Reviews

Mr. T, age 34, is a veteran who recently returned to civilian life. He presents to his local Veteran Affairs facility for transition of care. During active duty, he had been diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea, tobacco use disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) secondary to combat exposure, and insomnia. Mr. T says he wants to quit smoking; currently, he smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day. The primary care clinician notes that Mr. T has uncontrolled PTSD symptoms and poor sleep, and refers him for an outpatient mental health appointment.

At the mental health appointment 3 weeks later, Mr. T asks about medications to quit smoking, specifically varenicline (Table 1¹). Mr. T’s PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 score is 52, which indicates severe PTSD symptomatology. He says he sees shadowy figures in his periphery every day, and worries they are spying on him. His wife reports Mr. T has had these symptoms for most of their 10-year marriage but has never been treated for them. After a discussion with the outpatient team, Mr. T says he is willing to engage in exposure therapy for PTSD, but he does not want to take any medications other than varenicline for smoking cessation.

Cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen and risk factor for the development of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and other comorbidities. People with severe mental illness (SMI) are 3 to 5 times more likely to smoke, and they often face multiple barriers to cessation, including low socioeconomic status and lack of support.² Even when patients with SMI are provided appropriate behavioral and pharmacologic interventions, they often require more frequent monitoring and counseling, receive a longer duration of drug therapy, and experience lower smoking cessation rates than the general population.²

Current guidelines recommend nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, varenicline, and behavioral support as first-line therapies for smoking cessation in patients with and without SMI.² Evidence suggests that varenicline is more effective than other pharmacologic options; however, in 2009 a black-box warning was added to both varenicline and bupropion to highlight an increased risk of neuropsychiatric events in individuals with SMI.² This led some clinicians to hesitate to prescribe varenicline or bupropion to patients with psychiatric illness. However, in 2016, the EAGLES trial evaluated the safety of varenicline, bupropion, and NRT in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders, and based on the findings, the black-box warning was removed.² 

This article reviews the evidence regarding the use of varenicline and the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in patients with psychiatric illness. Table 2^3-6 provides a summary of each varenicline trial we discuss.

The EAGLES trial

EAGLES was a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled trial of 8,144 individuals who received treatment for smoking cessation.³ The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate to severe neuropsychiatric events (NPSAEs).³ Participants were split into psychiatric (N = 4,116) and nonpsychiatric (N = 4,028) cohorts and randomized into 4 treatment arms: varenicline 1 mg twice a day, bupropion 150 mg twice a day, nicotine patch 21 mg/d with taper, or placebo, all for 12 weeks with an additional 12 weeks of follow-up. All participants smoked ≥10 cigarettes per day. Individuals in the psychiatric cohort had to be psychiatrically stable (no exacerbations for 6 months and stable treatment for 3 months). Exclusionary diagnoses included psychotic disorders (except schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder), dementia, substance use (except nicotine), and personality disorders (except borderline personality disorder).²

The rates of moderate to severe NPSAEs in the varenicline groups were 1.25% (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.90) in the nonpsychiatric cohort and 6.42% (95% CI, 4.91 to 7.93) in the psychiatric cohort.³ However, when comparing the varenicline group of the psychiatric cohort to the other arms of the psychiatric cohort, there were no differences (bupropion 6.62% [95% CI, 5.09 to 8.15], nicotine patch 5.20% [95% CI, 3.84 to 6.56], placebo 4.83% [95% CI, 3.51 to 6.16], respectively). The primary efficacy endpoint was continuous abstinence rates (CAR) for Week 9 through Week 12. In the psychiatric cohort, varenicline was superior compared to placebo (odds ratio [OR] 3.24; 95% CI, 2.56 to 4.11), bupropion (OR 1.74; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.14), and nicotine patch (OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.99).³

Continue to: Further analysis of EAGLES

Beard et al⁴ used Bayes factor testing for additional analysis of EAGLES data to determine whether the data were insensitive to neuropsychiatric effects secondary to a lack of statistical power. In the psychiatric cohort, the varenicline and bupropion groups exhibited suggestive but not conclusive data that there was no increase in NPSAEs compared to placebo (Bayes factor 0.52 and 0.71, respectively).⁴

Another EAGLES analysis by Ayers et al⁵ evaluated participants with anxiety disorders (N = 712), including PTSD (N = 192), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) (N = 243), and panic disorder (N = 277).Of those with PTSD who received varenicline, there were no statistically significant differences in CAR from Week 9 to Week 12 vs placebo.⁵ However, there was a significant difference in individuals with GAD (OR 4.53; 95% CI, 1.20 to 17.10), and panic disorder (OR 8.49; 95% CI, 1.57 to 45.78).⁵ In contrast to CAR from Week 9 to Week 12, 7-day point prevalence abstinence at Week 12 for participants with PTSD was significant (OR 4.04; 95% CI, 1.39 to 11.74) when comparing varenicline to placebo. Within the anxiety disorder cohort, there were no significant differences in moderate to severe NPSAE rates based on treatment group. Calculated risk differences comparing varenicline to placebo were: PTSD group -7.73 (95% CI, -21.95 to 6.49), GAD group 2.80 (95% CI, -6.63 to 12.23), and panic disorder group -0.18 (95% CI, -9.57 to 9.21).⁵

Other studies

Evins et al⁶ conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of varenicline maintenance therapy in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. To be deemed clinically stable, participants in this study needed to be taking a stable dose of an antipsychotic or mood-stabilizing agent(s) for ≥30 days, compared to the 3-month requirement of the EAGLES trial.^3,6 Participants received 12 weeks of open-label varenicline; those who achieved abstinence (N = 87) entered the relapse-prevention phase and were randomized to varenicline 1 mg twice a day or placebo for 40 weeks. Of those who entered relapse-prevention, 5 in the placebo group and 2 in the varenicline group were psychiatrically hospitalized (risk ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.04 to 2.9).⁶ These researchers concluded that varenicline maintenance therapy prolonged abstinence rates with no significant increase in neuropsychiatric events.⁶

Although treatment options for smoking cessation have advanced, individuals with SMI are still disproportionately affected by the negative outcomes of cigarette smoking. Current literature suggests that varenicline does not confer an appreciable risk of neuropsychiatric events in otherwise stable patients and is the preferred first-line treatment. However, there is a gap in understanding the impact of this medication on individuals with unstable psychiatric illness. Health care professionals should be encouraged to use varenicline with careful monitoring for appropriate patients with psychiatric disorders as a standard of care to help them quit smoking.

CASE CONTINUED

After consulting with the psychiatric pharmacist and discussing the risks and benefits of varenicline, Mr. T is started on the appropriate titration schedule (Table 1¹). A pharmacist provides varenicline education, including the possibility of psychiatric adverse effects, and tells Mr. T to report any worsening psychiatric symptoms. Mr. T is scheduled for frequent follow-up visits to monitor possible adverse effects and his tobacco use. He says he understands the potential adverse effects of varenicline and agrees to frequent follow-up appointments while taking it.

Related Resources

• Leone FT, Zhang Y, Evers-Casey S, et al. Initiating pharmacologic treatment in tobacco-dependent adults. An official American Thoracic Society clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;202(2):e5-e31. doi:10.1164/rccm.202005.1982ST
• Cieslak K, Freudenreich O. 4 Ways to help your patients with schizophrenia quit smoking. Current Psychiatry. 2018; 17(2):28,33.

Drug Brand Names

Bupropion • Wellbutrin
Varenicline • Chantix

Mr. T, age 34, is a veteran who recently returned to civilian life. He presents to his local Veteran Affairs facility for transition of care. During active duty, he had been diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea, tobacco use disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) secondary to combat exposure, and insomnia. Mr. T says he wants to quit smoking; currently, he smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day. The primary care clinician notes that Mr. T has uncontrolled PTSD symptoms and poor sleep, and refers him for an outpatient mental health appointment.

At the mental health appointment 3 weeks later, Mr. T asks about medications to quit smoking, specifically varenicline (Table 1¹). Mr. T’s PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 score is 52, which indicates severe PTSD symptomatology. He says he sees shadowy figures in his periphery every day, and worries they are spying on him. His wife reports Mr. T has had these symptoms for most of their 10-year marriage but has never been treated for them. After a discussion with the outpatient team, Mr. T says he is willing to engage in exposure therapy for PTSD, but he does not want to take any medications other than varenicline for smoking cessation.

Cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen and risk factor for the development of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and other comorbidities. People with severe mental illness (SMI) are 3 to 5 times more likely to smoke, and they often face multiple barriers to cessation, including low socioeconomic status and lack of support.² Even when patients with SMI are provided appropriate behavioral and pharmacologic interventions, they often require more frequent monitoring and counseling, receive a longer duration of drug therapy, and experience lower smoking cessation rates than the general population.²

Current guidelines recommend nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, varenicline, and behavioral support as first-line therapies for smoking cessation in patients with and without SMI.² Evidence suggests that varenicline is more effective than other pharmacologic options; however, in 2009 a black-box warning was added to both varenicline and bupropion to highlight an increased risk of neuropsychiatric events in individuals with SMI.² This led some clinicians to hesitate to prescribe varenicline or bupropion to patients with psychiatric illness. However, in 2016, the EAGLES trial evaluated the safety of varenicline, bupropion, and NRT in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders, and based on the findings, the black-box warning was removed.² 

This article reviews the evidence regarding the use of varenicline and the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in patients with psychiatric illness. Table 2^3-6 provides a summary of each varenicline trial we discuss.

The EAGLES trial

EAGLES was a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled trial of 8,144 individuals who received treatment for smoking cessation.³ The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate to severe neuropsychiatric events (NPSAEs).³ Participants were split into psychiatric (N = 4,116) and nonpsychiatric (N = 4,028) cohorts and randomized into 4 treatment arms: varenicline 1 mg twice a day, bupropion 150 mg twice a day, nicotine patch 21 mg/d with taper, or placebo, all for 12 weeks with an additional 12 weeks of follow-up. All participants smoked ≥10 cigarettes per day. Individuals in the psychiatric cohort had to be psychiatrically stable (no exacerbations for 6 months and stable treatment for 3 months). Exclusionary diagnoses included psychotic disorders (except schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder), dementia, substance use (except nicotine), and personality disorders (except borderline personality disorder).²

The rates of moderate to severe NPSAEs in the varenicline groups were 1.25% (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.90) in the nonpsychiatric cohort and 6.42% (95% CI, 4.91 to 7.93) in the psychiatric cohort.³ However, when comparing the varenicline group of the psychiatric cohort to the other arms of the psychiatric cohort, there were no differences (bupropion 6.62% [95% CI, 5.09 to 8.15], nicotine patch 5.20% [95% CI, 3.84 to 6.56], placebo 4.83% [95% CI, 3.51 to 6.16], respectively). The primary efficacy endpoint was continuous abstinence rates (CAR) for Week 9 through Week 12. In the psychiatric cohort, varenicline was superior compared to placebo (odds ratio [OR] 3.24; 95% CI, 2.56 to 4.11), bupropion (OR 1.74; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.14), and nicotine patch (OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.99).³

Continue to: Further analysis of EAGLES

Beard et al⁴ used Bayes factor testing for additional analysis of EAGLES data to determine whether the data were insensitive to neuropsychiatric effects secondary to a lack of statistical power. In the psychiatric cohort, the varenicline and bupropion groups exhibited suggestive but not conclusive data that there was no increase in NPSAEs compared to placebo (Bayes factor 0.52 and 0.71, respectively).⁴

Another EAGLES analysis by Ayers et al⁵ evaluated participants with anxiety disorders (N = 712), including PTSD (N = 192), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) (N = 243), and panic disorder (N = 277).Of those with PTSD who received varenicline, there were no statistically significant differences in CAR from Week 9 to Week 12 vs placebo.⁵ However, there was a significant difference in individuals with GAD (OR 4.53; 95% CI, 1.20 to 17.10), and panic disorder (OR 8.49; 95% CI, 1.57 to 45.78).⁵ In contrast to CAR from Week 9 to Week 12, 7-day point prevalence abstinence at Week 12 for participants with PTSD was significant (OR 4.04; 95% CI, 1.39 to 11.74) when comparing varenicline to placebo. Within the anxiety disorder cohort, there were no significant differences in moderate to severe NPSAE rates based on treatment group. Calculated risk differences comparing varenicline to placebo were: PTSD group -7.73 (95% CI, -21.95 to 6.49), GAD group 2.80 (95% CI, -6.63 to 12.23), and panic disorder group -0.18 (95% CI, -9.57 to 9.21).⁵

Other studies

Evins et al⁶ conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of varenicline maintenance therapy in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. To be deemed clinically stable, participants in this study needed to be taking a stable dose of an antipsychotic or mood-stabilizing agent(s) for ≥30 days, compared to the 3-month requirement of the EAGLES trial.^3,6 Participants received 12 weeks of open-label varenicline; those who achieved abstinence (N = 87) entered the relapse-prevention phase and were randomized to varenicline 1 mg twice a day or placebo for 40 weeks. Of those who entered relapse-prevention, 5 in the placebo group and 2 in the varenicline group were psychiatrically hospitalized (risk ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.04 to 2.9).⁶ These researchers concluded that varenicline maintenance therapy prolonged abstinence rates with no significant increase in neuropsychiatric events.⁶

Although treatment options for smoking cessation have advanced, individuals with SMI are still disproportionately affected by the negative outcomes of cigarette smoking. Current literature suggests that varenicline does not confer an appreciable risk of neuropsychiatric events in otherwise stable patients and is the preferred first-line treatment. However, there is a gap in understanding the impact of this medication on individuals with unstable psychiatric illness. Health care professionals should be encouraged to use varenicline with careful monitoring for appropriate patients with psychiatric disorders as a standard of care to help them quit smoking.

CASE CONTINUED

After consulting with the psychiatric pharmacist and discussing the risks and benefits of varenicline, Mr. T is started on the appropriate titration schedule (Table 1¹). A pharmacist provides varenicline education, including the possibility of psychiatric adverse effects, and tells Mr. T to report any worsening psychiatric symptoms. Mr. T is scheduled for frequent follow-up visits to monitor possible adverse effects and his tobacco use. He says he understands the potential adverse effects of varenicline and agrees to frequent follow-up appointments while taking it.

Related Resources

• Leone FT, Zhang Y, Evers-Casey S, et al. Initiating pharmacologic treatment in tobacco-dependent adults. An official American Thoracic Society clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;202(2):e5-e31. doi:10.1164/rccm.202005.1982ST
• Cieslak K, Freudenreich O. 4 Ways to help your patients with schizophrenia quit smoking. Current Psychiatry. 2018; 17(2):28,33.

Drug Brand Names

Bupropion • Wellbutrin
Varenicline • Chantix

Mr. T, age 34, is a veteran who recently returned to civilian life. He presents to his local Veteran Affairs facility for transition of care. During active duty, he had been diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea, tobacco use disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) secondary to combat exposure, and insomnia. Mr. T says he wants to quit smoking; currently, he smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day. The primary care clinician notes that Mr. T has uncontrolled PTSD symptoms and poor sleep, and refers him for an outpatient mental health appointment.

At the mental health appointment 3 weeks later, Mr. T asks about medications to quit smoking, specifically varenicline (Table 1¹). Mr. T’s PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 score is 52, which indicates severe PTSD symptomatology. He says he sees shadowy figures in his periphery every day, and worries they are spying on him. His wife reports Mr. T has had these symptoms for most of their 10-year marriage but has never been treated for them. After a discussion with the outpatient team, Mr. T says he is willing to engage in exposure therapy for PTSD, but he does not want to take any medications other than varenicline for smoking cessation.

Cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen and risk factor for the development of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases and other comorbidities. People with severe mental illness (SMI) are 3 to 5 times more likely to smoke, and they often face multiple barriers to cessation, including low socioeconomic status and lack of support.² Even when patients with SMI are provided appropriate behavioral and pharmacologic interventions, they often require more frequent monitoring and counseling, receive a longer duration of drug therapy, and experience lower smoking cessation rates than the general population.²

Current guidelines recommend nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, varenicline, and behavioral support as first-line therapies for smoking cessation in patients with and without SMI.² Evidence suggests that varenicline is more effective than other pharmacologic options; however, in 2009 a black-box warning was added to both varenicline and bupropion to highlight an increased risk of neuropsychiatric events in individuals with SMI.² This led some clinicians to hesitate to prescribe varenicline or bupropion to patients with psychiatric illness. However, in 2016, the EAGLES trial evaluated the safety of varenicline, bupropion, and NRT in smokers with and without psychiatric disorders, and based on the findings, the black-box warning was removed.² 

This article reviews the evidence regarding the use of varenicline and the risk of neuropsychiatric adverse events in patients with psychiatric illness. Table 2^3-6 provides a summary of each varenicline trial we discuss.

The EAGLES trial

EAGLES was a multicenter, multinational, randomized, double-blind, triple-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled trial of 8,144 individuals who received treatment for smoking cessation.³ The primary endpoint was the incidence of a composite measure of moderate to severe neuropsychiatric events (NPSAEs).³ Participants were split into psychiatric (N = 4,116) and nonpsychiatric (N = 4,028) cohorts and randomized into 4 treatment arms: varenicline 1 mg twice a day, bupropion 150 mg twice a day, nicotine patch 21 mg/d with taper, or placebo, all for 12 weeks with an additional 12 weeks of follow-up. All participants smoked ≥10 cigarettes per day. Individuals in the psychiatric cohort had to be psychiatrically stable (no exacerbations for 6 months and stable treatment for 3 months). Exclusionary diagnoses included psychotic disorders (except schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder), dementia, substance use (except nicotine), and personality disorders (except borderline personality disorder).²

The rates of moderate to severe NPSAEs in the varenicline groups were 1.25% (95% CI, 0.60 to 1.90) in the nonpsychiatric cohort and 6.42% (95% CI, 4.91 to 7.93) in the psychiatric cohort.³ However, when comparing the varenicline group of the psychiatric cohort to the other arms of the psychiatric cohort, there were no differences (bupropion 6.62% [95% CI, 5.09 to 8.15], nicotine patch 5.20% [95% CI, 3.84 to 6.56], placebo 4.83% [95% CI, 3.51 to 6.16], respectively). The primary efficacy endpoint was continuous abstinence rates (CAR) for Week 9 through Week 12. In the psychiatric cohort, varenicline was superior compared to placebo (odds ratio [OR] 3.24; 95% CI, 2.56 to 4.11), bupropion (OR 1.74; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.14), and nicotine patch (OR 1.62; 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.99).³

Continue to: Further analysis of EAGLES

Beard et al⁴ used Bayes factor testing for additional analysis of EAGLES data to determine whether the data were insensitive to neuropsychiatric effects secondary to a lack of statistical power. In the psychiatric cohort, the varenicline and bupropion groups exhibited suggestive but not conclusive data that there was no increase in NPSAEs compared to placebo (Bayes factor 0.52 and 0.71, respectively).⁴

Another EAGLES analysis by Ayers et al⁵ evaluated participants with anxiety disorders (N = 712), including PTSD (N = 192), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) (N = 243), and panic disorder (N = 277).Of those with PTSD who received varenicline, there were no statistically significant differences in CAR from Week 9 to Week 12 vs placebo.⁵ However, there was a significant difference in individuals with GAD (OR 4.53; 95% CI, 1.20 to 17.10), and panic disorder (OR 8.49; 95% CI, 1.57 to 45.78).⁵ In contrast to CAR from Week 9 to Week 12, 7-day point prevalence abstinence at Week 12 for participants with PTSD was significant (OR 4.04; 95% CI, 1.39 to 11.74) when comparing varenicline to placebo. Within the anxiety disorder cohort, there were no significant differences in moderate to severe NPSAE rates based on treatment group. Calculated risk differences comparing varenicline to placebo were: PTSD group -7.73 (95% CI, -21.95 to 6.49), GAD group 2.80 (95% CI, -6.63 to 12.23), and panic disorder group -0.18 (95% CI, -9.57 to 9.21).⁵

Other studies

Evins et al⁶ conducted a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety of varenicline maintenance therapy in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. To be deemed clinically stable, participants in this study needed to be taking a stable dose of an antipsychotic or mood-stabilizing agent(s) for ≥30 days, compared to the 3-month requirement of the EAGLES trial.^3,6 Participants received 12 weeks of open-label varenicline; those who achieved abstinence (N = 87) entered the relapse-prevention phase and were randomized to varenicline 1 mg twice a day or placebo for 40 weeks. Of those who entered relapse-prevention, 5 in the placebo group and 2 in the varenicline group were psychiatrically hospitalized (risk ratio 0.45; 95% CI, 0.04 to 2.9).⁶ These researchers concluded that varenicline maintenance therapy prolonged abstinence rates with no significant increase in neuropsychiatric events.⁶

Although treatment options for smoking cessation have advanced, individuals with SMI are still disproportionately affected by the negative outcomes of cigarette smoking. Current literature suggests that varenicline does not confer an appreciable risk of neuropsychiatric events in otherwise stable patients and is the preferred first-line treatment. However, there is a gap in understanding the impact of this medication on individuals with unstable psychiatric illness. Health care professionals should be encouraged to use varenicline with careful monitoring for appropriate patients with psychiatric disorders as a standard of care to help them quit smoking.

CASE CONTINUED

After consulting with the psychiatric pharmacist and discussing the risks and benefits of varenicline, Mr. T is started on the appropriate titration schedule (Table 1¹). A pharmacist provides varenicline education, including the possibility of psychiatric adverse effects, and tells Mr. T to report any worsening psychiatric symptoms. Mr. T is scheduled for frequent follow-up visits to monitor possible adverse effects and his tobacco use. He says he understands the potential adverse effects of varenicline and agrees to frequent follow-up appointments while taking it.

Related Resources

• Leone FT, Zhang Y, Evers-Casey S, et al. Initiating pharmacologic treatment in tobacco-dependent adults. An official American Thoracic Society clinical practice guideline. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020;202(2):e5-e31. doi:10.1164/rccm.202005.1982ST
• Cieslak K, Freudenreich O. 4 Ways to help your patients with schizophrenia quit smoking. Current Psychiatry. 2018; 17(2):28,33.

Drug Brand Names

Bupropion • Wellbutrin
Varenicline • Chantix

Termination of pregnancy for medical reasons (TFMR) occurs when a pregnancy is ended due to medical complications that threaten the health of a pregnant individual and/or fetus, or when a fetus has a poor prognosis or life-limiting diagnosis. It is distinct from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists identification of all abortions as medically indicated. Common indications for TFMR include life-threatening pregnancy complications (eg, placental abruption, hyperemesis gravidarum, exacerbation of psychiatric illness), chromosomal abnormalities (eg, Trisomy 13, 18, and 21; Klinefelter syndrome), and fetal anomalies (eg, neural tube defects, cardiac defects, renal agenesis). In this article, we discuss the negative psychological outcomes of TFMR, and how to screen and intervene to best help women who experience TFMR.

