoxifen alone (85.4% vs 80.2%; hazard ratio 0.67; P = .003) after a median follow-up of 8 years. There were no significant differences in 8-year OS rates between the two groups (P = .305), although both cohorts had high OS rates overall (> 95%). This trial highlights the overall excellent prognosis in this patient population and underscores the importance of OFS in the subgroup of patients who remain in a premenopausal state or resume ovarian function after chemotherapy.

The ICE study (Ibandronate with or without Capecitabine in Elderly patients with early breast cancer) was a phase 3 trial looking at 1358 patients age ≥ 65 years with node-positive or high-risk node-negative early BC who were randomly assigned to receive 2 years of ibandronate with or without capecitabine for six cycles in the adjuvant setting. At a median follow-up of 61 months, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rates were similar amongst patients treated with adjuvant ibandronate plus capecitabine and ibandronate alone (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.78-1.19). Outcomes were independent of age, nodal status, and hormone receptor status. The incidences of high-grade gastrointestinal disorders (6.7% vs 1.0%; P < .001) and skin toxicity (14.6% vs 0.6%; P < .01) were significantly higher in the capecitabine plus ibandronate arm vs the ibandronate alone arm.

Adjuvant capecitabine plus ibandronate failed to show improved survival outcomes compared with ibandronate alone in older patients with node-positive/high-risk node-negative BC. This was similar to results of the CALGB 49907 trial, which showed inferior survival for adjuvant capecitabine compared with standard adjuvant chemotherapy in patients ≥ 65 years of age.¹ Therefore, although oral capecitabine may be more tolerable than intravenous polychemotherapy in older patients with high-risk BC, this should be weighed against lower efficacy.

Additional Reference

1. Muss HB, Berry DA, Cirrincione CT, et al, for the CALGB Investigators. Adjuvant chemotherapy in older women with early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:2055-2065. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810266

Given the age of the patient and the results of imaging, histology, and immunohistochemistry, the diagnosis is mucinous (colloid) carcinoma. The patient and oncologist discuss prognosis and discuss treatment options, such as breast-conserving surgery, local radiation, and possible adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is a rare histologic subtype of invasive breast cancer that occurs in < 5% of patients and generally develops in those who are ≥ 60 years old. Patients with mucinous (colloid) carcinoma generally present with a palpable mass or, on imaging, a poorly defined tumor with rare calcifications. The histologic hallmark of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is mucin production. There are two subtypes of mucinous breast carcinoma: pure and mixed. A pure mucinous tumor is defined as a carcinoma consisting of ≥ 90% intracellular or extracellular mucin. This pure subtype occurs more frequently than mixed mucinous breast carcinoma and is also less likely to metastasize to the lymph nodes.

Differential diagnosis can be challenging because mucinous (colloid) carcinoma can mimic a benign tumor on imaging, which is why it is important to include multiple factors when diagnosing in daily practice. According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), diagnosing nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer like mucinous (colloid) carcinoma involves patient history and physical exam, diagnostic bilateral mammography (ultrasound and breast MRI, as needed), pathology review, tumor estrogen/progesterone receptor status, HER2 status, and genetic counseling for those with a family history. In most cases of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, tumors are ER- and PR-positive and HER2-negative. 

A pure mucinous histologic subtype is generally associated with a favorable prognosis; 10-year survival rates of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma are > 80%. The tumor is generally not high grade and is most often classified on surgical excision. Two main types of lesions exist — A and B — as does a combination of AB. Type A has larger quantities of extracellular mucin and is considered the classic form of mucinous carcinoma. Type B is a distinct variant with endocrine differentiation. In addition, glycoproteins MUC2 and MUC6 are predominantly expressed in mucinous (colloid) carcinoma; ductal carcinoma in situ is not often found in this setting. 

NCCN recommends multidisciplinary care and development of a personalized survivorship treatment plan, which includes a customized summary of possible long-term treatment toxicities. In addition, multidisciplinary care coordination encourages close follow-up that helps patients adhere to their medications and stay current with ongoing screening.

Breast-conserving surgery and local radiation therapy are often the two modalities used to treat mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, especially because prognosis is so favorable. NCCN recommends the consideration of adjuvant endocrine treatment for patients with pure mucinous tumors that are HER2-negative and ER-positive and/or PR-positive; staged at pT1, pT2, or pT3, and pN0 or pN1mi; and ≤ 2.9 cm. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is recommended for patients with the same disease characteristics whose tumor is ≥ 3 cm.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, Assistant Member, Department of Breast Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.

Given the age of the patient and the results of imaging, histology, and immunohistochemistry, the diagnosis is mucinous (colloid) carcinoma. The patient and oncologist discuss prognosis and discuss treatment options, such as breast-conserving surgery, local radiation, and possible adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is a rare histologic subtype of invasive breast cancer that occurs in < 5% of patients and generally develops in those who are ≥ 60 years old. Patients with mucinous (colloid) carcinoma generally present with a palpable mass or, on imaging, a poorly defined tumor with rare calcifications. The histologic hallmark of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is mucin production. There are two subtypes of mucinous breast carcinoma: pure and mixed. A pure mucinous tumor is defined as a carcinoma consisting of ≥ 90% intracellular or extracellular mucin. This pure subtype occurs more frequently than mixed mucinous breast carcinoma and is also less likely to metastasize to the lymph nodes.