Psychiatric sequelae of TFMR

Unlike abortions in general, negative psychological outcomes are common among women who experience TFMR.¹ Nearly one-half of women develop symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and approximately one-fourth show signs of depression at 4 months after termination.² Such symptoms usually improve with time but may return around trauma anniversaries (date of diagnosis or termination). Women with a history of trauma, a prior psychiatric diagnosis, and/or no living children are at greater risk. Self-blame, doubt, and high levels of distress are also risk factors.^2-4 Protective factors include positive coping strategies (such as acceptance or reframing), higher perceived social support, and high self-efficacy.^3,4

Screening: What to ask, and how

Use open-ended questions to ask about a patient’s obstetric history:

• Have you ever been pregnant?
• If you’re comfortable sharing, what were the outcomes of these pregnancies?

If a woman discloses that she has experienced a TFMR, screen for and normalize psychiatric outcomes by asking:

• Symptoms of grief, depression, and anxiety are common after TFMR. Have you experienced such symptoms?
• What impact has terminating your pregnancy for medical reasons had on your mental health?

Screening tools such as the General Self-Efficacy Scale can help assess predictive factors, while other scales can assess specific diagnoses (eg, Patient Health Questionaire-9 for depression, Impact of Event Scale-Revised and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 for trauma-related symptoms, Traumatic Grief Inventory Self Report Version for pathological grief). The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale can assess for depression, but if you use this instrument, exclude statements that reference a current pregnancy or recent delivery.

How to best help

Interventions should be specific and targeted. Thus, consider the individual nature of the experience and variation in attachment that can occur over time.⁵ OB-GYN and perinatal psychiatry clinicians can recommend local resources and support groups that specifically focus on TFMR, rather than on general pregnancy loss. Refer patients to therapists who specialize in pregnancy loss, reproductive trauma, and/or TFMR. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy may be appropriate and effective.³ Online support groups (such as Termination of Pregnancy for Medical Reasons; www.facebook.com/groups/TFMRgroup/) can supplement or fill gaps in local resources. Suggest books that discuss TFMR, such as Our Heartbreaking Choices: Forty-Six Women Share Their Stories of Interrupting a Much-Wanted Pregnancy.⁶ Also suggest ways to facilitate conversations with children around TFMR, which is described in a series of books by Katrina Villegas (https://shop.terminationsremembered.com/product-category/childrens-books-about-termination-for-medical-reasons/). Inquire about support rituals, such as naming their child, holding a memorial service, and/or recognizing their due date. Also, for a woman who has experienced TFMR, remember to screen for anxiety in subsequent pregnancies.

Termination of pregnancy for medical reasons (TFMR) occurs when a pregnancy is ended due to medical complications that threaten the health of a pregnant individual and/or fetus, or when a fetus has a poor prognosis or life-limiting diagnosis. It is distinct from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists identification of all abortions as medically indicated. Common indications for TFMR include life-threatening pregnancy complications (eg, placental abruption, hyperemesis gravidarum, exacerbation of psychiatric illness), chromosomal abnormalities (eg, Trisomy 13, 18, and 21; Klinefelter syndrome), and fetal anomalies (eg, neural tube defects, cardiac defects, renal agenesis). In this article, we discuss the negative psychological outcomes of TFMR, and how to screen and intervene to best help women who experience TFMR.

Psychiatric sequelae of TFMR

Unlike abortions in general, negative psychological outcomes are common among women who experience TFMR.¹ Nearly one-half of women develop symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and approximately one-fourth show signs of depression at 4 months after termination.² Such symptoms usually improve with time but may return around trauma anniversaries (date of diagnosis or termination). Women with a history of trauma, a prior psychiatric diagnosis, and/or no living children are at greater risk. Self-blame, doubt, and high levels of distress are also risk factors.^2-4 Protective factors include positive coping strategies (such as acceptance or reframing), higher perceived social support, and high self-efficacy.^3,4

Screening: What to ask, and how

Use open-ended questions to ask about a patient’s obstetric history:

• Have you ever been pregnant?
• If you’re comfortable sharing, what were the outcomes of these pregnancies?

If a woman discloses that she has experienced a TFMR, screen for and normalize psychiatric outcomes by asking:

• Symptoms of grief, depression, and anxiety are common after TFMR. Have you experienced such symptoms?
• What impact has terminating your pregnancy for medical reasons had on your mental health?

Screening tools such as the General Self-Efficacy Scale can help assess predictive factors, while other scales can assess specific diagnoses (eg, Patient Health Questionaire-9 for depression, Impact of Event Scale-Revised and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 for trauma-related symptoms, Traumatic Grief Inventory Self Report Version for pathological grief). The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale can assess for depression, but if you use this instrument, exclude statements that reference a current pregnancy or recent delivery.

How to best help

Interventions should be specific and targeted. Thus, consider the individual nature of the experience and variation in attachment that can occur over time.⁵ OB-GYN and perinatal psychiatry clinicians can recommend local resources and support groups that specifically focus on TFMR, rather than on general pregnancy loss. Refer patients to therapists who specialize in pregnancy loss, reproductive trauma, and/or TFMR. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy may be appropriate and effective.³ Online support groups (such as Termination of Pregnancy for Medical Reasons; www.facebook.com/groups/TFMRgroup/) can supplement or fill gaps in local resources. Suggest books that discuss TFMR, such as Our Heartbreaking Choices: Forty-Six Women Share Their Stories of Interrupting a Much-Wanted Pregnancy.⁶ Also suggest ways to facilitate conversations with children around TFMR, which is described in a series of books by Katrina Villegas (https://shop.terminationsremembered.com/product-category/childrens-books-about-termination-for-medical-reasons/). Inquire about support rituals, such as naming their child, holding a memorial service, and/or recognizing their due date. Also, for a woman who has experienced TFMR, remember to screen for anxiety in subsequent pregnancies.

Termination of pregnancy for medical reasons (TFMR) occurs when a pregnancy is ended due to medical complications that threaten the health of a pregnant individual and/or fetus, or when a fetus has a poor prognosis or life-limiting diagnosis. It is distinct from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists identification of all abortions as medically indicated. Common indications for TFMR include life-threatening pregnancy complications (eg, placental abruption, hyperemesis gravidarum, exacerbation of psychiatric illness), chromosomal abnormalities (eg, Trisomy 13, 18, and 21; Klinefelter syndrome), and fetal anomalies (eg, neural tube defects, cardiac defects, renal agenesis). In this article, we discuss the negative psychological outcomes of TFMR, and how to screen and intervene to best help women who experience TFMR.

Psychiatric sequelae of TFMR

Unlike abortions in general, negative psychological outcomes are common among women who experience TFMR.¹ Nearly one-half of women develop symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and approximately one-fourth show signs of depression at 4 months after termination.² Such symptoms usually improve with time but may return around trauma anniversaries (date of diagnosis or termination). Women with a history of trauma, a prior psychiatric diagnosis, and/or no living children are at greater risk. Self-blame, doubt, and high levels of distress are also risk factors.^2-4 Protective factors include positive coping strategies (such as acceptance or reframing), higher perceived social support, and high self-efficacy.^3,4

Screening: What to ask, and how

Use open-ended questions to ask about a patient’s obstetric history:

• Have you ever been pregnant?
• If you’re comfortable sharing, what were the outcomes of these pregnancies?

If a woman discloses that she has experienced a TFMR, screen for and normalize psychiatric outcomes by asking:

• Symptoms of grief, depression, and anxiety are common after TFMR. Have you experienced such symptoms?
• What impact has terminating your pregnancy for medical reasons had on your mental health?

Screening tools such as the General Self-Efficacy Scale can help assess predictive factors, while other scales can assess specific diagnoses (eg, Patient Health Questionaire-9 for depression, Impact of Event Scale-Revised and PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 for trauma-related symptoms, Traumatic Grief Inventory Self Report Version for pathological grief). The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale can assess for depression, but if you use this instrument, exclude statements that reference a current pregnancy or recent delivery.

How to best help

Interventions should be specific and targeted. Thus, consider the individual nature of the experience and variation in attachment that can occur over time.⁵ OB-GYN and perinatal psychiatry clinicians can recommend local resources and support groups that specifically focus on TFMR, rather than on general pregnancy loss. Refer patients to therapists who specialize in pregnancy loss, reproductive trauma, and/or TFMR. Cognitive-behavioral therapy and acceptance and commitment therapy may be appropriate and effective.³ Online support groups (such as Termination of Pregnancy for Medical Reasons; www.facebook.com/groups/TFMRgroup/) can supplement or fill gaps in local resources. Suggest books that discuss TFMR, such as Our Heartbreaking Choices: Forty-Six Women Share Their Stories of Interrupting a Much-Wanted Pregnancy.⁶ Also suggest ways to facilitate conversations with children around TFMR, which is described in a series of books by Katrina Villegas (https://shop.terminationsremembered.com/product-category/childrens-books-about-termination-for-medical-reasons/). Inquire about support rituals, such as naming their child, holding a memorial service, and/or recognizing their due date. Also, for a woman who has experienced TFMR, remember to screen for anxiety in subsequent pregnancies.

Mr. J, age 23, presents to an outpatient mental health clinic for treatment of anxiety. He has no psychiatric history, is dressed neatly, and recently finished graduate school with a degree in accounting. Mr. J is reserved during the initial psychiatric evaluation and provides only basic facts about his developmental history.

Mr. J comes from a middle-class household with no history of trauma or substance use. He does not report any symptoms consistent with anxiety, but discloses a history of sexual preoccupations. Mr. J says that during adolescence he developed a predilection for observing others engage in sexual activity. In his late teens, he began following couples to their homes in the hope of witnessing sexual intimacy. In the rare instance that his voyeuristic fantasy comes to fruition, he masturbates and achieves sexual gratification he is incapable of experiencing otherwise. Mr. J notes that he has not yet been caught, but he expresses concern and embarrassment related to his actions. He concludes by noting that he seeks help because the frequency of this behavior has steadily increased.

How would you treat Mr. J? Where does the line exist between a normophilic sexual interest, fantasy or urge, and a paraphilia? Does Mr. J qualify as a sexually violent predator?

From The Rocky Horror Picture Show to Fifty Shades of Grey, sensationalized portrayals of sexual deviancy have long been present in popular culture. The continued popularity of serial killers years after their crimes seems in part related to the extreme sexual torture their victims often endure. However, a sexual offense does not always qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹ In fact, many individuals with paraphilic disorders never engage in illegal activity. Additionally, experiencing sexually deviant thoughts alone does not qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹

A thorough psychiatric evaluation should include a discussion of the patient’s sexual history, including the potential of sexual dysfunction and abnormal desires or behaviors. Most individuals with sexual dysfunction do not have a paraphilic disorder.² DSM-5 and ICD-11 classify sexual dysfunction and paraphilic disorders in different categories. However, previous editions grouped them together under sexual and gender identity disorders. Individuals with paraphilic disorders may not originally present to the outpatient setting for a paraphilic disorder, but instead may first seek treatment for a more common comorbid disorder, such as a mood disorder, personality disorder, or substance use disorder.³

Diagnostically speaking, if individuals do not experience distress or issues with functionality and lack legal charges (suggesting that they have not violated the rights of others), they are categorized as having an atypical sexual interest but do not necessarily meet the criteria for a disorder.⁴ This article provides an overview of paraphilic disorders as well as forensic considerations when examining individuals with sexually deviant behaviors.

Overview of paraphilic disorders

DSM-5 characterizes a paraphilic disorder as “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors generally involving nonhuman objects or nonconsenting partners for at least 6 months. The individual must have acted on the thought and/or it caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” DSM-5 outlines 9 categories of paraphilic disorders, which are described in Table 1.^4,5

Continue to: Paraphilic disorders are more common...

Paraphilic disorders are more common in men than in women; the 2 most prevalent are voyeuristic disorder and frotteuristic disorder.⁶ The incidence of paraphilias in the general outpatient setting varies by disorder. Approximately 45% of individuals with pedophilic disorder seek treatment, whereas only 1% of individuals with zoophilia seek treatment.⁶ The incidence of paraphilic acts also varies drastically; individuals with exhibitionistic disorder engaged in an average of 50 acts vs only 3 for individuals with sexual sadism.⁶ Not all individuals with paraphilic disorders commit crimes. Approximately 58% of sexual offenders meet the criteria for a paraphilic disorder, but antisocial personality disorder is a far more common diagnosis.⁷

Sexual psychopath statutes: Phase 1

In 1937, Michigan became the first state to enact sexual psychopath statutes, allowing for indeterminate sentencing and the civil commitment/treatment of sex offenders with repeated convictions. By the 1970s, more than 30 states had enacted similar statutes. It was not until 1967, in Specht v Patterson,⁸ that the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause was violated when Francis Eddie Specht faced life in prison following his conviction for indecent liberties under the Colorado Sex Offenders Act.

Specht was convicted in 1959 for indecent liberties after pleading guilty to enticing a child younger than age 16 into an office and engaging in sexual activities with them. At the time of Specht’s conviction, the crime of indecent liberties carried a punishment of 10 years. However, Specht was sentenced under the Sexual Offenders Act, which allowed for an indeterminate sentence of 1 day to life in prison. The Supreme Court noted that Specht was denied the right to be present with counsel, to confront the evidence against him, to cross-examine witnesses, and to offer his own evidence, which was a violation of his constitutionally guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment right to Procedural Due Process. The decision led most states to repeal early sexual psychopath statutes.⁸

Sexually violent predator laws: Phase 2

After early sexual psychopath statutes were repealed, many states pushed to update sex offender laws in response to the Earl Shriner case.⁹ In 1989, Shriner was released from prison after serving a 10-year sentence for sexually assaulting 2 teenage girls. At the time, he did not meet the criteria for civil commitment in the state of Washington. On the day he was released, Shriner cut off a young boy’s penis and left him to die. Washington subsequently became the first of many states to enact sexually violent predator (SVP) laws. Table 2¹⁰ shows states and districts that have SVP civil commitment laws.

A series of United States Supreme Court cases solidified current sexual offender civil commitment laws (Table 3^8,11-15).

Continue to: Allen v Illinois

Allen v Illinois (1986).¹¹ The Court ruled that forcing an individual to participate in a psychiatric evaluation prior to a sexually dangerous person’s commitment hearing did not violate the individual’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because the purpose of the evaluation was to provide treatment, not punishment.

Kansas v Hendricks (1997).¹² The Court upheld that the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act was constitutional and noted that the use of the broad term “mental abnormality” (in lieu of the more specific term “mental illness”) does not violate an individual’s Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process. Additionally, the Court opined that the constitutional ban on double jeopardy and ex post facto lawmaking does not apply because the procedures are civil, not criminal.

Kansas v Crane (2002).¹³ The Court upheld the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, stating that mental illness and dangerousness are essential elements to meet the criteria for civil commitment. The Court added that proof of partial (not total) “volitional impairment” is all that is required to meet the threshold of sexual dangerousness.

McKune v Lile (2002).¹⁴ The Court ruled that a policy requiring participation in polygraph testing, which would lead to the disclosure of sexual crimes (even those that have not been prosecuted), does not violate an individual’s Fifth Amendment rights because it serves a vital penological purpose.

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006¹⁶; United States v Comstock (2010).¹⁵ This act and subsequent case reinforced the federal government’s right to civilly commit sexually dangerous persons approaching the end of their prison sentences.

Continue to: What is requiried for civil commitment?

What is required for civil commitment?

SVP laws require 4 conditions to be met for the civil commitment of sexual offenders (Table 4¹⁷). In criteria 1, “charges” is a key word, because this allows individuals found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity or Incompetent to Stand Trial to be civilly committed. Criteria 2 defines “mental abnormality” as a “congenital or acquired condition affecting the emotional or volitional capacity which predisposes the person to commit criminal sexual acts in a degree constituting such person a menace to the health and safety of others.”¹⁸ This is a broad definition, and allows individuals with personality disorders to be civilly committed (although most sexual offenders are committed for having a paraphilic disorder). To determine risk, various actuarial instruments are used to assess for sexually violent recidivism, including (but not limited to) the Static-99R, Sexual Violence Risk-20, and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide.¹⁹

Although the percentages vary, sex offenders rarely are civilly committed following their criminal sentence. In California, approximately 1.5% of sex offenders are civilly committed.¹⁷ The standard of proof for civil commitment varies by state between “clear and convincing evidence” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” As sex offenders approach the end of their sentence, sexually violent offenders are identified to the general population and referred for a psychiatric evaluation. If the individual meets the 4 criteria for commitment (Table 4¹⁷), their case is sent to the prosecuting attorney’s office. If accepted, the court holds a probable cause hearing, followed by a full trial.

Pornography and sex offenders

Pornography has long been considered a risk factor for sexual offending, and the role of pornography in influencing sexual behavior has drawn recent interest in research towards predicting future offenses. However, a 2019 systematic review by Mellor et al²⁰ on the relationship between pornography and sexual offending suggested that early exposure to pornography is not a risk factor for sexual offending, nor is the risk of offending increased shortly after pornography exposure. Additionally, pornography use did not predict recidivism in low-risk sexual offenders, but did in high-risk offenders.

The use of child pornography presents a set of new risk factors. Prohibited by federal and state law, child pornography is defined under Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone <age 18). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer-generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created to depict a minor. The law does not require an image of a child engaging in sexual activity for the image to be characterized as child pornography. Offenders are also commonly charged with the distribution of child pornography. A conviction of child pornography possession carries a 15- to 30-year sentence, and distribution carries a 5- to 20-year sentence.²¹ The individual must also file for the sex offender registry, which may restrict their employment and place of residency.

It is unclear what percentage of individuals charged with child pornography have a history of prior sexual offenses. Numerous studies suggest there is a low risk of online offenders without prior offenses becoming contact offenders. Characteristics of online-only offenders include being White, a single male, age 20 to 30, well-educated, and employed, and having antisocial traits and a history of sexual deviancy.²² Contact offenders tend to be married with easy access to children, unemployed, uneducated, and to have a history of mental illness or criminal offenses.²²

Continue to: Recidivism and treatment

Recidivism and treatment

The recidivism rate among sexual offenders averages 13.7% at 3- to 6-year follow-up,although rates vary by type of sexual offense.²³ Individuals who committed rape have the highest rate of recidivism, while those who engaged in incest have the lowest. Three key points about sexual offender recidivism are:

• it declines over time and with increased age.
• sexual offenders are more like to commit a nonsexual offense than a sexual offense.
• sexual offenders who have undergone treatment are 26.3% less likely to reoffend.²³

Although there is no standard of treatment, current interventions include external control, reduction of sexual drive, treatment of comorbid conditions, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and dynamic psychotherapy. External control relies on an outside entity that affects the individual’s behavior. For sexually deviant behaviors, simply making the act illegal or involving the law may inhibit many individuals from acting on a thought. Additional external control may include pharmacotherapy, which ranges from nonhormonal options such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to hormonal options. Therapy tends to focus on social skills training, sex education, cognitive restructuring, and identifying triggers, as well as victim empathy. The best indicators for successful treatment include an absence of comorbidities, increased age, and adult interpersonal relationships.²⁴

Treatment choice may be predicated on the severity of the paraphilia. Psychotherapy alone is recommended for individuals able to maintain functioning if it does not affect their conventional sexual activity. Common treatment for low-risk individuals is psychotherapy and an SSRI. As risk increases, so does treatment with pharmacologic agents. Beyond SSRIs, moderate offenders may be treated with an SSRI and a low-dose antiandrogen. This is escalated in high-risk violent offenders to long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs and synthetic steroidal analogs.²⁵

An evolving class of disorders

With the evolution and accessibility of pornography, uncommon sexual practices have become more common, gaining notoriety and increased social acceptance. As a result, mental health professionals may be tasked with evaluating patients for possible paraphilic disorders. A common misconception is that individuals with sexually deviant thoughts, sexual offenders, and patients with paraphilic disorders are all the same. However, more commonly, sexual offenders do not have a paraphilic disorder. In the case of SVPs, outside of imprisonment, civil commitment remains a consideration for possible treatment. To meet the threshold of civil commitment, a sexual offender must have a “mental abnormality,” which is most commonly a paraphilic disorder. The treatment of paraphilic disorders remains a difficult task and includes a mixture of psychotherapy and medication options.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. J begins weekly CBT to gain control of his voyeuristic fantasies without impacting his conventional sexual activity and desire. He responds well to treatment, and after 18 months, begins a typical sexual relationship with a woman. Although his voyeuristic thoughts remain, the urge to act on the thoughts decreases as Mr. J develops coping mechanisms. He does not require pharmacologic treatment.

Bottom Line

Individuals with paraphilic disorders are too often portrayed as sexual deviants or criminals. Psychiatrists must review each case with careful consideration of individual risk factors, such as the patient’s sexual history, to evaluate potential treatment options while determining if they pose a threat to the public.

Related Resources

• Sorrentino R, Abramowitz J. Minor-attracted persons: a neglected population. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(7):21-27. doi:10.12788/cp.0149
• Berlin FS. Paraphilic disorders: a better understanding. Current Psychiatry. 2019;18(4):22-26,28.

Mr. J, age 23, presents to an outpatient mental health clinic for treatment of anxiety. He has no psychiatric history, is dressed neatly, and recently finished graduate school with a degree in accounting. Mr. J is reserved during the initial psychiatric evaluation and provides only basic facts about his developmental history.

Mr. J comes from a middle-class household with no history of trauma or substance use. He does not report any symptoms consistent with anxiety, but discloses a history of sexual preoccupations. Mr. J says that during adolescence he developed a predilection for observing others engage in sexual activity. In his late teens, he began following couples to their homes in the hope of witnessing sexual intimacy. In the rare instance that his voyeuristic fantasy comes to fruition, he masturbates and achieves sexual gratification he is incapable of experiencing otherwise. Mr. J notes that he has not yet been caught, but he expresses concern and embarrassment related to his actions. He concludes by noting that he seeks help because the frequency of this behavior has steadily increased.

How would you treat Mr. J? Where does the line exist between a normophilic sexual interest, fantasy or urge, and a paraphilia? Does Mr. J qualify as a sexually violent predator?

From The Rocky Horror Picture Show to Fifty Shades of Grey, sensationalized portrayals of sexual deviancy have long been present in popular culture. The continued popularity of serial killers years after their crimes seems in part related to the extreme sexual torture their victims often endure. However, a sexual offense does not always qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹ In fact, many individuals with paraphilic disorders never engage in illegal activity. Additionally, experiencing sexually deviant thoughts alone does not qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹

A thorough psychiatric evaluation should include a discussion of the patient’s sexual history, including the potential of sexual dysfunction and abnormal desires or behaviors. Most individuals with sexual dysfunction do not have a paraphilic disorder.² DSM-5 and ICD-11 classify sexual dysfunction and paraphilic disorders in different categories. However, previous editions grouped them together under sexual and gender identity disorders. Individuals with paraphilic disorders may not originally present to the outpatient setting for a paraphilic disorder, but instead may first seek treatment for a more common comorbid disorder, such as a mood disorder, personality disorder, or substance use disorder.³

Diagnostically speaking, if individuals do not experience distress or issues with functionality and lack legal charges (suggesting that they have not violated the rights of others), they are categorized as having an atypical sexual interest but do not necessarily meet the criteria for a disorder.⁴ This article provides an overview of paraphilic disorders as well as forensic considerations when examining individuals with sexually deviant behaviors.

Overview of paraphilic disorders

DSM-5 characterizes a paraphilic disorder as “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors generally involving nonhuman objects or nonconsenting partners for at least 6 months. The individual must have acted on the thought and/or it caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” DSM-5 outlines 9 categories of paraphilic disorders, which are described in Table 1.^4,5

Continue to: Paraphilic disorders are more common...

Paraphilic disorders are more common in men than in women; the 2 most prevalent are voyeuristic disorder and frotteuristic disorder.⁶ The incidence of paraphilias in the general outpatient setting varies by disorder. Approximately 45% of individuals with pedophilic disorder seek treatment, whereas only 1% of individuals with zoophilia seek treatment.⁶ The incidence of paraphilic acts also varies drastically; individuals with exhibitionistic disorder engaged in an average of 50 acts vs only 3 for individuals with sexual sadism.⁶ Not all individuals with paraphilic disorders commit crimes. Approximately 58% of sexual offenders meet the criteria for a paraphilic disorder, but antisocial personality disorder is a far more common diagnosis.⁷

Sexual psychopath statutes: Phase 1

In 1937, Michigan became the first state to enact sexual psychopath statutes, allowing for indeterminate sentencing and the civil commitment/treatment of sex offenders with repeated convictions. By the 1970s, more than 30 states had enacted similar statutes. It was not until 1967, in Specht v Patterson,⁸ that the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause was violated when Francis Eddie Specht faced life in prison following his conviction for indecent liberties under the Colorado Sex Offenders Act.

Specht was convicted in 1959 for indecent liberties after pleading guilty to enticing a child younger than age 16 into an office and engaging in sexual activities with them. At the time of Specht’s conviction, the crime of indecent liberties carried a punishment of 10 years. However, Specht was sentenced under the Sexual Offenders Act, which allowed for an indeterminate sentence of 1 day to life in prison. The Supreme Court noted that Specht was denied the right to be present with counsel, to confront the evidence against him, to cross-examine witnesses, and to offer his own evidence, which was a violation of his constitutionally guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment right to Procedural Due Process. The decision led most states to repeal early sexual psychopath statutes.⁸

Sexually violent predator laws: Phase 2

After early sexual psychopath statutes were repealed, many states pushed to update sex offender laws in response to the Earl Shriner case.⁹ In 1989, Shriner was released from prison after serving a 10-year sentence for sexually assaulting 2 teenage girls. At the time, he did not meet the criteria for civil commitment in the state of Washington. On the day he was released, Shriner cut off a young boy’s penis and left him to die. Washington subsequently became the first of many states to enact sexually violent predator (SVP) laws. Table 2¹⁰ shows states and districts that have SVP civil commitment laws.

A series of United States Supreme Court cases solidified current sexual offender civil commitment laws (Table 3^8,11-15).

Continue to: Allen v Illinois

Allen v Illinois (1986).¹¹ The Court ruled that forcing an individual to participate in a psychiatric evaluation prior to a sexually dangerous person’s commitment hearing did not violate the individual’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because the purpose of the evaluation was to provide treatment, not punishment.

Kansas v Hendricks (1997).¹² The Court upheld that the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act was constitutional and noted that the use of the broad term “mental abnormality” (in lieu of the more specific term “mental illness”) does not violate an individual’s Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process. Additionally, the Court opined that the constitutional ban on double jeopardy and ex post facto lawmaking does not apply because the procedures are civil, not criminal.

Kansas v Crane (2002).¹³ The Court upheld the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, stating that mental illness and dangerousness are essential elements to meet the criteria for civil commitment. The Court added that proof of partial (not total) “volitional impairment” is all that is required to meet the threshold of sexual dangerousness.

McKune v Lile (2002).¹⁴ The Court ruled that a policy requiring participation in polygraph testing, which would lead to the disclosure of sexual crimes (even those that have not been prosecuted), does not violate an individual’s Fifth Amendment rights because it serves a vital penological purpose.

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006¹⁶; United States v Comstock (2010).¹⁵ This act and subsequent case reinforced the federal government’s right to civilly commit sexually dangerous persons approaching the end of their prison sentences.

Continue to: What is requiried for civil commitment?

What is required for civil commitment?

SVP laws require 4 conditions to be met for the civil commitment of sexual offenders (Table 4¹⁷). In criteria 1, “charges” is a key word, because this allows individuals found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity or Incompetent to Stand Trial to be civilly committed. Criteria 2 defines “mental abnormality” as a “congenital or acquired condition affecting the emotional or volitional capacity which predisposes the person to commit criminal sexual acts in a degree constituting such person a menace to the health and safety of others.”¹⁸ This is a broad definition, and allows individuals with personality disorders to be civilly committed (although most sexual offenders are committed for having a paraphilic disorder). To determine risk, various actuarial instruments are used to assess for sexually violent recidivism, including (but not limited to) the Static-99R, Sexual Violence Risk-20, and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide.¹⁹

Although the percentages vary, sex offenders rarely are civilly committed following their criminal sentence. In California, approximately 1.5% of sex offenders are civilly committed.¹⁷ The standard of proof for civil commitment varies by state between “clear and convincing evidence” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” As sex offenders approach the end of their sentence, sexually violent offenders are identified to the general population and referred for a psychiatric evaluation. If the individual meets the 4 criteria for commitment (Table 4¹⁷), their case is sent to the prosecuting attorney’s office. If accepted, the court holds a probable cause hearing, followed by a full trial.

Pornography and sex offenders

Pornography has long been considered a risk factor for sexual offending, and the role of pornography in influencing sexual behavior has drawn recent interest in research towards predicting future offenses. However, a 2019 systematic review by Mellor et al²⁰ on the relationship between pornography and sexual offending suggested that early exposure to pornography is not a risk factor for sexual offending, nor is the risk of offending increased shortly after pornography exposure. Additionally, pornography use did not predict recidivism in low-risk sexual offenders, but did in high-risk offenders.

The use of child pornography presents a set of new risk factors. Prohibited by federal and state law, child pornography is defined under Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone <age 18). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer-generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created to depict a minor. The law does not require an image of a child engaging in sexual activity for the image to be characterized as child pornography. Offenders are also commonly charged with the distribution of child pornography. A conviction of child pornography possession carries a 15- to 30-year sentence, and distribution carries a 5- to 20-year sentence.²¹ The individual must also file for the sex offender registry, which may restrict their employment and place of residency.

It is unclear what percentage of individuals charged with child pornography have a history of prior sexual offenses. Numerous studies suggest there is a low risk of online offenders without prior offenses becoming contact offenders. Characteristics of online-only offenders include being White, a single male, age 20 to 30, well-educated, and employed, and having antisocial traits and a history of sexual deviancy.²² Contact offenders tend to be married with easy access to children, unemployed, uneducated, and to have a history of mental illness or criminal offenses.²²

Continue to: Recidivism and treatment

Recidivism and treatment

The recidivism rate among sexual offenders averages 13.7% at 3- to 6-year follow-up,although rates vary by type of sexual offense.²³ Individuals who committed rape have the highest rate of recidivism, while those who engaged in incest have the lowest. Three key points about sexual offender recidivism are:

• it declines over time and with increased age.
• sexual offenders are more like to commit a nonsexual offense than a sexual offense.
• sexual offenders who have undergone treatment are 26.3% less likely to reoffend.²³

Although there is no standard of treatment, current interventions include external control, reduction of sexual drive, treatment of comorbid conditions, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and dynamic psychotherapy. External control relies on an outside entity that affects the individual’s behavior. For sexually deviant behaviors, simply making the act illegal or involving the law may inhibit many individuals from acting on a thought. Additional external control may include pharmacotherapy, which ranges from nonhormonal options such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to hormonal options. Therapy tends to focus on social skills training, sex education, cognitive restructuring, and identifying triggers, as well as victim empathy. The best indicators for successful treatment include an absence of comorbidities, increased age, and adult interpersonal relationships.²⁴

Treatment choice may be predicated on the severity of the paraphilia. Psychotherapy alone is recommended for individuals able to maintain functioning if it does not affect their conventional sexual activity. Common treatment for low-risk individuals is psychotherapy and an SSRI. As risk increases, so does treatment with pharmacologic agents. Beyond SSRIs, moderate offenders may be treated with an SSRI and a low-dose antiandrogen. This is escalated in high-risk violent offenders to long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs and synthetic steroidal analogs.²⁵

An evolving class of disorders

With the evolution and accessibility of pornography, uncommon sexual practices have become more common, gaining notoriety and increased social acceptance. As a result, mental health professionals may be tasked with evaluating patients for possible paraphilic disorders. A common misconception is that individuals with sexually deviant thoughts, sexual offenders, and patients with paraphilic disorders are all the same. However, more commonly, sexual offenders do not have a paraphilic disorder. In the case of SVPs, outside of imprisonment, civil commitment remains a consideration for possible treatment. To meet the threshold of civil commitment, a sexual offender must have a “mental abnormality,” which is most commonly a paraphilic disorder. The treatment of paraphilic disorders remains a difficult task and includes a mixture of psychotherapy and medication options.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. J begins weekly CBT to gain control of his voyeuristic fantasies without impacting his conventional sexual activity and desire. He responds well to treatment, and after 18 months, begins a typical sexual relationship with a woman. Although his voyeuristic thoughts remain, the urge to act on the thoughts decreases as Mr. J develops coping mechanisms. He does not require pharmacologic treatment.

Bottom Line

Individuals with paraphilic disorders are too often portrayed as sexual deviants or criminals. Psychiatrists must review each case with careful consideration of individual risk factors, such as the patient’s sexual history, to evaluate potential treatment options while determining if they pose a threat to the public.

Related Resources

• Sorrentino R, Abramowitz J. Minor-attracted persons: a neglected population. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(7):21-27. doi:10.12788/cp.0149
• Berlin FS. Paraphilic disorders: a better understanding. Current Psychiatry. 2019;18(4):22-26,28.

Mr. J, age 23, presents to an outpatient mental health clinic for treatment of anxiety. He has no psychiatric history, is dressed neatly, and recently finished graduate school with a degree in accounting. Mr. J is reserved during the initial psychiatric evaluation and provides only basic facts about his developmental history.

Mr. J comes from a middle-class household with no history of trauma or substance use. He does not report any symptoms consistent with anxiety, but discloses a history of sexual preoccupations. Mr. J says that during adolescence he developed a predilection for observing others engage in sexual activity. In his late teens, he began following couples to their homes in the hope of witnessing sexual intimacy. In the rare instance that his voyeuristic fantasy comes to fruition, he masturbates and achieves sexual gratification he is incapable of experiencing otherwise. Mr. J notes that he has not yet been caught, but he expresses concern and embarrassment related to his actions. He concludes by noting that he seeks help because the frequency of this behavior has steadily increased.

How would you treat Mr. J? Where does the line exist between a normophilic sexual interest, fantasy or urge, and a paraphilia? Does Mr. J qualify as a sexually violent predator?

From The Rocky Horror Picture Show to Fifty Shades of Grey, sensationalized portrayals of sexual deviancy have long been present in popular culture. The continued popularity of serial killers years after their crimes seems in part related to the extreme sexual torture their victims often endure. However, a sexual offense does not always qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹ In fact, many individuals with paraphilic disorders never engage in illegal activity. Additionally, experiencing sexually deviant thoughts alone does not qualify as a paraphilic disorder.¹

A thorough psychiatric evaluation should include a discussion of the patient’s sexual history, including the potential of sexual dysfunction and abnormal desires or behaviors. Most individuals with sexual dysfunction do not have a paraphilic disorder.² DSM-5 and ICD-11 classify sexual dysfunction and paraphilic disorders in different categories. However, previous editions grouped them together under sexual and gender identity disorders. Individuals with paraphilic disorders may not originally present to the outpatient setting for a paraphilic disorder, but instead may first seek treatment for a more common comorbid disorder, such as a mood disorder, personality disorder, or substance use disorder.³

Diagnostically speaking, if individuals do not experience distress or issues with functionality and lack legal charges (suggesting that they have not violated the rights of others), they are categorized as having an atypical sexual interest but do not necessarily meet the criteria for a disorder.⁴ This article provides an overview of paraphilic disorders as well as forensic considerations when examining individuals with sexually deviant behaviors.

Overview of paraphilic disorders

DSM-5 characterizes a paraphilic disorder as “recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors generally involving nonhuman objects or nonconsenting partners for at least 6 months. The individual must have acted on the thought and/or it caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.” DSM-5 outlines 9 categories of paraphilic disorders, which are described in Table 1.^4,5

Continue to: Paraphilic disorders are more common...

Paraphilic disorders are more common in men than in women; the 2 most prevalent are voyeuristic disorder and frotteuristic disorder.⁶ The incidence of paraphilias in the general outpatient setting varies by disorder. Approximately 45% of individuals with pedophilic disorder seek treatment, whereas only 1% of individuals with zoophilia seek treatment.⁶ The incidence of paraphilic acts also varies drastically; individuals with exhibitionistic disorder engaged in an average of 50 acts vs only 3 for individuals with sexual sadism.⁶ Not all individuals with paraphilic disorders commit crimes. Approximately 58% of sexual offenders meet the criteria for a paraphilic disorder, but antisocial personality disorder is a far more common diagnosis.⁷

Sexual psychopath statutes: Phase 1

In 1937, Michigan became the first state to enact sexual psychopath statutes, allowing for indeterminate sentencing and the civil commitment/treatment of sex offenders with repeated convictions. By the 1970s, more than 30 states had enacted similar statutes. It was not until 1967, in Specht v Patterson,⁸ that the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause was violated when Francis Eddie Specht faced life in prison following his conviction for indecent liberties under the Colorado Sex Offenders Act.

Specht was convicted in 1959 for indecent liberties after pleading guilty to enticing a child younger than age 16 into an office and engaging in sexual activities with them. At the time of Specht’s conviction, the crime of indecent liberties carried a punishment of 10 years. However, Specht was sentenced under the Sexual Offenders Act, which allowed for an indeterminate sentence of 1 day to life in prison. The Supreme Court noted that Specht was denied the right to be present with counsel, to confront the evidence against him, to cross-examine witnesses, and to offer his own evidence, which was a violation of his constitutionally guaranteed Fourteenth Amendment right to Procedural Due Process. The decision led most states to repeal early sexual psychopath statutes.⁸

Sexually violent predator laws: Phase 2

After early sexual psychopath statutes were repealed, many states pushed to update sex offender laws in response to the Earl Shriner case.⁹ In 1989, Shriner was released from prison after serving a 10-year sentence for sexually assaulting 2 teenage girls. At the time, he did not meet the criteria for civil commitment in the state of Washington. On the day he was released, Shriner cut off a young boy’s penis and left him to die. Washington subsequently became the first of many states to enact sexually violent predator (SVP) laws. Table 2¹⁰ shows states and districts that have SVP civil commitment laws.

A series of United States Supreme Court cases solidified current sexual offender civil commitment laws (Table 3^8,11-15).

Continue to: Allen v Illinois

Allen v Illinois (1986).¹¹ The Court ruled that forcing an individual to participate in a psychiatric evaluation prior to a sexually dangerous person’s commitment hearing did not violate the individual’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because the purpose of the evaluation was to provide treatment, not punishment.

Kansas v Hendricks (1997).¹² The Court upheld that the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act was constitutional and noted that the use of the broad term “mental abnormality” (in lieu of the more specific term “mental illness”) does not violate an individual’s Fourteenth Amendment right to substantive due process. Additionally, the Court opined that the constitutional ban on double jeopardy and ex post facto lawmaking does not apply because the procedures are civil, not criminal.

Kansas v Crane (2002).¹³ The Court upheld the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act, stating that mental illness and dangerousness are essential elements to meet the criteria for civil commitment. The Court added that proof of partial (not total) “volitional impairment” is all that is required to meet the threshold of sexual dangerousness.

McKune v Lile (2002).¹⁴ The Court ruled that a policy requiring participation in polygraph testing, which would lead to the disclosure of sexual crimes (even those that have not been prosecuted), does not violate an individual’s Fifth Amendment rights because it serves a vital penological purpose.

Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006¹⁶; United States v Comstock (2010).¹⁵ This act and subsequent case reinforced the federal government’s right to civilly commit sexually dangerous persons approaching the end of their prison sentences.

Continue to: What is requiried for civil commitment?

What is required for civil commitment?

SVP laws require 4 conditions to be met for the civil commitment of sexual offenders (Table 4¹⁷). In criteria 1, “charges” is a key word, because this allows individuals found Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity or Incompetent to Stand Trial to be civilly committed. Criteria 2 defines “mental abnormality” as a “congenital or acquired condition affecting the emotional or volitional capacity which predisposes the person to commit criminal sexual acts in a degree constituting such person a menace to the health and safety of others.”¹⁸ This is a broad definition, and allows individuals with personality disorders to be civilly committed (although most sexual offenders are committed for having a paraphilic disorder). To determine risk, various actuarial instruments are used to assess for sexually violent recidivism, including (but not limited to) the Static-99R, Sexual Violence Risk-20, and the Sex Offender Risk Appraisal Guide.¹⁹

Although the percentages vary, sex offenders rarely are civilly committed following their criminal sentence. In California, approximately 1.5% of sex offenders are civilly committed.¹⁷ The standard of proof for civil commitment varies by state between “clear and convincing evidence” and “beyond a reasonable doubt.” As sex offenders approach the end of their sentence, sexually violent offenders are identified to the general population and referred for a psychiatric evaluation. If the individual meets the 4 criteria for commitment (Table 4¹⁷), their case is sent to the prosecuting attorney’s office. If accepted, the court holds a probable cause hearing, followed by a full trial.

Pornography and sex offenders

Pornography has long been considered a risk factor for sexual offending, and the role of pornography in influencing sexual behavior has drawn recent interest in research towards predicting future offenses. However, a 2019 systematic review by Mellor et al²⁰ on the relationship between pornography and sexual offending suggested that early exposure to pornography is not a risk factor for sexual offending, nor is the risk of offending increased shortly after pornography exposure. Additionally, pornography use did not predict recidivism in low-risk sexual offenders, but did in high-risk offenders.

The use of child pornography presents a set of new risk factors. Prohibited by federal and state law, child pornography is defined under Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone <age 18). Visual depictions include photographs, videos, digital or computer-generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor, and images created to depict a minor. The law does not require an image of a child engaging in sexual activity for the image to be characterized as child pornography. Offenders are also commonly charged with the distribution of child pornography. A conviction of child pornography possession carries a 15- to 30-year sentence, and distribution carries a 5- to 20-year sentence.²¹ The individual must also file for the sex offender registry, which may restrict their employment and place of residency.

It is unclear what percentage of individuals charged with child pornography have a history of prior sexual offenses. Numerous studies suggest there is a low risk of online offenders without prior offenses becoming contact offenders. Characteristics of online-only offenders include being White, a single male, age 20 to 30, well-educated, and employed, and having antisocial traits and a history of sexual deviancy.²² Contact offenders tend to be married with easy access to children, unemployed, uneducated, and to have a history of mental illness or criminal offenses.²²

Continue to: Recidivism and treatment

Recidivism and treatment

The recidivism rate among sexual offenders averages 13.7% at 3- to 6-year follow-up,although rates vary by type of sexual offense.²³ Individuals who committed rape have the highest rate of recidivism, while those who engaged in incest have the lowest. Three key points about sexual offender recidivism are:

• it declines over time and with increased age.
• sexual offenders are more like to commit a nonsexual offense than a sexual offense.
• sexual offenders who have undergone treatment are 26.3% less likely to reoffend.²³

Although there is no standard of treatment, current interventions include external control, reduction of sexual drive, treatment of comorbid conditions, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and dynamic psychotherapy. External control relies on an outside entity that affects the individual’s behavior. For sexually deviant behaviors, simply making the act illegal or involving the law may inhibit many individuals from acting on a thought. Additional external control may include pharmacotherapy, which ranges from nonhormonal options such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to hormonal options. Therapy tends to focus on social skills training, sex education, cognitive restructuring, and identifying triggers, as well as victim empathy. The best indicators for successful treatment include an absence of comorbidities, increased age, and adult interpersonal relationships.²⁴

Treatment choice may be predicated on the severity of the paraphilia. Psychotherapy alone is recommended for individuals able to maintain functioning if it does not affect their conventional sexual activity. Common treatment for low-risk individuals is psychotherapy and an SSRI. As risk increases, so does treatment with pharmacologic agents. Beyond SSRIs, moderate offenders may be treated with an SSRI and a low-dose antiandrogen. This is escalated in high-risk violent offenders to long-acting gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs and synthetic steroidal analogs.²⁵

An evolving class of disorders

With the evolution and accessibility of pornography, uncommon sexual practices have become more common, gaining notoriety and increased social acceptance. As a result, mental health professionals may be tasked with evaluating patients for possible paraphilic disorders. A common misconception is that individuals with sexually deviant thoughts, sexual offenders, and patients with paraphilic disorders are all the same. However, more commonly, sexual offenders do not have a paraphilic disorder. In the case of SVPs, outside of imprisonment, civil commitment remains a consideration for possible treatment. To meet the threshold of civil commitment, a sexual offender must have a “mental abnormality,” which is most commonly a paraphilic disorder. The treatment of paraphilic disorders remains a difficult task and includes a mixture of psychotherapy and medication options.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. J begins weekly CBT to gain control of his voyeuristic fantasies without impacting his conventional sexual activity and desire. He responds well to treatment, and after 18 months, begins a typical sexual relationship with a woman. Although his voyeuristic thoughts remain, the urge to act on the thoughts decreases as Mr. J develops coping mechanisms. He does not require pharmacologic treatment.

Bottom Line

Individuals with paraphilic disorders are too often portrayed as sexual deviants or criminals. Psychiatrists must review each case with careful consideration of individual risk factors, such as the patient’s sexual history, to evaluate potential treatment options while determining if they pose a threat to the public.

Related Resources

• Sorrentino R, Abramowitz J. Minor-attracted persons: a neglected population. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(7):21-27. doi:10.12788/cp.0149
• Berlin FS. Paraphilic disorders: a better understanding. Current Psychiatry. 2019;18(4):22-26,28.

There is a need to connect mental and physical symptoms in the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disorders. Obviously, we are not yet equipped to clearly recognize which neurotransmitters cause which symptoms. The science of defining the underlying mechanisms is lagging behind the clinical needs. However, in this article, we present a few hypothetical clinical cases to emphasize a possible way of analyzing symptoms in order to identify underlying pathology and guide more effective treatment. Our descriptions do not reflect the entire set of symptoms caused by these neurotransmitters; we created them based on what is presently known (or suspected). Additional research is needed to confirm or disprove the hypotheses we present.