Differential diagnosis can be challenging because mucinous (colloid) carcinoma can mimic a benign tumor on imaging, which is why it is important to include multiple factors when diagnosing in daily practice. According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), diagnosing nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer like mucinous (colloid) carcinoma involves patient history and physical exam, diagnostic bilateral mammography (ultrasound and breast MRI, as needed), pathology review, tumor estrogen/progesterone receptor status, HER2 status, and genetic counseling for those with a family history. In most cases of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, tumors are ER- and PR-positive and HER2-negative. 

A pure mucinous histologic subtype is generally associated with a favorable prognosis; 10-year survival rates of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma are > 80%. The tumor is generally not high grade and is most often classified on surgical excision. Two main types of lesions exist — A and B — as does a combination of AB. Type A has larger quantities of extracellular mucin and is considered the classic form of mucinous carcinoma. Type B is a distinct variant with endocrine differentiation. In addition, glycoproteins MUC2 and MUC6 are predominantly expressed in mucinous (colloid) carcinoma; ductal carcinoma in situ is not often found in this setting. 

NCCN recommends multidisciplinary care and development of a personalized survivorship treatment plan, which includes a customized summary of possible long-term treatment toxicities. In addition, multidisciplinary care coordination encourages close follow-up that helps patients adhere to their medications and stay current with ongoing screening.

Breast-conserving surgery and local radiation therapy are often the two modalities used to treat mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, especially because prognosis is so favorable. NCCN recommends the consideration of adjuvant endocrine treatment for patients with pure mucinous tumors that are HER2-negative and ER-positive and/or PR-positive; staged at pT1, pT2, or pT3, and pN0 or pN1mi; and ≤ 2.9 cm. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is recommended for patients with the same disease characteristics whose tumor is ≥ 3 cm.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, Assistant Member, Department of Breast Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.

Given the age of the patient and the results of imaging, histology, and immunohistochemistry, the diagnosis is mucinous (colloid) carcinoma. The patient and oncologist discuss prognosis and discuss treatment options, such as breast-conserving surgery, local radiation, and possible adjuvant endocrine therapy.

Mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is a rare histologic subtype of invasive breast cancer that occurs in < 5% of patients and generally develops in those who are ≥ 60 years old. Patients with mucinous (colloid) carcinoma generally present with a palpable mass or, on imaging, a poorly defined tumor with rare calcifications. The histologic hallmark of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma is mucin production. There are two subtypes of mucinous breast carcinoma: pure and mixed. A pure mucinous tumor is defined as a carcinoma consisting of ≥ 90% intracellular or extracellular mucin. This pure subtype occurs more frequently than mixed mucinous breast carcinoma and is also less likely to metastasize to the lymph nodes.

Differential diagnosis can be challenging because mucinous (colloid) carcinoma can mimic a benign tumor on imaging, which is why it is important to include multiple factors when diagnosing in daily practice. According to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), diagnosing nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer like mucinous (colloid) carcinoma involves patient history and physical exam, diagnostic bilateral mammography (ultrasound and breast MRI, as needed), pathology review, tumor estrogen/progesterone receptor status, HER2 status, and genetic counseling for those with a family history. In most cases of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, tumors are ER- and PR-positive and HER2-negative. 

A pure mucinous histologic subtype is generally associated with a favorable prognosis; 10-year survival rates of mucinous (colloid) carcinoma are > 80%. The tumor is generally not high grade and is most often classified on surgical excision. Two main types of lesions exist — A and B — as does a combination of AB. Type A has larger quantities of extracellular mucin and is considered the classic form of mucinous carcinoma. Type B is a distinct variant with endocrine differentiation. In addition, glycoproteins MUC2 and MUC6 are predominantly expressed in mucinous (colloid) carcinoma; ductal carcinoma in situ is not often found in this setting. 

NCCN recommends multidisciplinary care and development of a personalized survivorship treatment plan, which includes a customized summary of possible long-term treatment toxicities. In addition, multidisciplinary care coordination encourages close follow-up that helps patients adhere to their medications and stay current with ongoing screening.

Breast-conserving surgery and local radiation therapy are often the two modalities used to treat mucinous (colloid) carcinoma, especially because prognosis is so favorable. NCCN recommends the consideration of adjuvant endocrine treatment for patients with pure mucinous tumors that are HER2-negative and ER-positive and/or PR-positive; staged at pT1, pT2, or pT3, and pN0 or pN1mi; and ≤ 2.9 cm. Adjuvant endocrine therapy is recommended for patients with the same disease characteristics whose tumor is ≥ 3 cm.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, Assistant Member, Department of Breast Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.

Avan J. Armaghani, MD, has disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Image Quizzes are fictional or fictionalized clinical scenarios intended to provide evidence-based educational takeaways.