In Part 1 (Current Psychiatry, May 2022), we argued that for depression, anxiety, psychosis, and bipolar disorder, development and approval of medications is currently based on descriptive diagnoses, with disregard to the various underlying causes of those conditions. Similar to how the many types of pneumonia are treated differently based on the specific infective agent, we suggested there are various types of depression or chronic pain based on the underlying neuro­transmitter pathology. Such an approach may be extrapolated to anxiety, psychosis, or bipolar disorder, although those conditions are outside the scope of this article. In Part 1, we described serotonin- and dopamine-associated mental and physical symptoms that suggest distinctly different types of depression or chronic pain, and we suggested specific ways of treating those described conditions. Part 2 reflects on pathology that is possibly connected to endorphin and norepinephrine dysfunction. Table 1 outlines medical and psychiatric symptoms that likely reflect endorphin excess^1-16 and deficiency,^1,16-24 and Table 2 lists symptoms that likely reflect norepinephrine excess^16,25-30and deficiency.^16,26,31-39 It is worth noting that both the quantity of neurotransmitters as well as the quality of the transmission (as in receptors, cellular pumps, and distribution mechanisms) are important.

Endorphin excess (Table 1^1-16)

Ms. R is a frustrated chronic pain patient who bitterly complains that despite having seen more than 20 physicians, she does not have an answer to what causes her “all over” pain and headache.^4,5,11 She does not believe that all her laboratory test are normal, and insists that “something is missing.” She aches all over but says she can actually tolerate more pain than others and experiences only a little discomfort during an electromyogram or dental interventions. Though Ms. R is not very susceptible to acute pain,^4,5,9,16 pain all over without an identifiable cause is part of her life.^4,5,11 She says that listening to music and social interactions help decrease her pain.^4,5,10 Ms. R states that opioid medications do not help her pain, though she has a history of opioid overuse and opioid-induced hyperalgesia.^6,11,16

Ms. R tends to overdo pleasureful activities to achieve satisfaction.² She says exercise is particularly satisfying, to the point that she experiences euphoria and a loss of time.⁹ She is angry that her neurologist suggested she see a psychiatrist. Her depression bothers her more than her anxiety.^2,5,7

Ms. R clearly has a self-image problem, alternating between high and low self-esteem. She has a low appetite^1,12,14-16 and sleeps excessively.^2,4,7,9,10 Her mother privately tells you that Ms. R has a history of childhood sexual abuse and lagged in life due to a lack of motivation. Ms. R used to self-mutilate “to feel normal.”¹² Her primary care physician chronically addresses Ms. R’s poorly explained cholestasis and pruritus⁸ as well as dysregulation of blood pressure and heart rate, both of which tend to be low.^12,13,16

Impression. Ms. R shows multiple symptoms associated with endorphin excess. A trial of an opioid antagonist may be reasonable. Dopamine blockade helps with endorphin suppression and also may be used for this patient. Using a low starting dose and a slow titration of such medications would be beneficial due to frequent intolerance issues, especially nausea. Gamma aminobutyric acid-ergic medications modulate the opioid system and may be considered. A serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or mirtazapine may help patients such as Ms. R to control mood and pain through norepinephrine’s influence on endorphins.

Endorphin deficiency (Table 1^1,16-24)

Mr. J complains of low back pain, diffuse body pain, depression, and moodiness.^19,20,24 He is sluggish and plagued by psychomotor retardation.²⁴ All his life, a heightened perception of pain has caused him problems,^19,20 but has not stopped him from engaging in self-mutilation.²⁴ His “unexplained” pain and general body aches seem to be associated with objectively verifiable pain generators (such as bruises and surgical procedures) but this pain is in excess of what would generally be expected. Mr. J describes his low back pain as mild degenerative disc disease and is eager to explain that his wife’s spine is more diseased, yet she has no back pain.

Continue to: Mr. J responds to treatment...

Mr. J responds to treatment with opioids^16,20 but comments that his mood, and not necessarily his pain, improves when he takes these medications.²⁰ He tends to overuse his pain medications, and had run into trouble with his previous pain management physician. Nitrous oxide is remarkably effective during dental procedures.¹⁹ Acupuncture helps to control his pain and mood.¹⁷ Exercise is also rewarding.¹⁸

Mr. J has difficulty achieving orgasm, a decreased sexual drive, and emotional sensitivity.²⁴ He is impulsive.^19,20,24 His baseline mood is low-grade; anxiety bothers him more than depression.^23,24 Mr. J is thin, has a poor appetite,^1,16 and sleeps poorly.²⁴ His primary care physician struggles to help Mr. J to control dysregulation of his heart rate, blood pressure,²¹ and urinary retention,^16,22 as well as episodes of hypoglycemia.^1,16 He reluctantly admits to abusing alcohol, but explains that it helps with his mood and pain better than his prescribed medications.^18,23

Impression. Mr. J exhibits multiple symptoms associated with endorphin deficiency. Short-term use of opioids is warranted, but he should avoid long-term opioid use, and he and his physician should work together to establish strict control of their intake. Buprenorphine would be the opioid of choice for such a patient. Psychiatric treatment, including for alcohol use disorder, should be a mandatory part of his treatment regimen. Behavioral therapy with a focus on finding healthy ways to achieve gratification would be effective. Alternative treatments such as acupuncture may be of value.

Norepinephrine excess (Table 2^16,25-30)

Mr. G comes to the office irritable and angry^28,30 because no one can help him with his intractable headaches.^16,25 He is pale, his breathing is noisy, and he licks his dry lips while sweating.^16,25 His wife is shy and seems to be afraid of her husband, who is easily irritated and edgy.^28,30 His heart rate and blood pressure are high; he has a history of palpitations and chest pain.^16,25 When unhappy, he gets pale, sweaty, tremulous, and nauseous.^16,25 He masks his anxiety with aggression and has impaired concentration, restless sleep, muscle tension, muscle cramps, and abdominal cramps.^27,28,30 Mr. G suffers from frequent nausea.^16,25 His neck is stiff and pupils are dilated; he clenches his teeth and uses a mouth guard for correction of temporomandibular joint disorder.^16,25 His sleep apnea is poorly controlled because he feels entrapped when he uses a continuous positive airway pressure machine.²⁹ He blames his wife for his premature ejaculation and says that she gives him goosebumps.²⁵ His hypervigilance and hyperarousal are torturous to his wife.^27,30 Despite his overall angry state, Mr. G is also constantly fearful.^28,30 He is almost never hungry, does not like crowds, hates your waiting area, and is vocal about his dislike of doctors being late “all the time.”^26,28,30

Comment. Norepinephrine and dopamine functions are connected through common neuronal and glial uptake mechanisms. This is a foundation of norepinephrine excess symptoms crossing over with symptoms of dopamine deficiency.

Continue to: Impression

Impression. Mr. G shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine excess. It is important to avoid caffeine intake in patients with clinical signs of excessive norepinephrine. Beta-blockers and alpha-2 agonists work well in patients such as Mr. G. Benzodiazepines indirectly decrease norepinephrine activity, but need to be used carefully due to the potential for misuse and addiction. In particular, short-acting benzodiazepines such as alprazolam and lorazepam must be avoided due to the induction of CNS instability with rapidly changing medication blood levels. Chlordiazepoxide may be a good choice for a patient such as Mr. G because it has the fewest adverse effects and the lowest abuse potential compared with other benzodiazepines. Avoid SNRIs in such a patient. Using mood-stabilizing antipsychotic medications may be especially warranted in treating Mr. G’s depression and pain.

Norepinephrine deficiency (Table 2^16,26,31-39)

Two years ago, Ms. A was diagnosed with chronic fatigue³¹ and fibromyalgia. She also had been diagnosed with depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). She presents with concerns of “brain fog,” no energy, low sex drive, and daytime sleepiness.^33,35 Allodynia is widespread.^16,36,37 Ms. A suffers from bulimia; she eats once a day but is still overweight.²⁶ She has orthostatic hypotension in addition to baseline low blood pressure and bradycardia.^16,38,39 Her pupils are almost pinpoint, even when she does not take opioid medications.¹⁶ Her skin is dry and her hair is brittle; deep tendon reflexes are weakened, and her muscle tone is decreased.¹⁶ Ms. A’s constant low mood drives her to drink excessive amounts of caffeine, which she says “helps with daytime sleepiness but does not last”^32,33 and causes heart rhythm problems³⁸ and dyspepsia.¹⁶ She sees that her headaches and body pain are associated with her caffeine intake, but refuses to stop taking caffeine. Her low interest in life and general passivity have caused her many problems, though the problems themselves do not make her feel much.^31,32,39 She is rather indifferent to pleasurable activities, including sex.³¹ Her response to exciting experiences is blunted,³² but she is still frequently tearful.³⁴ Ms. A’s mood does not improve with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; she has tried many. She says that she would not come to see a physician, but “my mom told me to.” She resents that her family thinks she is lazy^31,32,39 and blames her ADHD for underperformance in life.^32,33 Ms. A has a family history of chronic pain and Alzheimer disease, and the longer she experiences pain, the worse her memory.³⁵

Comment. As mentioned earlier, because of the norepinephrine/dopamine relationship, symptoms of excess dopamine overlap with symptoms of norepinephrine deficiency.

Impression. Ms. A shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine deficiency. The use of noradrenergic antidepressants (such as SNRIs and mirtazapine)²⁶ and stimulants may be warranted. Physical exercise, participating in social activities, massage, acupuncture, and family support may help with Ms. A’s pain as well as her depression, as might vasopressors.

In Part 3, we will address gamma aminobutyric acid and glutamate.

Bottom Line

Both high and low levels of endorphins and norepinephrine may be associated with certain psychiatric and medical symptoms and disorders. An astute clinician may judge which neurotransmitter is dysfunctional based on the patient’s presentation, and tailor treatment accordingly.

Related Resources

• Arbuck DM, Salmerón JM, Mueller R. Neurotransmitter-based diagnosis and treatment: a hypothesis (Part 1). Current Psychiatry. 2022;21(5):30-36. doi:10.12788/cp.0242

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Chlordiazepoxide • Librium
Lorazepam • Ativan
Mirtazapine • Remeron

There is a need to connect mental and physical symptoms in the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disorders. Obviously, we are not yet equipped to clearly recognize which neurotransmitters cause which symptoms. The science of defining the underlying mechanisms is lagging behind the clinical needs. However, in this article, we present a few hypothetical clinical cases to emphasize a possible way of analyzing symptoms in order to identify underlying pathology and guide more effective treatment. Our descriptions do not reflect the entire set of symptoms caused by these neurotransmitters; we created them based on what is presently known (or suspected). Additional research is needed to confirm or disprove the hypotheses we present.

In Part 1 (Current Psychiatry, May 2022), we argued that for depression, anxiety, psychosis, and bipolar disorder, development and approval of medications is currently based on descriptive diagnoses, with disregard to the various underlying causes of those conditions. Similar to how the many types of pneumonia are treated differently based on the specific infective agent, we suggested there are various types of depression or chronic pain based on the underlying neuro­transmitter pathology. Such an approach may be extrapolated to anxiety, psychosis, or bipolar disorder, although those conditions are outside the scope of this article. In Part 1, we described serotonin- and dopamine-associated mental and physical symptoms that suggest distinctly different types of depression or chronic pain, and we suggested specific ways of treating those described conditions. Part 2 reflects on pathology that is possibly connected to endorphin and norepinephrine dysfunction. Table 1 outlines medical and psychiatric symptoms that likely reflect endorphin excess^1-16 and deficiency,^1,16-24 and Table 2 lists symptoms that likely reflect norepinephrine excess^16,25-30and deficiency.^16,26,31-39 It is worth noting that both the quantity of neurotransmitters as well as the quality of the transmission (as in receptors, cellular pumps, and distribution mechanisms) are important.

Endorphin excess (Table 1^1-16)

Ms. R is a frustrated chronic pain patient who bitterly complains that despite having seen more than 20 physicians, she does not have an answer to what causes her “all over” pain and headache.^4,5,11 She does not believe that all her laboratory test are normal, and insists that “something is missing.” She aches all over but says she can actually tolerate more pain than others and experiences only a little discomfort during an electromyogram or dental interventions. Though Ms. R is not very susceptible to acute pain,^4,5,9,16 pain all over without an identifiable cause is part of her life.^4,5,11 She says that listening to music and social interactions help decrease her pain.^4,5,10 Ms. R states that opioid medications do not help her pain, though she has a history of opioid overuse and opioid-induced hyperalgesia.^6,11,16

Ms. R tends to overdo pleasureful activities to achieve satisfaction.² She says exercise is particularly satisfying, to the point that she experiences euphoria and a loss of time.⁹ She is angry that her neurologist suggested she see a psychiatrist. Her depression bothers her more than her anxiety.^2,5,7

Ms. R clearly has a self-image problem, alternating between high and low self-esteem. She has a low appetite^1,12,14-16 and sleeps excessively.^2,4,7,9,10 Her mother privately tells you that Ms. R has a history of childhood sexual abuse and lagged in life due to a lack of motivation. Ms. R used to self-mutilate “to feel normal.”¹² Her primary care physician chronically addresses Ms. R’s poorly explained cholestasis and pruritus⁸ as well as dysregulation of blood pressure and heart rate, both of which tend to be low.^12,13,16

Impression. Ms. R shows multiple symptoms associated with endorphin excess. A trial of an opioid antagonist may be reasonable. Dopamine blockade helps with endorphin suppression and also may be used for this patient. Using a low starting dose and a slow titration of such medications would be beneficial due to frequent intolerance issues, especially nausea. Gamma aminobutyric acid-ergic medications modulate the opioid system and may be considered. A serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or mirtazapine may help patients such as Ms. R to control mood and pain through norepinephrine’s influence on endorphins.

Endorphin deficiency (Table 1^1,16-24)

Mr. J complains of low back pain, diffuse body pain, depression, and moodiness.^19,20,24 He is sluggish and plagued by psychomotor retardation.²⁴ All his life, a heightened perception of pain has caused him problems,^19,20 but has not stopped him from engaging in self-mutilation.²⁴ His “unexplained” pain and general body aches seem to be associated with objectively verifiable pain generators (such as bruises and surgical procedures) but this pain is in excess of what would generally be expected. Mr. J describes his low back pain as mild degenerative disc disease and is eager to explain that his wife’s spine is more diseased, yet she has no back pain.

Continue to: Mr. J responds to treatment...

Mr. J responds to treatment with opioids^16,20 but comments that his mood, and not necessarily his pain, improves when he takes these medications.²⁰ He tends to overuse his pain medications, and had run into trouble with his previous pain management physician. Nitrous oxide is remarkably effective during dental procedures.¹⁹ Acupuncture helps to control his pain and mood.¹⁷ Exercise is also rewarding.¹⁸

Mr. J has difficulty achieving orgasm, a decreased sexual drive, and emotional sensitivity.²⁴ He is impulsive.^19,20,24 His baseline mood is low-grade; anxiety bothers him more than depression.^23,24 Mr. J is thin, has a poor appetite,^1,16 and sleeps poorly.²⁴ His primary care physician struggles to help Mr. J to control dysregulation of his heart rate, blood pressure,²¹ and urinary retention,^16,22 as well as episodes of hypoglycemia.^1,16 He reluctantly admits to abusing alcohol, but explains that it helps with his mood and pain better than his prescribed medications.^18,23

Impression. Mr. J exhibits multiple symptoms associated with endorphin deficiency. Short-term use of opioids is warranted, but he should avoid long-term opioid use, and he and his physician should work together to establish strict control of their intake. Buprenorphine would be the opioid of choice for such a patient. Psychiatric treatment, including for alcohol use disorder, should be a mandatory part of his treatment regimen. Behavioral therapy with a focus on finding healthy ways to achieve gratification would be effective. Alternative treatments such as acupuncture may be of value.

Norepinephrine excess (Table 2^16,25-30)

Mr. G comes to the office irritable and angry^28,30 because no one can help him with his intractable headaches.^16,25 He is pale, his breathing is noisy, and he licks his dry lips while sweating.^16,25 His wife is shy and seems to be afraid of her husband, who is easily irritated and edgy.^28,30 His heart rate and blood pressure are high; he has a history of palpitations and chest pain.^16,25 When unhappy, he gets pale, sweaty, tremulous, and nauseous.^16,25 He masks his anxiety with aggression and has impaired concentration, restless sleep, muscle tension, muscle cramps, and abdominal cramps.^27,28,30 Mr. G suffers from frequent nausea.^16,25 His neck is stiff and pupils are dilated; he clenches his teeth and uses a mouth guard for correction of temporomandibular joint disorder.^16,25 His sleep apnea is poorly controlled because he feels entrapped when he uses a continuous positive airway pressure machine.²⁹ He blames his wife for his premature ejaculation and says that she gives him goosebumps.²⁵ His hypervigilance and hyperarousal are torturous to his wife.^27,30 Despite his overall angry state, Mr. G is also constantly fearful.^28,30 He is almost never hungry, does not like crowds, hates your waiting area, and is vocal about his dislike of doctors being late “all the time.”^26,28,30

Comment. Norepinephrine and dopamine functions are connected through common neuronal and glial uptake mechanisms. This is a foundation of norepinephrine excess symptoms crossing over with symptoms of dopamine deficiency.

Continue to: Impression

Impression. Mr. G shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine excess. It is important to avoid caffeine intake in patients with clinical signs of excessive norepinephrine. Beta-blockers and alpha-2 agonists work well in patients such as Mr. G. Benzodiazepines indirectly decrease norepinephrine activity, but need to be used carefully due to the potential for misuse and addiction. In particular, short-acting benzodiazepines such as alprazolam and lorazepam must be avoided due to the induction of CNS instability with rapidly changing medication blood levels. Chlordiazepoxide may be a good choice for a patient such as Mr. G because it has the fewest adverse effects and the lowest abuse potential compared with other benzodiazepines. Avoid SNRIs in such a patient. Using mood-stabilizing antipsychotic medications may be especially warranted in treating Mr. G’s depression and pain.

Norepinephrine deficiency (Table 2^16,26,31-39)

Two years ago, Ms. A was diagnosed with chronic fatigue³¹ and fibromyalgia. She also had been diagnosed with depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). She presents with concerns of “brain fog,” no energy, low sex drive, and daytime sleepiness.^33,35 Allodynia is widespread.^16,36,37 Ms. A suffers from bulimia; she eats once a day but is still overweight.²⁶ She has orthostatic hypotension in addition to baseline low blood pressure and bradycardia.^16,38,39 Her pupils are almost pinpoint, even when she does not take opioid medications.¹⁶ Her skin is dry and her hair is brittle; deep tendon reflexes are weakened, and her muscle tone is decreased.¹⁶ Ms. A’s constant low mood drives her to drink excessive amounts of caffeine, which she says “helps with daytime sleepiness but does not last”^32,33 and causes heart rhythm problems³⁸ and dyspepsia.¹⁶ She sees that her headaches and body pain are associated with her caffeine intake, but refuses to stop taking caffeine. Her low interest in life and general passivity have caused her many problems, though the problems themselves do not make her feel much.^31,32,39 She is rather indifferent to pleasurable activities, including sex.³¹ Her response to exciting experiences is blunted,³² but she is still frequently tearful.³⁴ Ms. A’s mood does not improve with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; she has tried many. She says that she would not come to see a physician, but “my mom told me to.” She resents that her family thinks she is lazy^31,32,39 and blames her ADHD for underperformance in life.^32,33 Ms. A has a family history of chronic pain and Alzheimer disease, and the longer she experiences pain, the worse her memory.³⁵

Comment. As mentioned earlier, because of the norepinephrine/dopamine relationship, symptoms of excess dopamine overlap with symptoms of norepinephrine deficiency.

Impression. Ms. A shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine deficiency. The use of noradrenergic antidepressants (such as SNRIs and mirtazapine)²⁶ and stimulants may be warranted. Physical exercise, participating in social activities, massage, acupuncture, and family support may help with Ms. A’s pain as well as her depression, as might vasopressors.

In Part 3, we will address gamma aminobutyric acid and glutamate.

Bottom Line

Both high and low levels of endorphins and norepinephrine may be associated with certain psychiatric and medical symptoms and disorders. An astute clinician may judge which neurotransmitter is dysfunctional based on the patient’s presentation, and tailor treatment accordingly.

Related Resources

• Arbuck DM, Salmerón JM, Mueller R. Neurotransmitter-based diagnosis and treatment: a hypothesis (Part 1). Current Psychiatry. 2022;21(5):30-36. doi:10.12788/cp.0242

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Chlordiazepoxide • Librium
Lorazepam • Ativan
Mirtazapine • Remeron

There is a need to connect mental and physical symptoms in the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disorders. Obviously, we are not yet equipped to clearly recognize which neurotransmitters cause which symptoms. The science of defining the underlying mechanisms is lagging behind the clinical needs. However, in this article, we present a few hypothetical clinical cases to emphasize a possible way of analyzing symptoms in order to identify underlying pathology and guide more effective treatment. Our descriptions do not reflect the entire set of symptoms caused by these neurotransmitters; we created them based on what is presently known (or suspected). Additional research is needed to confirm or disprove the hypotheses we present.

In Part 1 (Current Psychiatry, May 2022), we argued that for depression, anxiety, psychosis, and bipolar disorder, development and approval of medications is currently based on descriptive diagnoses, with disregard to the various underlying causes of those conditions. Similar to how the many types of pneumonia are treated differently based on the specific infective agent, we suggested there are various types of depression or chronic pain based on the underlying neuro­transmitter pathology. Such an approach may be extrapolated to anxiety, psychosis, or bipolar disorder, although those conditions are outside the scope of this article. In Part 1, we described serotonin- and dopamine-associated mental and physical symptoms that suggest distinctly different types of depression or chronic pain, and we suggested specific ways of treating those described conditions. Part 2 reflects on pathology that is possibly connected to endorphin and norepinephrine dysfunction. Table 1 outlines medical and psychiatric symptoms that likely reflect endorphin excess^1-16 and deficiency,^1,16-24 and Table 2 lists symptoms that likely reflect norepinephrine excess^16,25-30and deficiency.^16,26,31-39 It is worth noting that both the quantity of neurotransmitters as well as the quality of the transmission (as in receptors, cellular pumps, and distribution mechanisms) are important.

Endorphin excess (Table 1^1-16)

Ms. R is a frustrated chronic pain patient who bitterly complains that despite having seen more than 20 physicians, she does not have an answer to what causes her “all over” pain and headache.^4,5,11 She does not believe that all her laboratory test are normal, and insists that “something is missing.” She aches all over but says she can actually tolerate more pain than others and experiences only a little discomfort during an electromyogram or dental interventions. Though Ms. R is not very susceptible to acute pain,^4,5,9,16 pain all over without an identifiable cause is part of her life.^4,5,11 She says that listening to music and social interactions help decrease her pain.^4,5,10 Ms. R states that opioid medications do not help her pain, though she has a history of opioid overuse and opioid-induced hyperalgesia.^6,11,16

Ms. R tends to overdo pleasureful activities to achieve satisfaction.² She says exercise is particularly satisfying, to the point that she experiences euphoria and a loss of time.⁹ She is angry that her neurologist suggested she see a psychiatrist. Her depression bothers her more than her anxiety.^2,5,7

Ms. R clearly has a self-image problem, alternating between high and low self-esteem. She has a low appetite^1,12,14-16 and sleeps excessively.^2,4,7,9,10 Her mother privately tells you that Ms. R has a history of childhood sexual abuse and lagged in life due to a lack of motivation. Ms. R used to self-mutilate “to feel normal.”¹² Her primary care physician chronically addresses Ms. R’s poorly explained cholestasis and pruritus⁸ as well as dysregulation of blood pressure and heart rate, both of which tend to be low.^12,13,16

Impression. Ms. R shows multiple symptoms associated with endorphin excess. A trial of an opioid antagonist may be reasonable. Dopamine blockade helps with endorphin suppression and also may be used for this patient. Using a low starting dose and a slow titration of such medications would be beneficial due to frequent intolerance issues, especially nausea. Gamma aminobutyric acid-ergic medications modulate the opioid system and may be considered. A serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) or mirtazapine may help patients such as Ms. R to control mood and pain through norepinephrine’s influence on endorphins.

Endorphin deficiency (Table 1^1,16-24)

Mr. J complains of low back pain, diffuse body pain, depression, and moodiness.^19,20,24 He is sluggish and plagued by psychomotor retardation.²⁴ All his life, a heightened perception of pain has caused him problems,^19,20 but has not stopped him from engaging in self-mutilation.²⁴ His “unexplained” pain and general body aches seem to be associated with objectively verifiable pain generators (such as bruises and surgical procedures) but this pain is in excess of what would generally be expected. Mr. J describes his low back pain as mild degenerative disc disease and is eager to explain that his wife’s spine is more diseased, yet she has no back pain.

Continue to: Mr. J responds to treatment...

Mr. J responds to treatment with opioids^16,20 but comments that his mood, and not necessarily his pain, improves when he takes these medications.²⁰ He tends to overuse his pain medications, and had run into trouble with his previous pain management physician. Nitrous oxide is remarkably effective during dental procedures.¹⁹ Acupuncture helps to control his pain and mood.¹⁷ Exercise is also rewarding.¹⁸

Mr. J has difficulty achieving orgasm, a decreased sexual drive, and emotional sensitivity.²⁴ He is impulsive.^19,20,24 His baseline mood is low-grade; anxiety bothers him more than depression.^23,24 Mr. J is thin, has a poor appetite,^1,16 and sleeps poorly.²⁴ His primary care physician struggles to help Mr. J to control dysregulation of his heart rate, blood pressure,²¹ and urinary retention,^16,22 as well as episodes of hypoglycemia.^1,16 He reluctantly admits to abusing alcohol, but explains that it helps with his mood and pain better than his prescribed medications.^18,23

Impression. Mr. J exhibits multiple symptoms associated with endorphin deficiency. Short-term use of opioids is warranted, but he should avoid long-term opioid use, and he and his physician should work together to establish strict control of their intake. Buprenorphine would be the opioid of choice for such a patient. Psychiatric treatment, including for alcohol use disorder, should be a mandatory part of his treatment regimen. Behavioral therapy with a focus on finding healthy ways to achieve gratification would be effective. Alternative treatments such as acupuncture may be of value.

Norepinephrine excess (Table 2^16,25-30)

Mr. G comes to the office irritable and angry^28,30 because no one can help him with his intractable headaches.^16,25 He is pale, his breathing is noisy, and he licks his dry lips while sweating.^16,25 His wife is shy and seems to be afraid of her husband, who is easily irritated and edgy.^28,30 His heart rate and blood pressure are high; he has a history of palpitations and chest pain.^16,25 When unhappy, he gets pale, sweaty, tremulous, and nauseous.^16,25 He masks his anxiety with aggression and has impaired concentration, restless sleep, muscle tension, muscle cramps, and abdominal cramps.^27,28,30 Mr. G suffers from frequent nausea.^16,25 His neck is stiff and pupils are dilated; he clenches his teeth and uses a mouth guard for correction of temporomandibular joint disorder.^16,25 His sleep apnea is poorly controlled because he feels entrapped when he uses a continuous positive airway pressure machine.²⁹ He blames his wife for his premature ejaculation and says that she gives him goosebumps.²⁵ His hypervigilance and hyperarousal are torturous to his wife.^27,30 Despite his overall angry state, Mr. G is also constantly fearful.^28,30 He is almost never hungry, does not like crowds, hates your waiting area, and is vocal about his dislike of doctors being late “all the time.”^26,28,30

Comment. Norepinephrine and dopamine functions are connected through common neuronal and glial uptake mechanisms. This is a foundation of norepinephrine excess symptoms crossing over with symptoms of dopamine deficiency.

Continue to: Impression

Impression. Mr. G shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine excess. It is important to avoid caffeine intake in patients with clinical signs of excessive norepinephrine. Beta-blockers and alpha-2 agonists work well in patients such as Mr. G. Benzodiazepines indirectly decrease norepinephrine activity, but need to be used carefully due to the potential for misuse and addiction. In particular, short-acting benzodiazepines such as alprazolam and lorazepam must be avoided due to the induction of CNS instability with rapidly changing medication blood levels. Chlordiazepoxide may be a good choice for a patient such as Mr. G because it has the fewest adverse effects and the lowest abuse potential compared with other benzodiazepines. Avoid SNRIs in such a patient. Using mood-stabilizing antipsychotic medications may be especially warranted in treating Mr. G’s depression and pain.

Norepinephrine deficiency (Table 2^16,26,31-39)

Two years ago, Ms. A was diagnosed with chronic fatigue³¹ and fibromyalgia. She also had been diagnosed with depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). She presents with concerns of “brain fog,” no energy, low sex drive, and daytime sleepiness.^33,35 Allodynia is widespread.^16,36,37 Ms. A suffers from bulimia; she eats once a day but is still overweight.²⁶ She has orthostatic hypotension in addition to baseline low blood pressure and bradycardia.^16,38,39 Her pupils are almost pinpoint, even when she does not take opioid medications.¹⁶ Her skin is dry and her hair is brittle; deep tendon reflexes are weakened, and her muscle tone is decreased.¹⁶ Ms. A’s constant low mood drives her to drink excessive amounts of caffeine, which she says “helps with daytime sleepiness but does not last”^32,33 and causes heart rhythm problems³⁸ and dyspepsia.¹⁶ She sees that her headaches and body pain are associated with her caffeine intake, but refuses to stop taking caffeine. Her low interest in life and general passivity have caused her many problems, though the problems themselves do not make her feel much.^31,32,39 She is rather indifferent to pleasurable activities, including sex.³¹ Her response to exciting experiences is blunted,³² but she is still frequently tearful.³⁴ Ms. A’s mood does not improve with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; she has tried many. She says that she would not come to see a physician, but “my mom told me to.” She resents that her family thinks she is lazy^31,32,39 and blames her ADHD for underperformance in life.^32,33 Ms. A has a family history of chronic pain and Alzheimer disease, and the longer she experiences pain, the worse her memory.³⁵

Comment. As mentioned earlier, because of the norepinephrine/dopamine relationship, symptoms of excess dopamine overlap with symptoms of norepinephrine deficiency.

Impression. Ms. A shows multiple symptoms associated with norepinephrine deficiency. The use of noradrenergic antidepressants (such as SNRIs and mirtazapine)²⁶ and stimulants may be warranted. Physical exercise, participating in social activities, massage, acupuncture, and family support may help with Ms. A’s pain as well as her depression, as might vasopressors.

In Part 3, we will address gamma aminobutyric acid and glutamate.

Bottom Line

Both high and low levels of endorphins and norepinephrine may be associated with certain psychiatric and medical symptoms and disorders. An astute clinician may judge which neurotransmitter is dysfunctional based on the patient’s presentation, and tailor treatment accordingly.

Related Resources

• Arbuck DM, Salmerón JM, Mueller R. Neurotransmitter-based diagnosis and treatment: a hypothesis (Part 1). Current Psychiatry. 2022;21(5):30-36. doi:10.12788/cp.0242

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Chlordiazepoxide • Librium
Lorazepam • Ativan
Mirtazapine • Remeron

Approved by the FDA on April 5, 2022, dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Igalmi, manufactured and distributed by BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc., New Haven, CT USA) is indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder (Table).^1,2 It is administered sublingually or buccally under the supervision of a health care provider. After administration, patients should have their vital signs and alertness assessed but there is no FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) required for use. A limitation of use is that the safety and effectiveness of dexmedetomidine sublingual film has not been established beyond 24 hours from the first dose.² There are no contraindications for use.²

Dexmedetomidine is a well-known efficacious alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist available since 1999 in an IV formulation indicated for sedation of initially intubated and mechanically ventilated patients in an ICU setting, and sedation of nonintubated patients prior to and/or during surgical and other procedures.^3,4 The reformulation of dexmedetomidine as a sublingual film allows the broader use of this agent in psychiatric settings when managing agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and thus potentially avoiding the use of IM administration of antipsychotics and/or benzodiazepines. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.⁵

Dosing

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is distributed commercially in the following strengths: 180 mcg and 120 mcg. It consists of a lightly mint-flavored, rectangular film containing 2 microdeposits of dexmedetomidine hydrochloride. Dosage strengths of 90 mcg and 60 mcg are available by cutting the 180 mcg or 120 mcg film in half between the 2 visible darker blue dots. The recommended dose depends on the severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment.² For severe agitation, the recommended dose is 180 mcg. For mild or moderate agitation, the recommended dose is 120 mcg. Dosage is reduced in patients with mild/moderate hepatic impairment (120 mcg for severe agitation and 90 mcg for mild or moderate agitation) or severe hepatic impairment (90 mcg and 60 mcg, for severe and mild/moderate agitation, respectively). The dose recommended for geriatric patients (defined as age ≥65 years) is 120 mcg for either mild, moderate, or severe agitation. Patients are advised not to eat or drink for at least 15 minutes after sublingual administration, or at least 1 hour after buccal administration (defined as placement in the mouth directly behind the lower lip).

If agitation persists after the initial dose, up to 2 additional doses (90 mcg if the initial dose was 180 mcg, otherwise 60 mcg if the initial dose was 120, 90, or 60 mcg) may be given at least 2 hours apart. Assessment of vital signs, including orthostatic measurements, is required prior to the administration of any subsequent doses. Due to risk of hypotension, additional doses are not recommended in patients with systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure <60 mm Hg, heart rate <60 beats per minute, or postural decrease in systolic blood pressure ≥20 mm Hg or in diastolic blood pressure ≥10 mm Hg.

Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamics

Dexmedetomidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist and the mechanism of action in the acute treatment of agitation is thought to be due to activation of presynaptic alpha-2 adrenergic receptors.² Binding affinities (Ki values) are 4 to 6 nM at the alpha-2 adrenergic receptor subtypes.²

Dexmedetomidine exhibits concentration-dependent QT prolongation, with mean QTc increases from baseline from 6 msec (120 mcg single dose) to 11 msec (180 mcg plus 2 additional doses of 90 mcg 2 hours apart for a total of 3 doses).² Placing the observation about QTc prolongation into clinical context, studies of IM administration of ziprasidone 20 mg and 30 mg and haloperidol 7.5 mg and 10 mg resulted in changes of the QTc interval of 4.6 msec and 6.0 msec, respectively, after 1 dose.⁶ After a second injection, these values were 12.8 msec and 14.7 msec, respectively.⁶

Clinical pharmacokinetics

The sublingual film formulation is absorbed orally, bypassing first-pass metabolism, and achieving higher dexmedetomidine bioavailability than ingested formulations.⁷ Exposure is dose-dependent, with dexmedetomidine being quantifiable in plasma after 5 to 20 minutes post dosing, and with a plasma half-life of 2 to 3 hours.^2,8 Mean time for the film to dissolve in the mouth was approximately 6 to 8 minutes following sublingual administration, and 18 minutes following buccal administration.² Absolute bioavailability was approximately 72% and 82% following sublingual and buccal administration, respectively.² Mean maximal plasma concentrations of dexmedetomidine were reached approximately 2 hours after sublingual or buccal administration.² Compared to drinking water at 2 hours post administration, early water intake (as early as 15 minutes post-dose) had minimal effects on the rate or extent of sublingual absorption but was not assessed after buccal administration.² The average protein binding was 94% and was constant across the different plasma concentrations evaluated and similar in males and females, but significantly decreased in participants with hepatic impairment compared to healthy individuals.² In contrast, the pharmacokinetic profile of dexmedetomidine is not significantly different in patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/minute compared to those with normal renal function.² Dexmedetomidine undergoes almost complete biotransformation to inactive metabolites via direct glucuronidation as well as cytochrome P450 (CYP) (primarily CYP2A6)–mediated metabolism.² There is no evidence of any CYP–mediated drug interactions that are likely to be of clinical relevance.²

Continue to: Efficacy

The efficacy and tolerability of 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses of dexmedetomidine sublingual film was evaluated in 2 similarly designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trials in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or schizophreniform disorder⁹ and bipolar I or II disorder.¹⁰ These studies included a total of 758 adult patients age range 18 to 71 (mean age approximately 46.5), with about 59% male participants.² In contrast to other agents approved by the FDA for treatment of agitation associated with bipolar disorder, dexmedetomidine sublingual film was assessed in patients regardless of polarity (manic, mixed features, or depressed).⁵ The primary efficacy measure for the dexmedetomidine sublingual film studies was the investigator-administered Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC), consisting of the following 5 items: excitement, tension, hostility, uncooperativeness, and poor impulse control.¹¹ The items from the PANSS-EC are rated from 1 (not present) to 7 (extremely severe) and thus the total scores range from 5 to 35. For enrollment in the studies, patients had to be judged to be clinically agitated with a total PANSS-EC score ≥14, with at least 1 individual item score ≥4.²

After study medication administration, the PANSS-EC was assessed from 10 minutes through 24 hours, with the primary endpoint being at 2 hours post-dose. Patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder who were treated with dexmedetomidine sublingual film 120 mcg or 180 mcg had superior symptomatic improvements from baseline to 2 hours post-dose compared to placebo, with treatment effects beginning as early as 20 to 30 minutes post-dose (for patients with schizophrenia, dexmedetomidine was statistically significantly superior to placebo beginning at 20 minutes following dosing with the 180 mcg dose and 30 minutes after the 120 mcg dose; for patients with bipolar disorder, differences from placebo were statistically significant beginning at 20 minutes after treatment with both the 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses).² Evaluation of effect size for dexmedetomidine vs placebo for PANSS-EC response at 2 hours (defined as ≥40% improvement from baseline) resulted in a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3 when combining both studies and both doses,¹² comparing favorably with the NNT values observed for IM formulations of aripiprazole, haloperidol, lorazepam, olanzapine, and ziprasidone,¹³ and inhaled loxapine.¹⁴

Overall tolerability and safety

The highlights of the prescribing information contain warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence.² Advice is provided to ensure that patients are alert and not experiencing orthostatic or symptomatic hypotension prior to resuming ambulation, a concern commonly raised when assessing potential treatments for agitation.¹⁵ Dexmedetomidine sublingual film should be avoided in patients with risk factors for prolonged QT interval, a precaution that was evident for the use of ziprasidone¹⁶ and where an effect is also noted with haloperidol.⁶ As per the prescribing information, the most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥5% and at least twice the rate of placebo) are somnolence, oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia, dizziness, dry mouth, hypotension, and orthostatic hypotension. Rates of adverse reactions of somnolence (including fatigue and sluggishness) with dexmedetomidine 120 mcg or 180 mcg are almost the same (22% and 23%, respectively), and higher than the 6% observed with placebo.² Other adverse reactions are substantially lower in frequency. These include oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia (6%, 7%, and 1%, for dexmedetomidine 120 mcg, 180 mcg, or placebo, respectively), dizziness (4%, 6%, 1%), hypotension (5%, 5%, 0%), orthostatic hypotension (3%, 5%, <1%), dry mouth (7%, 4%, 1%), nausea (2%, 3%, 2%), bradycardia (2%, 2%, 0%), and abdominal discomfort (0%, 2%, 1%).²

Regarding dose-dependent changes in blood pressure during the studies, 16%, 18%, and 9% of patients treated with 120 mcg, 180 mcg, and placebo, respectively, experienced orthostatic hypotension at 2 hours post dose. However, at 24 hours, none of the patients in the 180-mcg group experienced a systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg with a decrease ≥20 mm Hg, compared with one patient (<1%) in the 120-mcg group and none in the placebo group.²

The prescribing information advises that concomitant use of dexmedetomidine sublingual film with anesthetics, sedatives, hypnotics, or opioids is likely to lead to enhanced CNS depressant effects, and that the prescriber should consider a reduction in dosage of dexmedetomidine or the concomitant anesthetic, sedative, hypnotic, or opioid.²

Summary

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is an oral medication indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder. The recommended dose depends on severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment. A dose of 180 mcg is recommended for severe agitation and a dose of 120 mcg is recommended for mild or moderate agitation, with doses adjusted lower in the presence of hepatic impairment. There are no contraindications but there are warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence. Clinicians should monitor vital signs and alertness after administration to prevent falls and syncope; however, there is no FDA REMS required for use. The clinical trial evidence supporting the use of dexmedetomidine is robust, with evidence of a treatment effect as early as 20 minutes after administration. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.

Bottom Line

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film provides an opportunity to rethink the approach to the management of agitation and avoid the potentially unnecessary use of IM injections. Dexmedetomidine sublingual film acts rapidly and is simple to use.

Related Resources

• Dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Iglami) prescribing information. https://www.igalmihcp.com/igalmi-pi.pdf

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Dexmedetomidine • Igalmi, Precedex
Haloperidol • Haldol
Lorazepam • Ativan
Loxapine inhaled • Adasuve
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Ziprasidone • Geodon

Approved by the FDA on April 5, 2022, dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Igalmi, manufactured and distributed by BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc., New Haven, CT USA) is indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder (Table).^1,2 It is administered sublingually or buccally under the supervision of a health care provider. After administration, patients should have their vital signs and alertness assessed but there is no FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) required for use. A limitation of use is that the safety and effectiveness of dexmedetomidine sublingual film has not been established beyond 24 hours from the first dose.² There are no contraindications for use.²

Dexmedetomidine is a well-known efficacious alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist available since 1999 in an IV formulation indicated for sedation of initially intubated and mechanically ventilated patients in an ICU setting, and sedation of nonintubated patients prior to and/or during surgical and other procedures.^3,4 The reformulation of dexmedetomidine as a sublingual film allows the broader use of this agent in psychiatric settings when managing agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and thus potentially avoiding the use of IM administration of antipsychotics and/or benzodiazepines. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.⁵

Dosing

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is distributed commercially in the following strengths: 180 mcg and 120 mcg. It consists of a lightly mint-flavored, rectangular film containing 2 microdeposits of dexmedetomidine hydrochloride. Dosage strengths of 90 mcg and 60 mcg are available by cutting the 180 mcg or 120 mcg film in half between the 2 visible darker blue dots. The recommended dose depends on the severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment.² For severe agitation, the recommended dose is 180 mcg. For mild or moderate agitation, the recommended dose is 120 mcg. Dosage is reduced in patients with mild/moderate hepatic impairment (120 mcg for severe agitation and 90 mcg for mild or moderate agitation) or severe hepatic impairment (90 mcg and 60 mcg, for severe and mild/moderate agitation, respectively). The dose recommended for geriatric patients (defined as age ≥65 years) is 120 mcg for either mild, moderate, or severe agitation. Patients are advised not to eat or drink for at least 15 minutes after sublingual administration, or at least 1 hour after buccal administration (defined as placement in the mouth directly behind the lower lip).

If agitation persists after the initial dose, up to 2 additional doses (90 mcg if the initial dose was 180 mcg, otherwise 60 mcg if the initial dose was 120, 90, or 60 mcg) may be given at least 2 hours apart. Assessment of vital signs, including orthostatic measurements, is required prior to the administration of any subsequent doses. Due to risk of hypotension, additional doses are not recommended in patients with systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure <60 mm Hg, heart rate <60 beats per minute, or postural decrease in systolic blood pressure ≥20 mm Hg or in diastolic blood pressure ≥10 mm Hg.

Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamics

Dexmedetomidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist and the mechanism of action in the acute treatment of agitation is thought to be due to activation of presynaptic alpha-2 adrenergic receptors.² Binding affinities (Ki values) are 4 to 6 nM at the alpha-2 adrenergic receptor subtypes.²

Dexmedetomidine exhibits concentration-dependent QT prolongation, with mean QTc increases from baseline from 6 msec (120 mcg single dose) to 11 msec (180 mcg plus 2 additional doses of 90 mcg 2 hours apart for a total of 3 doses).² Placing the observation about QTc prolongation into clinical context, studies of IM administration of ziprasidone 20 mg and 30 mg and haloperidol 7.5 mg and 10 mg resulted in changes of the QTc interval of 4.6 msec and 6.0 msec, respectively, after 1 dose.⁶ After a second injection, these values were 12.8 msec and 14.7 msec, respectively.⁶

Clinical pharmacokinetics

The sublingual film formulation is absorbed orally, bypassing first-pass metabolism, and achieving higher dexmedetomidine bioavailability than ingested formulations.⁷ Exposure is dose-dependent, with dexmedetomidine being quantifiable in plasma after 5 to 20 minutes post dosing, and with a plasma half-life of 2 to 3 hours.^2,8 Mean time for the film to dissolve in the mouth was approximately 6 to 8 minutes following sublingual administration, and 18 minutes following buccal administration.² Absolute bioavailability was approximately 72% and 82% following sublingual and buccal administration, respectively.² Mean maximal plasma concentrations of dexmedetomidine were reached approximately 2 hours after sublingual or buccal administration.² Compared to drinking water at 2 hours post administration, early water intake (as early as 15 minutes post-dose) had minimal effects on the rate or extent of sublingual absorption but was not assessed after buccal administration.² The average protein binding was 94% and was constant across the different plasma concentrations evaluated and similar in males and females, but significantly decreased in participants with hepatic impairment compared to healthy individuals.² In contrast, the pharmacokinetic profile of dexmedetomidine is not significantly different in patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/minute compared to those with normal renal function.² Dexmedetomidine undergoes almost complete biotransformation to inactive metabolites via direct glucuronidation as well as cytochrome P450 (CYP) (primarily CYP2A6)–mediated metabolism.² There is no evidence of any CYP–mediated drug interactions that are likely to be of clinical relevance.²

Continue to: Efficacy

The efficacy and tolerability of 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses of dexmedetomidine sublingual film was evaluated in 2 similarly designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trials in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or schizophreniform disorder⁹ and bipolar I or II disorder.¹⁰ These studies included a total of 758 adult patients age range 18 to 71 (mean age approximately 46.5), with about 59% male participants.² In contrast to other agents approved by the FDA for treatment of agitation associated with bipolar disorder, dexmedetomidine sublingual film was assessed in patients regardless of polarity (manic, mixed features, or depressed).⁵ The primary efficacy measure for the dexmedetomidine sublingual film studies was the investigator-administered Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC), consisting of the following 5 items: excitement, tension, hostility, uncooperativeness, and poor impulse control.¹¹ The items from the PANSS-EC are rated from 1 (not present) to 7 (extremely severe) and thus the total scores range from 5 to 35. For enrollment in the studies, patients had to be judged to be clinically agitated with a total PANSS-EC score ≥14, with at least 1 individual item score ≥4.²

After study medication administration, the PANSS-EC was assessed from 10 minutes through 24 hours, with the primary endpoint being at 2 hours post-dose. Patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder who were treated with dexmedetomidine sublingual film 120 mcg or 180 mcg had superior symptomatic improvements from baseline to 2 hours post-dose compared to placebo, with treatment effects beginning as early as 20 to 30 minutes post-dose (for patients with schizophrenia, dexmedetomidine was statistically significantly superior to placebo beginning at 20 minutes following dosing with the 180 mcg dose and 30 minutes after the 120 mcg dose; for patients with bipolar disorder, differences from placebo were statistically significant beginning at 20 minutes after treatment with both the 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses).² Evaluation of effect size for dexmedetomidine vs placebo for PANSS-EC response at 2 hours (defined as ≥40% improvement from baseline) resulted in a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3 when combining both studies and both doses,¹² comparing favorably with the NNT values observed for IM formulations of aripiprazole, haloperidol, lorazepam, olanzapine, and ziprasidone,¹³ and inhaled loxapine.¹⁴

Overall tolerability and safety

The highlights of the prescribing information contain warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence.² Advice is provided to ensure that patients are alert and not experiencing orthostatic or symptomatic hypotension prior to resuming ambulation, a concern commonly raised when assessing potential treatments for agitation.¹⁵ Dexmedetomidine sublingual film should be avoided in patients with risk factors for prolonged QT interval, a precaution that was evident for the use of ziprasidone¹⁶ and where an effect is also noted with haloperidol.⁶ As per the prescribing information, the most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥5% and at least twice the rate of placebo) are somnolence, oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia, dizziness, dry mouth, hypotension, and orthostatic hypotension. Rates of adverse reactions of somnolence (including fatigue and sluggishness) with dexmedetomidine 120 mcg or 180 mcg are almost the same (22% and 23%, respectively), and higher than the 6% observed with placebo.² Other adverse reactions are substantially lower in frequency. These include oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia (6%, 7%, and 1%, for dexmedetomidine 120 mcg, 180 mcg, or placebo, respectively), dizziness (4%, 6%, 1%), hypotension (5%, 5%, 0%), orthostatic hypotension (3%, 5%, <1%), dry mouth (7%, 4%, 1%), nausea (2%, 3%, 2%), bradycardia (2%, 2%, 0%), and abdominal discomfort (0%, 2%, 1%).²

Regarding dose-dependent changes in blood pressure during the studies, 16%, 18%, and 9% of patients treated with 120 mcg, 180 mcg, and placebo, respectively, experienced orthostatic hypotension at 2 hours post dose. However, at 24 hours, none of the patients in the 180-mcg group experienced a systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg with a decrease ≥20 mm Hg, compared with one patient (<1%) in the 120-mcg group and none in the placebo group.²

The prescribing information advises that concomitant use of dexmedetomidine sublingual film with anesthetics, sedatives, hypnotics, or opioids is likely to lead to enhanced CNS depressant effects, and that the prescriber should consider a reduction in dosage of dexmedetomidine or the concomitant anesthetic, sedative, hypnotic, or opioid.²

Summary

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is an oral medication indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder. The recommended dose depends on severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment. A dose of 180 mcg is recommended for severe agitation and a dose of 120 mcg is recommended for mild or moderate agitation, with doses adjusted lower in the presence of hepatic impairment. There are no contraindications but there are warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence. Clinicians should monitor vital signs and alertness after administration to prevent falls and syncope; however, there is no FDA REMS required for use. The clinical trial evidence supporting the use of dexmedetomidine is robust, with evidence of a treatment effect as early as 20 minutes after administration. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.

Bottom Line

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film provides an opportunity to rethink the approach to the management of agitation and avoid the potentially unnecessary use of IM injections. Dexmedetomidine sublingual film acts rapidly and is simple to use.

Related Resources

• Dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Iglami) prescribing information. https://www.igalmihcp.com/igalmi-pi.pdf

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Dexmedetomidine • Igalmi, Precedex
Haloperidol • Haldol
Lorazepam • Ativan
Loxapine inhaled • Adasuve
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Ziprasidone • Geodon

Approved by the FDA on April 5, 2022, dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Igalmi, manufactured and distributed by BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc., New Haven, CT USA) is indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder (Table).^1,2 It is administered sublingually or buccally under the supervision of a health care provider. After administration, patients should have their vital signs and alertness assessed but there is no FDA Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) required for use. A limitation of use is that the safety and effectiveness of dexmedetomidine sublingual film has not been established beyond 24 hours from the first dose.² There are no contraindications for use.²

Dexmedetomidine is a well-known efficacious alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist available since 1999 in an IV formulation indicated for sedation of initially intubated and mechanically ventilated patients in an ICU setting, and sedation of nonintubated patients prior to and/or during surgical and other procedures.^3,4 The reformulation of dexmedetomidine as a sublingual film allows the broader use of this agent in psychiatric settings when managing agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, and thus potentially avoiding the use of IM administration of antipsychotics and/or benzodiazepines. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.⁵

Dosing

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is distributed commercially in the following strengths: 180 mcg and 120 mcg. It consists of a lightly mint-flavored, rectangular film containing 2 microdeposits of dexmedetomidine hydrochloride. Dosage strengths of 90 mcg and 60 mcg are available by cutting the 180 mcg or 120 mcg film in half between the 2 visible darker blue dots. The recommended dose depends on the severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment.² For severe agitation, the recommended dose is 180 mcg. For mild or moderate agitation, the recommended dose is 120 mcg. Dosage is reduced in patients with mild/moderate hepatic impairment (120 mcg for severe agitation and 90 mcg for mild or moderate agitation) or severe hepatic impairment (90 mcg and 60 mcg, for severe and mild/moderate agitation, respectively). The dose recommended for geriatric patients (defined as age ≥65 years) is 120 mcg for either mild, moderate, or severe agitation. Patients are advised not to eat or drink for at least 15 minutes after sublingual administration, or at least 1 hour after buccal administration (defined as placement in the mouth directly behind the lower lip).

If agitation persists after the initial dose, up to 2 additional doses (90 mcg if the initial dose was 180 mcg, otherwise 60 mcg if the initial dose was 120, 90, or 60 mcg) may be given at least 2 hours apart. Assessment of vital signs, including orthostatic measurements, is required prior to the administration of any subsequent doses. Due to risk of hypotension, additional doses are not recommended in patients with systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure <60 mm Hg, heart rate <60 beats per minute, or postural decrease in systolic blood pressure ≥20 mm Hg or in diastolic blood pressure ≥10 mm Hg.

Mechanism of action and pharmacodynamics

Dexmedetomidine is an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist and the mechanism of action in the acute treatment of agitation is thought to be due to activation of presynaptic alpha-2 adrenergic receptors.² Binding affinities (Ki values) are 4 to 6 nM at the alpha-2 adrenergic receptor subtypes.²

Dexmedetomidine exhibits concentration-dependent QT prolongation, with mean QTc increases from baseline from 6 msec (120 mcg single dose) to 11 msec (180 mcg plus 2 additional doses of 90 mcg 2 hours apart for a total of 3 doses).² Placing the observation about QTc prolongation into clinical context, studies of IM administration of ziprasidone 20 mg and 30 mg and haloperidol 7.5 mg and 10 mg resulted in changes of the QTc interval of 4.6 msec and 6.0 msec, respectively, after 1 dose.⁶ After a second injection, these values were 12.8 msec and 14.7 msec, respectively.⁶

Clinical pharmacokinetics

The sublingual film formulation is absorbed orally, bypassing first-pass metabolism, and achieving higher dexmedetomidine bioavailability than ingested formulations.⁷ Exposure is dose-dependent, with dexmedetomidine being quantifiable in plasma after 5 to 20 minutes post dosing, and with a plasma half-life of 2 to 3 hours.^2,8 Mean time for the film to dissolve in the mouth was approximately 6 to 8 minutes following sublingual administration, and 18 minutes following buccal administration.² Absolute bioavailability was approximately 72% and 82% following sublingual and buccal administration, respectively.² Mean maximal plasma concentrations of dexmedetomidine were reached approximately 2 hours after sublingual or buccal administration.² Compared to drinking water at 2 hours post administration, early water intake (as early as 15 minutes post-dose) had minimal effects on the rate or extent of sublingual absorption but was not assessed after buccal administration.² The average protein binding was 94% and was constant across the different plasma concentrations evaluated and similar in males and females, but significantly decreased in participants with hepatic impairment compared to healthy individuals.² In contrast, the pharmacokinetic profile of dexmedetomidine is not significantly different in patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/minute compared to those with normal renal function.² Dexmedetomidine undergoes almost complete biotransformation to inactive metabolites via direct glucuronidation as well as cytochrome P450 (CYP) (primarily CYP2A6)–mediated metabolism.² There is no evidence of any CYP–mediated drug interactions that are likely to be of clinical relevance.²

Continue to: Efficacy

The efficacy and tolerability of 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses of dexmedetomidine sublingual film was evaluated in 2 similarly designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trials in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or schizophreniform disorder⁹ and bipolar I or II disorder.¹⁰ These studies included a total of 758 adult patients age range 18 to 71 (mean age approximately 46.5), with about 59% male participants.² In contrast to other agents approved by the FDA for treatment of agitation associated with bipolar disorder, dexmedetomidine sublingual film was assessed in patients regardless of polarity (manic, mixed features, or depressed).⁵ The primary efficacy measure for the dexmedetomidine sublingual film studies was the investigator-administered Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC), consisting of the following 5 items: excitement, tension, hostility, uncooperativeness, and poor impulse control.¹¹ The items from the PANSS-EC are rated from 1 (not present) to 7 (extremely severe) and thus the total scores range from 5 to 35. For enrollment in the studies, patients had to be judged to be clinically agitated with a total PANSS-EC score ≥14, with at least 1 individual item score ≥4.²

After study medication administration, the PANSS-EC was assessed from 10 minutes through 24 hours, with the primary endpoint being at 2 hours post-dose. Patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder who were treated with dexmedetomidine sublingual film 120 mcg or 180 mcg had superior symptomatic improvements from baseline to 2 hours post-dose compared to placebo, with treatment effects beginning as early as 20 to 30 minutes post-dose (for patients with schizophrenia, dexmedetomidine was statistically significantly superior to placebo beginning at 20 minutes following dosing with the 180 mcg dose and 30 minutes after the 120 mcg dose; for patients with bipolar disorder, differences from placebo were statistically significant beginning at 20 minutes after treatment with both the 120 mcg and 180 mcg doses).² Evaluation of effect size for dexmedetomidine vs placebo for PANSS-EC response at 2 hours (defined as ≥40% improvement from baseline) resulted in a number needed to treat (NNT) of 3 when combining both studies and both doses,¹² comparing favorably with the NNT values observed for IM formulations of aripiprazole, haloperidol, lorazepam, olanzapine, and ziprasidone,¹³ and inhaled loxapine.¹⁴

Overall tolerability and safety

The highlights of the prescribing information contain warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence.² Advice is provided to ensure that patients are alert and not experiencing orthostatic or symptomatic hypotension prior to resuming ambulation, a concern commonly raised when assessing potential treatments for agitation.¹⁵ Dexmedetomidine sublingual film should be avoided in patients with risk factors for prolonged QT interval, a precaution that was evident for the use of ziprasidone¹⁶ and where an effect is also noted with haloperidol.⁶ As per the prescribing information, the most common adverse reactions (incidence ≥5% and at least twice the rate of placebo) are somnolence, oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia, dizziness, dry mouth, hypotension, and orthostatic hypotension. Rates of adverse reactions of somnolence (including fatigue and sluggishness) with dexmedetomidine 120 mcg or 180 mcg are almost the same (22% and 23%, respectively), and higher than the 6% observed with placebo.² Other adverse reactions are substantially lower in frequency. These include oral paresthesia or oral hypoesthesia (6%, 7%, and 1%, for dexmedetomidine 120 mcg, 180 mcg, or placebo, respectively), dizziness (4%, 6%, 1%), hypotension (5%, 5%, 0%), orthostatic hypotension (3%, 5%, <1%), dry mouth (7%, 4%, 1%), nausea (2%, 3%, 2%), bradycardia (2%, 2%, 0%), and abdominal discomfort (0%, 2%, 1%).²

Regarding dose-dependent changes in blood pressure during the studies, 16%, 18%, and 9% of patients treated with 120 mcg, 180 mcg, and placebo, respectively, experienced orthostatic hypotension at 2 hours post dose. However, at 24 hours, none of the patients in the 180-mcg group experienced a systolic blood pressure ≤90 mm Hg with a decrease ≥20 mm Hg, compared with one patient (<1%) in the 120-mcg group and none in the placebo group.²

The prescribing information advises that concomitant use of dexmedetomidine sublingual film with anesthetics, sedatives, hypnotics, or opioids is likely to lead to enhanced CNS depressant effects, and that the prescriber should consider a reduction in dosage of dexmedetomidine or the concomitant anesthetic, sedative, hypnotic, or opioid.²

Summary

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film is an oral medication indicated in adults for the acute treatment of agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar I or II disorder. The recommended dose depends on severity of agitation, age, and the presence of hepatic impairment. A dose of 180 mcg is recommended for severe agitation and a dose of 120 mcg is recommended for mild or moderate agitation, with doses adjusted lower in the presence of hepatic impairment. There are no contraindications but there are warnings and precautions regarding hypotension/orthostatic hypotension/bradycardia, QT interval prolongation, and somnolence. Clinicians should monitor vital signs and alertness after administration to prevent falls and syncope; however, there is no FDA REMS required for use. The clinical trial evidence supporting the use of dexmedetomidine is robust, with evidence of a treatment effect as early as 20 minutes after administration. Noninvasive formulations, although requiring cooperation from patients, have the potential to improve overall patient experience, thereby improving future cooperation between patients and health care professionals.

Bottom Line

Dexmedetomidine sublingual film provides an opportunity to rethink the approach to the management of agitation and avoid the potentially unnecessary use of IM injections. Dexmedetomidine sublingual film acts rapidly and is simple to use.

Related Resources

• Dexmedetomidine sublingual film (Iglami) prescribing information. https://www.igalmihcp.com/igalmi-pi.pdf

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Dexmedetomidine • Igalmi, Precedex
Haloperidol • Haldol
Lorazepam • Ativan
Loxapine inhaled • Adasuve
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Ziprasidone • Geodon

Mr. L, age 31, presents to the emergency department (ED) with somnolence after sustaining an arm laceration at work. While in the ED, Mr. L explains he has opioid use disorder (OUD) and last week received an initial 300 mg injection of extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR). Due to ongoing opioid cravings, he took nonprescribed fentanyl and alprazolam before work.

The ED clinicians address Mr. L’s arm injury and transfer him to the hospital’s low-threshold outpatient addiction clinic for further assessment and management. There, he is prescribed sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP) 8 mg/2 mg daily as needed for 1 week to address ongoing opioid cravings, and is encouraged to return for another visit the following week.

The United States continues to struggle with the overdose crisis, largely fueled by illicitly manufactured opioids such as fentanyl.¹ Opioid agonist and partial agonist treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine decrease the risk of death in individuals with OUD by up to 50%.² While methadone has a history of proven effectiveness for OUD, accessibility is fraught with barriers (eg, patients must attend an opioid treatment program daily to receive a dose, pharmacies are unable to dispense methadone for OUD).

Buprenorphine has been shown to decrease opioid cravings while limiting euphoria due to its partial—as opposed to full—agonist activity.³ Several buprenorphine formulations are available (Table). Buprenorphine presents an opportunity to treat OUD like other chronic illnesses. In accordance with the US Department of Health and Human Services Practice Guideline (2021), any clinician can obtain a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in any treatment setting, and patients can receive the medication at a pharmacy.⁴

However, many patients have barriers to consistent daily dosing of buprenorphine due to strict clinic/prescriber requirements, transportation difficulties, continued cravings, and other factors. BUP-XR, a buprenorphine injection administered once a month, may address several of these concerns, most notably the potential for better suppression of cravings by delivering a consistent level of buprenorphine over the course of 28 days.⁵ Since BUP-XR was FDA-approved in 2017, questions remain whether it can adequately quell opioid cravings in early treatment months prior to steady-state concentration.

This article addresses whether clinicians should consider supplemental SL-BUP in addition to BUP-XR during early treatment months and/or prior to steady-state.

Pharmacokinetics of BUP-XR

BUP-XR is administered by subcutaneous injection via an ATRIGEL delivery system (BUP-XR; Albany Molecular Research, Burlington, Massachusetts).⁶ Upon injection, approximately 7% of the buprenorphine dose dissipates with the solvent, leading to maximum concentration approximately 24 hours post-dose. The remaining dose hardens to create a depot that elutes buprenorphine gradually over 28 days.⁷

Continue to: Buprenorphine requires...

Buprenorphine requires ≥70% mu-opioid receptor (MOR) occupancy to effectively suppress symptoms of craving and withdrawal in patients with OUD. Buprenorphine serum concentration correlates significantly with MOR occupancy, such that concentrations of 2 to 3 ng/mL are acknowledged as baseline minimums for clinical efficacy.⁸

BUP-XR is administered in 1 of 2 dosing regimens. In both, 2 separate 300 mg doses are administered 28 days apart during Month 1 and Month 2, followed by maintenance doses of either 300 mg (300/300 mg dosing regimen) or 100 mg (300/100 mg dosing regimen) every 28 days thereafter. Combined Phase II and Phase III data analyzing serum concentrations of BUP-XR across both dosing regimens revealed that, for most patients, there is a noticeable period during Month 1 and Month 2 when serum concentrations fall below 2 ng/mL.⁷ Steady-state concentrations of both regimens develop after 4 to 6 appropriately timed injections, providing average steady-state serum concentrations in Phase II and Phase III trials of 6.54 ng/mL for the 300/300 mg dosing regimen and 3.00 ng/mL for 300/100 mg dosing regimen.⁷

Real-world experiences with BUP-XR

The theoretical need for supplementation has been voiced in practice. A case series by Peckham et al⁹ noted that 55% (n = 22) of patients required SL-BUP supplementation for up to 120 days after the first BUP-XR injection to quell cravings and reduce nonprescribed opioid use.

The RECOVER trial by Ling et al¹⁰ demonstrated the importance of the first 2 months of BUP-XR therapy in the overall treatment success for patients with OUD. In this analysis, patients maintained on BUP-XR for 12 months reported a 75% likelihood of abstinence, compared to 24% for patients receiving 0 to 2 months of BUP-XR treatment. Other benefits included improved employment status and reduced depression rates. This trial did not specifically discuss supplemental SL-BUP or subthreshold concentrations of buprenorphine during early months.¹⁰

Individualized treatment should be based on OUD symptoms

While BUP-XR was designed to continuously deliver at least 2 ng/mL of buprenorphine, serum concentrations are labile during the first 2 months of treatment. This may result in breakthrough OUD symptoms, particularly withdrawal or opioid cravings. Additionally, due to individual variability, some patients may still experience serum concentrations below 2 ng/mL after Month 2 and until steady-state is achieved between Month 4 and Month 6.⁷

Continue to: Beyond a theoretical...

Beyond a theoretical need for supplementation with SL-BUP, there is limited information regarding optimal dosing, dosage intervals, or length of supplementation. Therefore, clear guidance is not available at this time, and treatment should be individualized based on subjective and objective OUD symptoms.

What also remains unknown are potential barriers patients may face in receiving 2 concurrent buprenorphine prescriptions. BUP-XR, administered in a health care setting, can be obtained 2 ways. A clinician can directly order the medication from the distributor to be administered via buy-and-bill. An alternate option requires the clinician to send a prescription to an appropriately credentialed pharmacy that will ship patient-specific orders directly to the clinic. Despite this, most SL-BUP prescriptions are billed and dispensed from community pharmacies. At the insurance level, there is risk the prescription claim will be rejected for duplication of therapy, which may require additional collaboration between the prescribing clinician, pharmacist, and insurance representative to ensure patients have access to the medication.

Pending studies and approvals may also provide greater guidance and flexibility in decision-making for patients with OUD. The CoLAB study currently underway in Australia is examining the efficacy and outcomes of an intermediate dose (200 mg) of BUP-XR and will also allow for supplemental SL-BUP doses.¹¹ Additionally, an alternative BUP-XR formulation, Brixadi, currently in use in the European Union as Buvidal, has submitted an application for FDA approval in the United States. The application indicates that Brixadi will be available with a wider range of doses and at both weekly and monthly intervals. Approval has been delayed due to deficiencies in the United States–based third-party production facilities. It is unclear how the FDA and manufacturer plan to proceed.¹²

Short-term supplementation with SL-BUP during early the months of treatment with BUP-XR should be considered to control OUD symptoms and assist with patient retention. Once steady-state is achieved, trough concentrations of buprenorphine are not expected to drop below 2 ng/mL with continued on-time maintenance doses and thus, supplementation can likely cease.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. L is seen in the low-threshold outpatient clinic 1 week after his ED visit. His arm laceration is healing well, and he is noticeably more alert and engaged. Each morning this week, he awakes with cravings, sweating, and anxiety. These symptoms alleviate after he takes SL-BUP. Mr. L’s clinician gives him a copy of the Subjective Opioid Withdrawal Scale so he can assess his withdrawal symptoms each morning and provide this data at follow-up appointments. Mr. L and his clinician decide to meet weekly until his next injection to continue assessing his current supplemental dose, symptoms, and whether there should be additional adjustments to his treatment plan.

Related Resources

• Cho J, Bhimani J, Patel M, et al. Substance abuse among older adults: a growing problem. Current Psychiatry. 2018;17(3):14-20.
• Verma S. Opioid use disorder in adolescents: an overview. Current Psychiatry. 2020;19(2):12-14,16-21.

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Buprenorphine • Sublocade, Subutex
Buprenorphine/naloxone • Suboxone, Zubsolv
Methadone • Methadose

Mr. L, age 31, presents to the emergency department (ED) with somnolence after sustaining an arm laceration at work. While in the ED, Mr. L explains he has opioid use disorder (OUD) and last week received an initial 300 mg injection of extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR). Due to ongoing opioid cravings, he took nonprescribed fentanyl and alprazolam before work.

The ED clinicians address Mr. L’s arm injury and transfer him to the hospital’s low-threshold outpatient addiction clinic for further assessment and management. There, he is prescribed sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP) 8 mg/2 mg daily as needed for 1 week to address ongoing opioid cravings, and is encouraged to return for another visit the following week.

The United States continues to struggle with the overdose crisis, largely fueled by illicitly manufactured opioids such as fentanyl.¹ Opioid agonist and partial agonist treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine decrease the risk of death in individuals with OUD by up to 50%.² While methadone has a history of proven effectiveness for OUD, accessibility is fraught with barriers (eg, patients must attend an opioid treatment program daily to receive a dose, pharmacies are unable to dispense methadone for OUD).

Buprenorphine has been shown to decrease opioid cravings while limiting euphoria due to its partial—as opposed to full—agonist activity.³ Several buprenorphine formulations are available (Table). Buprenorphine presents an opportunity to treat OUD like other chronic illnesses. In accordance with the US Department of Health and Human Services Practice Guideline (2021), any clinician can obtain a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in any treatment setting, and patients can receive the medication at a pharmacy.⁴

However, many patients have barriers to consistent daily dosing of buprenorphine due to strict clinic/prescriber requirements, transportation difficulties, continued cravings, and other factors. BUP-XR, a buprenorphine injection administered once a month, may address several of these concerns, most notably the potential for better suppression of cravings by delivering a consistent level of buprenorphine over the course of 28 days.⁵ Since BUP-XR was FDA-approved in 2017, questions remain whether it can adequately quell opioid cravings in early treatment months prior to steady-state concentration.

This article addresses whether clinicians should consider supplemental SL-BUP in addition to BUP-XR during early treatment months and/or prior to steady-state.

Pharmacokinetics of BUP-XR

BUP-XR is administered by subcutaneous injection via an ATRIGEL delivery system (BUP-XR; Albany Molecular Research, Burlington, Massachusetts).⁶ Upon injection, approximately 7% of the buprenorphine dose dissipates with the solvent, leading to maximum concentration approximately 24 hours post-dose. The remaining dose hardens to create a depot that elutes buprenorphine gradually over 28 days.⁷

Continue to: Buprenorphine requires...

Buprenorphine requires ≥70% mu-opioid receptor (MOR) occupancy to effectively suppress symptoms of craving and withdrawal in patients with OUD. Buprenorphine serum concentration correlates significantly with MOR occupancy, such that concentrations of 2 to 3 ng/mL are acknowledged as baseline minimums for clinical efficacy.⁸

BUP-XR is administered in 1 of 2 dosing regimens. In both, 2 separate 300 mg doses are administered 28 days apart during Month 1 and Month 2, followed by maintenance doses of either 300 mg (300/300 mg dosing regimen) or 100 mg (300/100 mg dosing regimen) every 28 days thereafter. Combined Phase II and Phase III data analyzing serum concentrations of BUP-XR across both dosing regimens revealed that, for most patients, there is a noticeable period during Month 1 and Month 2 when serum concentrations fall below 2 ng/mL.⁷ Steady-state concentrations of both regimens develop after 4 to 6 appropriately timed injections, providing average steady-state serum concentrations in Phase II and Phase III trials of 6.54 ng/mL for the 300/300 mg dosing regimen and 3.00 ng/mL for 300/100 mg dosing regimen.⁷

Real-world experiences with BUP-XR

The theoretical need for supplementation has been voiced in practice. A case series by Peckham et al⁹ noted that 55% (n = 22) of patients required SL-BUP supplementation for up to 120 days after the first BUP-XR injection to quell cravings and reduce nonprescribed opioid use.

The RECOVER trial by Ling et al¹⁰ demonstrated the importance of the first 2 months of BUP-XR therapy in the overall treatment success for patients with OUD. In this analysis, patients maintained on BUP-XR for 12 months reported a 75% likelihood of abstinence, compared to 24% for patients receiving 0 to 2 months of BUP-XR treatment. Other benefits included improved employment status and reduced depression rates. This trial did not specifically discuss supplemental SL-BUP or subthreshold concentrations of buprenorphine during early months.¹⁰

Individualized treatment should be based on OUD symptoms

While BUP-XR was designed to continuously deliver at least 2 ng/mL of buprenorphine, serum concentrations are labile during the first 2 months of treatment. This may result in breakthrough OUD symptoms, particularly withdrawal or opioid cravings. Additionally, due to individual variability, some patients may still experience serum concentrations below 2 ng/mL after Month 2 and until steady-state is achieved between Month 4 and Month 6.⁷

Continue to: Beyond a theoretical...

Beyond a theoretical need for supplementation with SL-BUP, there is limited information regarding optimal dosing, dosage intervals, or length of supplementation. Therefore, clear guidance is not available at this time, and treatment should be individualized based on subjective and objective OUD symptoms.

What also remains unknown are potential barriers patients may face in receiving 2 concurrent buprenorphine prescriptions. BUP-XR, administered in a health care setting, can be obtained 2 ways. A clinician can directly order the medication from the distributor to be administered via buy-and-bill. An alternate option requires the clinician to send a prescription to an appropriately credentialed pharmacy that will ship patient-specific orders directly to the clinic. Despite this, most SL-BUP prescriptions are billed and dispensed from community pharmacies. At the insurance level, there is risk the prescription claim will be rejected for duplication of therapy, which may require additional collaboration between the prescribing clinician, pharmacist, and insurance representative to ensure patients have access to the medication.

Pending studies and approvals may also provide greater guidance and flexibility in decision-making for patients with OUD. The CoLAB study currently underway in Australia is examining the efficacy and outcomes of an intermediate dose (200 mg) of BUP-XR and will also allow for supplemental SL-BUP doses.¹¹ Additionally, an alternative BUP-XR formulation, Brixadi, currently in use in the European Union as Buvidal, has submitted an application for FDA approval in the United States. The application indicates that Brixadi will be available with a wider range of doses and at both weekly and monthly intervals. Approval has been delayed due to deficiencies in the United States–based third-party production facilities. It is unclear how the FDA and manufacturer plan to proceed.¹²

Short-term supplementation with SL-BUP during early the months of treatment with BUP-XR should be considered to control OUD symptoms and assist with patient retention. Once steady-state is achieved, trough concentrations of buprenorphine are not expected to drop below 2 ng/mL with continued on-time maintenance doses and thus, supplementation can likely cease.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. L is seen in the low-threshold outpatient clinic 1 week after his ED visit. His arm laceration is healing well, and he is noticeably more alert and engaged. Each morning this week, he awakes with cravings, sweating, and anxiety. These symptoms alleviate after he takes SL-BUP. Mr. L’s clinician gives him a copy of the Subjective Opioid Withdrawal Scale so he can assess his withdrawal symptoms each morning and provide this data at follow-up appointments. Mr. L and his clinician decide to meet weekly until his next injection to continue assessing his current supplemental dose, symptoms, and whether there should be additional adjustments to his treatment plan.

Related Resources

• Cho J, Bhimani J, Patel M, et al. Substance abuse among older adults: a growing problem. Current Psychiatry. 2018;17(3):14-20.
• Verma S. Opioid use disorder in adolescents: an overview. Current Psychiatry. 2020;19(2):12-14,16-21.

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Buprenorphine • Sublocade, Subutex
Buprenorphine/naloxone • Suboxone, Zubsolv
Methadone • Methadose

Mr. L, age 31, presents to the emergency department (ED) with somnolence after sustaining an arm laceration at work. While in the ED, Mr. L explains he has opioid use disorder (OUD) and last week received an initial 300 mg injection of extended-release buprenorphine (BUP-XR). Due to ongoing opioid cravings, he took nonprescribed fentanyl and alprazolam before work.

The ED clinicians address Mr. L’s arm injury and transfer him to the hospital’s low-threshold outpatient addiction clinic for further assessment and management. There, he is prescribed sublingual buprenorphine/naloxone (SL-BUP) 8 mg/2 mg daily as needed for 1 week to address ongoing opioid cravings, and is encouraged to return for another visit the following week.

The United States continues to struggle with the overdose crisis, largely fueled by illicitly manufactured opioids such as fentanyl.¹ Opioid agonist and partial agonist treatments such as methadone and buprenorphine decrease the risk of death in individuals with OUD by up to 50%.² While methadone has a history of proven effectiveness for OUD, accessibility is fraught with barriers (eg, patients must attend an opioid treatment program daily to receive a dose, pharmacies are unable to dispense methadone for OUD).

Buprenorphine has been shown to decrease opioid cravings while limiting euphoria due to its partial—as opposed to full—agonist activity.³ Several buprenorphine formulations are available (Table). Buprenorphine presents an opportunity to treat OUD like other chronic illnesses. In accordance with the US Department of Health and Human Services Practice Guideline (2021), any clinician can obtain a waiver to prescribe buprenorphine in any treatment setting, and patients can receive the medication at a pharmacy.⁴

However, many patients have barriers to consistent daily dosing of buprenorphine due to strict clinic/prescriber requirements, transportation difficulties, continued cravings, and other factors. BUP-XR, a buprenorphine injection administered once a month, may address several of these concerns, most notably the potential for better suppression of cravings by delivering a consistent level of buprenorphine over the course of 28 days.⁵ Since BUP-XR was FDA-approved in 2017, questions remain whether it can adequately quell opioid cravings in early treatment months prior to steady-state concentration.

This article addresses whether clinicians should consider supplemental SL-BUP in addition to BUP-XR during early treatment months and/or prior to steady-state.

Pharmacokinetics of BUP-XR

BUP-XR is administered by subcutaneous injection via an ATRIGEL delivery system (BUP-XR; Albany Molecular Research, Burlington, Massachusetts).⁶ Upon injection, approximately 7% of the buprenorphine dose dissipates with the solvent, leading to maximum concentration approximately 24 hours post-dose. The remaining dose hardens to create a depot that elutes buprenorphine gradually over 28 days.⁷

Continue to: Buprenorphine requires...

Buprenorphine requires ≥70% mu-opioid receptor (MOR) occupancy to effectively suppress symptoms of craving and withdrawal in patients with OUD. Buprenorphine serum concentration correlates significantly with MOR occupancy, such that concentrations of 2 to 3 ng/mL are acknowledged as baseline minimums for clinical efficacy.⁸

BUP-XR is administered in 1 of 2 dosing regimens. In both, 2 separate 300 mg doses are administered 28 days apart during Month 1 and Month 2, followed by maintenance doses of either 300 mg (300/300 mg dosing regimen) or 100 mg (300/100 mg dosing regimen) every 28 days thereafter. Combined Phase II and Phase III data analyzing serum concentrations of BUP-XR across both dosing regimens revealed that, for most patients, there is a noticeable period during Month 1 and Month 2 when serum concentrations fall below 2 ng/mL.⁷ Steady-state concentrations of both regimens develop after 4 to 6 appropriately timed injections, providing average steady-state serum concentrations in Phase II and Phase III trials of 6.54 ng/mL for the 300/300 mg dosing regimen and 3.00 ng/mL for 300/100 mg dosing regimen.⁷

Real-world experiences with BUP-XR

The theoretical need for supplementation has been voiced in practice. A case series by Peckham et al⁹ noted that 55% (n = 22) of patients required SL-BUP supplementation for up to 120 days after the first BUP-XR injection to quell cravings and reduce nonprescribed opioid use.

The RECOVER trial by Ling et al¹⁰ demonstrated the importance of the first 2 months of BUP-XR therapy in the overall treatment success for patients with OUD. In this analysis, patients maintained on BUP-XR for 12 months reported a 75% likelihood of abstinence, compared to 24% for patients receiving 0 to 2 months of BUP-XR treatment. Other benefits included improved employment status and reduced depression rates. This trial did not specifically discuss supplemental SL-BUP or subthreshold concentrations of buprenorphine during early months.¹⁰

Individualized treatment should be based on OUD symptoms

While BUP-XR was designed to continuously deliver at least 2 ng/mL of buprenorphine, serum concentrations are labile during the first 2 months of treatment. This may result in breakthrough OUD symptoms, particularly withdrawal or opioid cravings. Additionally, due to individual variability, some patients may still experience serum concentrations below 2 ng/mL after Month 2 and until steady-state is achieved between Month 4 and Month 6.⁷

Continue to: Beyond a theoretical...

Beyond a theoretical need for supplementation with SL-BUP, there is limited information regarding optimal dosing, dosage intervals, or length of supplementation. Therefore, clear guidance is not available at this time, and treatment should be individualized based on subjective and objective OUD symptoms.

What also remains unknown are potential barriers patients may face in receiving 2 concurrent buprenorphine prescriptions. BUP-XR, administered in a health care setting, can be obtained 2 ways. A clinician can directly order the medication from the distributor to be administered via buy-and-bill. An alternate option requires the clinician to send a prescription to an appropriately credentialed pharmacy that will ship patient-specific orders directly to the clinic. Despite this, most SL-BUP prescriptions are billed and dispensed from community pharmacies. At the insurance level, there is risk the prescription claim will be rejected for duplication of therapy, which may require additional collaboration between the prescribing clinician, pharmacist, and insurance representative to ensure patients have access to the medication.

Pending studies and approvals may also provide greater guidance and flexibility in decision-making for patients with OUD. The CoLAB study currently underway in Australia is examining the efficacy and outcomes of an intermediate dose (200 mg) of BUP-XR and will also allow for supplemental SL-BUP doses.¹¹ Additionally, an alternative BUP-XR formulation, Brixadi, currently in use in the European Union as Buvidal, has submitted an application for FDA approval in the United States. The application indicates that Brixadi will be available with a wider range of doses and at both weekly and monthly intervals. Approval has been delayed due to deficiencies in the United States–based third-party production facilities. It is unclear how the FDA and manufacturer plan to proceed.¹²

Short-term supplementation with SL-BUP during early the months of treatment with BUP-XR should be considered to control OUD symptoms and assist with patient retention. Once steady-state is achieved, trough concentrations of buprenorphine are not expected to drop below 2 ng/mL with continued on-time maintenance doses and thus, supplementation can likely cease.

CASE CONTINUED

Mr. L is seen in the low-threshold outpatient clinic 1 week after his ED visit. His arm laceration is healing well, and he is noticeably more alert and engaged. Each morning this week, he awakes with cravings, sweating, and anxiety. These symptoms alleviate after he takes SL-BUP. Mr. L’s clinician gives him a copy of the Subjective Opioid Withdrawal Scale so he can assess his withdrawal symptoms each morning and provide this data at follow-up appointments. Mr. L and his clinician decide to meet weekly until his next injection to continue assessing his current supplemental dose, symptoms, and whether there should be additional adjustments to his treatment plan.

Related Resources

• Cho J, Bhimani J, Patel M, et al. Substance abuse among older adults: a growing problem. Current Psychiatry. 2018;17(3):14-20.
• Verma S. Opioid use disorder in adolescents: an overview. Current Psychiatry. 2020;19(2):12-14,16-21.

Drug Brand Names

Alprazolam • Xanax
Buprenorphine • Sublocade, Subutex
Buprenorphine/naloxone • Suboxone, Zubsolv
Methadone • Methadose

CASE Schizophrenia, leukemia, and chemotherapy

Mr. A, age 30, has schizophrenia but has been stable on clozapine 600 mg/d. He presents to the emergency department with generalized pain that started in his right scapula, arm, elbow, and back. Laboratory tests and a diagnostic examination reveal severe leukocytosis, thrombocytopenia, and anemia, and clinicians diagnose Mr. A with B-cell acute lymphocytic leukemia (B-ALL). Upon admission, Mr. A is neutropenic with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1,420 µL (reference range 2,500 to 6,000 µL). The hematology team recommends chemotherapy. The treating clinicians also consult the psychiatry team for recommendations on how to best manage Mr. A’s schizophrenia during chemotherapy, including whether clozapine should be discontinued.

HISTORY Stable on clozapine for >10 years

Mr. A was diagnosed with schizophrenia at age 15 after developing paranoia and auditory hallucinations of people talking to him and to each other. He had been hospitalized multiple times for worsened auditory hallucinations and paranoia that led to significant agitation and violence. Previous treatment with multiple antipsychotics, including haloperidol, quetiapine, aripiprazole, olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone, was not successful. Mr. A began clozapine >10 years ago, and his symptoms have been stable since, without any further psychiatric hospitalizations. Mr. A takes clozapine 600 mg/d and divalproex sodium 1,500 mg/d, which he tolerates well and without significant adverse effects. Though he continues to have intermittent auditory hallucinations, they are mild and manageable. Mr. A lives with his mother, who reports he occasionally talks to himself but when he does not take clozapine, the auditory hallucinations worsen and cause him to become paranoid and aggressive. His ANC is monitored monthly and had been normal for several years until he was diagnosed with B-ALL.

[polldaddy:11125941]

The authors’ observations

The decision to continue clozapine during chemotherapy is challenging and should weigh the risk of agranulocytosis against that of psychiatric destabilization. Because clozapine and chemotherapy are both associated with agranulocytosis, there is concern that concurrent treatment could increase this risk in an additive or synergistic manner. To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no controlled studies investigating the interactions between clozapine and chemotherapeutic agents. Evidence on the hematopoietic consequences of concurrent clozapine and chemotherapy treatment has been limited to case reports because the topic does not lend itself well to randomized controlled trials.

A recent systematic review found no adverse outcomes among the 27 published cases in which clozapine was continued during myelosuppressive chemotherapy.¹ The most notable finding was an association between clozapine discontinuation and psychiatric decompensation, which was reported in 12 of 13 cases in which clozapine was prophylactically discontinued to minimize the risk of agranulocytosis.

Patient-specific factors must also be considered, such as the likelihood that psychotic symptoms will recur or worsen if clozapine is discontinued, as well as the extent to which symptom recurrence would interfere with cancer treatment. Clinicians should evaluate the feasibility of switching to another antipsychotic by obtaining a thorough history of the patient’s previous antipsychotics, doses, treatment duration, and response. However, many patients are treated with clozapine because their psychotic symptoms did not improve with other treatments. The character and severity of the patient’s psychotic symptoms when untreated or prior to clozapine treatment can provide a clearer understanding of how a recurrence of symptoms may interfere with cancer treatment. To formulate an accurate assessment of risks and benefits, it is necessary to consider both available evidence and patient-specific factors. The significant agitation and paranoia that Mr. A experienced when not taking clozapine was likely to disrupt chemotherapy. Thus, the adverse consequences of discontinuing clozapine were both severe and likely.

TREATMENT Continuing clozapine

After an extensive discussion of risks, benefits, and alternative treatments with the hematology and psychiatry teams, Mr. A and his family decide to continue clozapine with increased ANC monitoring during chemotherapy. Concurrent treatment was pursued with close collaboration among the patient, the patient’s family, and the hematology and pharmacy teams, and in careful consideration of the clozapine risk evaluation and mitigation strategy. Mr. A’s ANC was monitored daily during chemotherapy treatments and weekly in the intervals between treatments.

As expected, chemotherapy resulted in bone marrow suppression and pancytopenia. Mr. A’s ANC steadily decreased during the next 10 days until it reached 0 µL. This was consistent with the predicted ANC nadir between Day 10 and Day 14, after which recovery was expected. However, Mr. A’s ANC remained at 0 µL on Day 15.

[polldaddy:11125947]

Continue to: The authors' observations

Temporary decreases in ANC are expected during chemotherapy, and the timing of onset and recovery is often well characterized. Prior to Day 15, the observed progressive marrow suppression was solely due to chemotherapy. However, because Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL longer than anticipated, reevaluation of clozapine’s effects was warranted.

Timing, clinical course, and comprehensive hematologic monitoring can provide important clues as to whether clozapine may be responsible for prolonged neutropenia. Though a prolonged ANC of 0 µL raised concern for clozapine-induced agranulocytosis (CIAG), comprehensive monitoring of hematologic cell lines was reassuring because CIAG selectively targets granulocytic cells (neutrophils).² In contrast, chemo­therapy can affect other cell lineages, including lymphocytes, red blood cells, and platelets, which causes pancytopenia.³ For Mr. A, though the clinical presentation of pancytopenia was significant and concerning, it was inconsistent with CIAG.

Additionally, the patient’s baseline risk of CIAG should be considered. After 18 weeks of clozapine treatment, the risk of CIAG decreases to a level similar to that associated with other antipsychotics.^4,5 Therefore, CIAG would be unlikely in a patient treated with clozapine for more than 1 year and who did not have a history of neutropenia, as was the case with Mr. A.

While bone marrow biopsy can help differentiate between the causes of agranulocytosis,⁶ it is highly invasive and may not be necessary if laboratory evidence is sufficient. However, if a treatment team is strongly considering discontinuing clozapine and there are no suitable alternatives, a biopsy may provide additional clarification.

TREATMENT CAR T-cell therapy and cancer remission

Clozapine is continued with daily monitoring. On Day 19, Mr. A’s ANC increases, reaching 2,600 µL by discharge on Day 40. Mr. A remains psychiatrically stable throughout his hospitalization and does not experience any complications associated with neutropenia, despite its prolonged duration.

Continue to: Unfortunately, multiple cycles of...

Unfortunately, multiple cycles of chemo­therapy fail to induce remission. Mr. A is referred for CD19/CD22 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, which helps achieve remission. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is recommended to maximize the likelihood of sustained remission.⁷ As with chemotherapy, Mr. A and his family agree with the multidisciplinary treatment recommendation to continue clozapine during both CAR T-cell therapy and HSCT, because the risks associated with psychiatric decompensation were greater than a potential increased risk of agranulocytosis. Clozapine treatment is continued throughout both therapies without issue.

Four months after HSCT, Mr. A is admitted for neutropenic fever and left face cellulitis. Upon admission, his ANC is 30 µL and subsequently decreases to 0 µL. In addition to neutropenia, Mr. A is also anemic and thrombocytopenic. He undergoes a bone marrow biopsy.

[polldaddy:11125950]

The authors’ observations

While no published cases have examined the bone marrow of patients experiencing CIAG, 2 retrospective studies have characterized 2 classes of bone marrow findings associated with drug-induced agranulocytosis resulting from nonchemotherapeutic agents (Table).^8,9 Type I marrow appears hypercellular with adequate neutrophil precursors but an arrested neutrophil maturation, with few or no mature forms of neutrophils beyond myelocytes.^8,9 Type II demonstrates a severe reduction or complete absence of granulocytic precursors with normal or increased erythropoiesis and megakaryocytes.^8,9 These findings have been used to accurately differentiate between chemotherapy and nonchemotherapy drug-induced agranulocytosis,⁶ resulting in successful identification and discontinuation of the responsible agent.

Mr. A’s bone marrow biopsy showed severe pancytopenia with profound neutropenia and normocytic anemia, without evidence of residual leukemia, inconsistent with Type I or Type II. Findings were suggestive of a myelodysplastic syndrome, consistent with secondary graft failure. Symptoms resolved after treatment with antibiotics, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, epoetin alfa, and thrombopoietin. Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL for 22 days before returning to normal (>1,500 µL) by Day 29. He had no secondary complications resulting from neutropenia. As the clinical evidence suggested, Mr. A’s neutropenia was unlikely to be due to clozapine. Clozapine was continued throughout his cancer treatment, and he remained psychiatrically stable.

Clozapine, cancer treatments, and agranulocytosis

This case demonstrates that clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even with the development of agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Evidence to guide psychiatric clinicians to evaluate the likelihood that agranulocytosis is clozapine-induced is limited.

Continue to: We offer an algorithm...

We offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma (Figure). Based on our experience and limited current evidence, we recommend continuing clozapine during cancer treatment unless there is clear evidence to suggest otherwise. Presently, no evidence in published literature suggests worsened outcomes in patients treated concurrently with clozapine and cancer therapies.

OUTCOME Cancer-free and psychiatrically stable

Mr. A continues clozapine therapy throughout all phases of treatment, without interruption. No adverse effects are determined to be secondary to clozapine. He remains psychiatrically stable throughout treatment, and able to participate and engage in his oncologic therapy. Mr. A is now more than 1 year in remission with no recurrence of graft failure, and his psychiatric symptoms continue to be well controlled with clozapine.

Bottom Line

Clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even in patients who develop agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Based on our experience and limited evidence, we offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma.

Related Resources

• Grainger BT, Arcasoy MO, Kenedi CA. Feasibility of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in psychiatric patients on clozapine: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Haematol. 2019;103(4):277-286. doi:10.1111/ejh.13285
• Daniel JS, Gross T. Managing clozapine-induced neutropenia and agranulocytosis. Current Psychiatry. 2016;15(12):51-53.

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Clozapine • Clozaril
Divalproex sodium • Depakote
Epoetin alfa • Epogen
Haloperidol • Haldol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Risperidone • Risperdal
Ziprasidone • Geodon

CASE Schizophrenia, leukemia, and chemotherapy

Mr. A, age 30, has schizophrenia but has been stable on clozapine 600 mg/d. He presents to the emergency department with generalized pain that started in his right scapula, arm, elbow, and back. Laboratory tests and a diagnostic examination reveal severe leukocytosis, thrombocytopenia, and anemia, and clinicians diagnose Mr. A with B-cell acute lymphocytic leukemia (B-ALL). Upon admission, Mr. A is neutropenic with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1,420 µL (reference range 2,500 to 6,000 µL). The hematology team recommends chemotherapy. The treating clinicians also consult the psychiatry team for recommendations on how to best manage Mr. A’s schizophrenia during chemotherapy, including whether clozapine should be discontinued.

HISTORY Stable on clozapine for >10 years

Mr. A was diagnosed with schizophrenia at age 15 after developing paranoia and auditory hallucinations of people talking to him and to each other. He had been hospitalized multiple times for worsened auditory hallucinations and paranoia that led to significant agitation and violence. Previous treatment with multiple antipsychotics, including haloperidol, quetiapine, aripiprazole, olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone, was not successful. Mr. A began clozapine >10 years ago, and his symptoms have been stable since, without any further psychiatric hospitalizations. Mr. A takes clozapine 600 mg/d and divalproex sodium 1,500 mg/d, which he tolerates well and without significant adverse effects. Though he continues to have intermittent auditory hallucinations, they are mild and manageable. Mr. A lives with his mother, who reports he occasionally talks to himself but when he does not take clozapine, the auditory hallucinations worsen and cause him to become paranoid and aggressive. His ANC is monitored monthly and had been normal for several years until he was diagnosed with B-ALL.

[polldaddy:11125941]

The authors’ observations

The decision to continue clozapine during chemotherapy is challenging and should weigh the risk of agranulocytosis against that of psychiatric destabilization. Because clozapine and chemotherapy are both associated with agranulocytosis, there is concern that concurrent treatment could increase this risk in an additive or synergistic manner. To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no controlled studies investigating the interactions between clozapine and chemotherapeutic agents. Evidence on the hematopoietic consequences of concurrent clozapine and chemotherapy treatment has been limited to case reports because the topic does not lend itself well to randomized controlled trials.

A recent systematic review found no adverse outcomes among the 27 published cases in which clozapine was continued during myelosuppressive chemotherapy.¹ The most notable finding was an association between clozapine discontinuation and psychiatric decompensation, which was reported in 12 of 13 cases in which clozapine was prophylactically discontinued to minimize the risk of agranulocytosis.

Patient-specific factors must also be considered, such as the likelihood that psychotic symptoms will recur or worsen if clozapine is discontinued, as well as the extent to which symptom recurrence would interfere with cancer treatment. Clinicians should evaluate the feasibility of switching to another antipsychotic by obtaining a thorough history of the patient’s previous antipsychotics, doses, treatment duration, and response. However, many patients are treated with clozapine because their psychotic symptoms did not improve with other treatments. The character and severity of the patient’s psychotic symptoms when untreated or prior to clozapine treatment can provide a clearer understanding of how a recurrence of symptoms may interfere with cancer treatment. To formulate an accurate assessment of risks and benefits, it is necessary to consider both available evidence and patient-specific factors. The significant agitation and paranoia that Mr. A experienced when not taking clozapine was likely to disrupt chemotherapy. Thus, the adverse consequences of discontinuing clozapine were both severe and likely.

TREATMENT Continuing clozapine

After an extensive discussion of risks, benefits, and alternative treatments with the hematology and psychiatry teams, Mr. A and his family decide to continue clozapine with increased ANC monitoring during chemotherapy. Concurrent treatment was pursued with close collaboration among the patient, the patient’s family, and the hematology and pharmacy teams, and in careful consideration of the clozapine risk evaluation and mitigation strategy. Mr. A’s ANC was monitored daily during chemotherapy treatments and weekly in the intervals between treatments.

As expected, chemotherapy resulted in bone marrow suppression and pancytopenia. Mr. A’s ANC steadily decreased during the next 10 days until it reached 0 µL. This was consistent with the predicted ANC nadir between Day 10 and Day 14, after which recovery was expected. However, Mr. A’s ANC remained at 0 µL on Day 15.

[polldaddy:11125947]

Continue to: The authors' observations

Temporary decreases in ANC are expected during chemotherapy, and the timing of onset and recovery is often well characterized. Prior to Day 15, the observed progressive marrow suppression was solely due to chemotherapy. However, because Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL longer than anticipated, reevaluation of clozapine’s effects was warranted.

Timing, clinical course, and comprehensive hematologic monitoring can provide important clues as to whether clozapine may be responsible for prolonged neutropenia. Though a prolonged ANC of 0 µL raised concern for clozapine-induced agranulocytosis (CIAG), comprehensive monitoring of hematologic cell lines was reassuring because CIAG selectively targets granulocytic cells (neutrophils).² In contrast, chemo­therapy can affect other cell lineages, including lymphocytes, red blood cells, and platelets, which causes pancytopenia.³ For Mr. A, though the clinical presentation of pancytopenia was significant and concerning, it was inconsistent with CIAG.

Additionally, the patient’s baseline risk of CIAG should be considered. After 18 weeks of clozapine treatment, the risk of CIAG decreases to a level similar to that associated with other antipsychotics.^4,5 Therefore, CIAG would be unlikely in a patient treated with clozapine for more than 1 year and who did not have a history of neutropenia, as was the case with Mr. A.

While bone marrow biopsy can help differentiate between the causes of agranulocytosis,⁶ it is highly invasive and may not be necessary if laboratory evidence is sufficient. However, if a treatment team is strongly considering discontinuing clozapine and there are no suitable alternatives, a biopsy may provide additional clarification.

TREATMENT CAR T-cell therapy and cancer remission

Clozapine is continued with daily monitoring. On Day 19, Mr. A’s ANC increases, reaching 2,600 µL by discharge on Day 40. Mr. A remains psychiatrically stable throughout his hospitalization and does not experience any complications associated with neutropenia, despite its prolonged duration.

Continue to: Unfortunately, multiple cycles of...

Unfortunately, multiple cycles of chemo­therapy fail to induce remission. Mr. A is referred for CD19/CD22 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, which helps achieve remission. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is recommended to maximize the likelihood of sustained remission.⁷ As with chemotherapy, Mr. A and his family agree with the multidisciplinary treatment recommendation to continue clozapine during both CAR T-cell therapy and HSCT, because the risks associated with psychiatric decompensation were greater than a potential increased risk of agranulocytosis. Clozapine treatment is continued throughout both therapies without issue.

Four months after HSCT, Mr. A is admitted for neutropenic fever and left face cellulitis. Upon admission, his ANC is 30 µL and subsequently decreases to 0 µL. In addition to neutropenia, Mr. A is also anemic and thrombocytopenic. He undergoes a bone marrow biopsy.

[polldaddy:11125950]

The authors’ observations

While no published cases have examined the bone marrow of patients experiencing CIAG, 2 retrospective studies have characterized 2 classes of bone marrow findings associated with drug-induced agranulocytosis resulting from nonchemotherapeutic agents (Table).^8,9 Type I marrow appears hypercellular with adequate neutrophil precursors but an arrested neutrophil maturation, with few or no mature forms of neutrophils beyond myelocytes.^8,9 Type II demonstrates a severe reduction or complete absence of granulocytic precursors with normal or increased erythropoiesis and megakaryocytes.^8,9 These findings have been used to accurately differentiate between chemotherapy and nonchemotherapy drug-induced agranulocytosis,⁶ resulting in successful identification and discontinuation of the responsible agent.

Mr. A’s bone marrow biopsy showed severe pancytopenia with profound neutropenia and normocytic anemia, without evidence of residual leukemia, inconsistent with Type I or Type II. Findings were suggestive of a myelodysplastic syndrome, consistent with secondary graft failure. Symptoms resolved after treatment with antibiotics, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, epoetin alfa, and thrombopoietin. Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL for 22 days before returning to normal (>1,500 µL) by Day 29. He had no secondary complications resulting from neutropenia. As the clinical evidence suggested, Mr. A’s neutropenia was unlikely to be due to clozapine. Clozapine was continued throughout his cancer treatment, and he remained psychiatrically stable.

Clozapine, cancer treatments, and agranulocytosis

This case demonstrates that clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even with the development of agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Evidence to guide psychiatric clinicians to evaluate the likelihood that agranulocytosis is clozapine-induced is limited.

Continue to: We offer an algorithm...

We offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma (Figure). Based on our experience and limited current evidence, we recommend continuing clozapine during cancer treatment unless there is clear evidence to suggest otherwise. Presently, no evidence in published literature suggests worsened outcomes in patients treated concurrently with clozapine and cancer therapies.

OUTCOME Cancer-free and psychiatrically stable

Mr. A continues clozapine therapy throughout all phases of treatment, without interruption. No adverse effects are determined to be secondary to clozapine. He remains psychiatrically stable throughout treatment, and able to participate and engage in his oncologic therapy. Mr. A is now more than 1 year in remission with no recurrence of graft failure, and his psychiatric symptoms continue to be well controlled with clozapine.

Bottom Line

Clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even in patients who develop agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Based on our experience and limited evidence, we offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma.

Related Resources

• Grainger BT, Arcasoy MO, Kenedi CA. Feasibility of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in psychiatric patients on clozapine: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Haematol. 2019;103(4):277-286. doi:10.1111/ejh.13285
• Daniel JS, Gross T. Managing clozapine-induced neutropenia and agranulocytosis. Current Psychiatry. 2016;15(12):51-53.

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Clozapine • Clozaril
Divalproex sodium • Depakote
Epoetin alfa • Epogen
Haloperidol • Haldol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Risperidone • Risperdal
Ziprasidone • Geodon

CASE Schizophrenia, leukemia, and chemotherapy

Mr. A, age 30, has schizophrenia but has been stable on clozapine 600 mg/d. He presents to the emergency department with generalized pain that started in his right scapula, arm, elbow, and back. Laboratory tests and a diagnostic examination reveal severe leukocytosis, thrombocytopenia, and anemia, and clinicians diagnose Mr. A with B-cell acute lymphocytic leukemia (B-ALL). Upon admission, Mr. A is neutropenic with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of 1,420 µL (reference range 2,500 to 6,000 µL). The hematology team recommends chemotherapy. The treating clinicians also consult the psychiatry team for recommendations on how to best manage Mr. A’s schizophrenia during chemotherapy, including whether clozapine should be discontinued.

HISTORY Stable on clozapine for >10 years

Mr. A was diagnosed with schizophrenia at age 15 after developing paranoia and auditory hallucinations of people talking to him and to each other. He had been hospitalized multiple times for worsened auditory hallucinations and paranoia that led to significant agitation and violence. Previous treatment with multiple antipsychotics, including haloperidol, quetiapine, aripiprazole, olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone, was not successful. Mr. A began clozapine >10 years ago, and his symptoms have been stable since, without any further psychiatric hospitalizations. Mr. A takes clozapine 600 mg/d and divalproex sodium 1,500 mg/d, which he tolerates well and without significant adverse effects. Though he continues to have intermittent auditory hallucinations, they are mild and manageable. Mr. A lives with his mother, who reports he occasionally talks to himself but when he does not take clozapine, the auditory hallucinations worsen and cause him to become paranoid and aggressive. His ANC is monitored monthly and had been normal for several years until he was diagnosed with B-ALL.

[polldaddy:11125941]

The authors’ observations

The decision to continue clozapine during chemotherapy is challenging and should weigh the risk of agranulocytosis against that of psychiatric destabilization. Because clozapine and chemotherapy are both associated with agranulocytosis, there is concern that concurrent treatment could increase this risk in an additive or synergistic manner. To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no controlled studies investigating the interactions between clozapine and chemotherapeutic agents. Evidence on the hematopoietic consequences of concurrent clozapine and chemotherapy treatment has been limited to case reports because the topic does not lend itself well to randomized controlled trials.

A recent systematic review found no adverse outcomes among the 27 published cases in which clozapine was continued during myelosuppressive chemotherapy.¹ The most notable finding was an association between clozapine discontinuation and psychiatric decompensation, which was reported in 12 of 13 cases in which clozapine was prophylactically discontinued to minimize the risk of agranulocytosis.

Patient-specific factors must also be considered, such as the likelihood that psychotic symptoms will recur or worsen if clozapine is discontinued, as well as the extent to which symptom recurrence would interfere with cancer treatment. Clinicians should evaluate the feasibility of switching to another antipsychotic by obtaining a thorough history of the patient’s previous antipsychotics, doses, treatment duration, and response. However, many patients are treated with clozapine because their psychotic symptoms did not improve with other treatments. The character and severity of the patient’s psychotic symptoms when untreated or prior to clozapine treatment can provide a clearer understanding of how a recurrence of symptoms may interfere with cancer treatment. To formulate an accurate assessment of risks and benefits, it is necessary to consider both available evidence and patient-specific factors. The significant agitation and paranoia that Mr. A experienced when not taking clozapine was likely to disrupt chemotherapy. Thus, the adverse consequences of discontinuing clozapine were both severe and likely.

TREATMENT Continuing clozapine

After an extensive discussion of risks, benefits, and alternative treatments with the hematology and psychiatry teams, Mr. A and his family decide to continue clozapine with increased ANC monitoring during chemotherapy. Concurrent treatment was pursued with close collaboration among the patient, the patient’s family, and the hematology and pharmacy teams, and in careful consideration of the clozapine risk evaluation and mitigation strategy. Mr. A’s ANC was monitored daily during chemotherapy treatments and weekly in the intervals between treatments.

As expected, chemotherapy resulted in bone marrow suppression and pancytopenia. Mr. A’s ANC steadily decreased during the next 10 days until it reached 0 µL. This was consistent with the predicted ANC nadir between Day 10 and Day 14, after which recovery was expected. However, Mr. A’s ANC remained at 0 µL on Day 15.

[polldaddy:11125947]

Continue to: The authors' observations

Temporary decreases in ANC are expected during chemotherapy, and the timing of onset and recovery is often well characterized. Prior to Day 15, the observed progressive marrow suppression was solely due to chemotherapy. However, because Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL longer than anticipated, reevaluation of clozapine’s effects was warranted.

Timing, clinical course, and comprehensive hematologic monitoring can provide important clues as to whether clozapine may be responsible for prolonged neutropenia. Though a prolonged ANC of 0 µL raised concern for clozapine-induced agranulocytosis (CIAG), comprehensive monitoring of hematologic cell lines was reassuring because CIAG selectively targets granulocytic cells (neutrophils).² In contrast, chemo­therapy can affect other cell lineages, including lymphocytes, red blood cells, and platelets, which causes pancytopenia.³ For Mr. A, though the clinical presentation of pancytopenia was significant and concerning, it was inconsistent with CIAG.

Additionally, the patient’s baseline risk of CIAG should be considered. After 18 weeks of clozapine treatment, the risk of CIAG decreases to a level similar to that associated with other antipsychotics.^4,5 Therefore, CIAG would be unlikely in a patient treated with clozapine for more than 1 year and who did not have a history of neutropenia, as was the case with Mr. A.

While bone marrow biopsy can help differentiate between the causes of agranulocytosis,⁶ it is highly invasive and may not be necessary if laboratory evidence is sufficient. However, if a treatment team is strongly considering discontinuing clozapine and there are no suitable alternatives, a biopsy may provide additional clarification.

TREATMENT CAR T-cell therapy and cancer remission

Clozapine is continued with daily monitoring. On Day 19, Mr. A’s ANC increases, reaching 2,600 µL by discharge on Day 40. Mr. A remains psychiatrically stable throughout his hospitalization and does not experience any complications associated with neutropenia, despite its prolonged duration.

Continue to: Unfortunately, multiple cycles of...

Unfortunately, multiple cycles of chemo­therapy fail to induce remission. Mr. A is referred for CD19/CD22 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, which helps achieve remission. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is recommended to maximize the likelihood of sustained remission.⁷ As with chemotherapy, Mr. A and his family agree with the multidisciplinary treatment recommendation to continue clozapine during both CAR T-cell therapy and HSCT, because the risks associated with psychiatric decompensation were greater than a potential increased risk of agranulocytosis. Clozapine treatment is continued throughout both therapies without issue.

Four months after HSCT, Mr. A is admitted for neutropenic fever and left face cellulitis. Upon admission, his ANC is 30 µL and subsequently decreases to 0 µL. In addition to neutropenia, Mr. A is also anemic and thrombocytopenic. He undergoes a bone marrow biopsy.

[polldaddy:11125950]

The authors’ observations

While no published cases have examined the bone marrow of patients experiencing CIAG, 2 retrospective studies have characterized 2 classes of bone marrow findings associated with drug-induced agranulocytosis resulting from nonchemotherapeutic agents (Table).^8,9 Type I marrow appears hypercellular with adequate neutrophil precursors but an arrested neutrophil maturation, with few or no mature forms of neutrophils beyond myelocytes.^8,9 Type II demonstrates a severe reduction or complete absence of granulocytic precursors with normal or increased erythropoiesis and megakaryocytes.^8,9 These findings have been used to accurately differentiate between chemotherapy and nonchemotherapy drug-induced agranulocytosis,⁶ resulting in successful identification and discontinuation of the responsible agent.

Mr. A’s bone marrow biopsy showed severe pancytopenia with profound neutropenia and normocytic anemia, without evidence of residual leukemia, inconsistent with Type I or Type II. Findings were suggestive of a myelodysplastic syndrome, consistent with secondary graft failure. Symptoms resolved after treatment with antibiotics, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, epoetin alfa, and thrombopoietin. Mr. A’s ANC remained 0 µL for 22 days before returning to normal (>1,500 µL) by Day 29. He had no secondary complications resulting from neutropenia. As the clinical evidence suggested, Mr. A’s neutropenia was unlikely to be due to clozapine. Clozapine was continued throughout his cancer treatment, and he remained psychiatrically stable.

Clozapine, cancer treatments, and agranulocytosis

This case demonstrates that clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even with the development of agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Evidence to guide psychiatric clinicians to evaluate the likelihood that agranulocytosis is clozapine-induced is limited.

Continue to: We offer an algorithm...

We offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma (Figure). Based on our experience and limited current evidence, we recommend continuing clozapine during cancer treatment unless there is clear evidence to suggest otherwise. Presently, no evidence in published literature suggests worsened outcomes in patients treated concurrently with clozapine and cancer therapies.

OUTCOME Cancer-free and psychiatrically stable

Mr. A continues clozapine therapy throughout all phases of treatment, without interruption. No adverse effects are determined to be secondary to clozapine. He remains psychiatrically stable throughout treatment, and able to participate and engage in his oncologic therapy. Mr. A is now more than 1 year in remission with no recurrence of graft failure, and his psychiatric symptoms continue to be well controlled with clozapine.

Bottom Line

Clozapine can be safely continued during a variety of cancer treatments (ie, chemotherapy, CAR T-cell therapy, HSCT), even in patients who develop agranulocytosis and prolonged neutropenia. Based on our experience and limited evidence, we offer an algorithm to assist clinicians faced with this challenging clinical dilemma.

Related Resources

• Grainger BT, Arcasoy MO, Kenedi CA. Feasibility of myelosuppressive chemotherapy in psychiatric patients on clozapine: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Haematol. 2019;103(4):277-286. doi:10.1111/ejh.13285
• Daniel JS, Gross T. Managing clozapine-induced neutropenia and agranulocytosis. Current Psychiatry. 2016;15(12):51-53.

Drug Brand Names

Aripiprazole • Abilify
Clozapine • Clozaril
Divalproex sodium • Depakote
Epoetin alfa • Epogen
Haloperidol • Haldol
Olanzapine • Zyprexa
Quetiapine • Seroquel
Risperidone • Risperdal
Ziprasidone • Geodon

Boarding of psychiatric patients in the emergency department (ED) has been well documented.¹ Numerous researchers have discussed ways to address this public health crisis. In this Pearl, I use the acronym BOARDING to provide key strategies for psychiatric clinicians managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in an ED.

Be vigilant. As a patient’s time waiting in the ED increases, watch for clinical blind spots. New medical problems,² psychiatric issues, or medication errors³ may unexpectedly arise since the patient was originally stabilized by emergency medicine clinicians.

Orders. Since the patient could be waiting in the ED for 24 hours or longer, consider starting orders (eg, precautions, medications, diet, vital sign checks, labs, etc) as you would for a patient in an inpatient psychiatric unit or a dedicated psychiatric ED.

AWOL. Unlike inpatient psychiatric units, EDs generally are not locked. Extra resources (eg, sitter, safety alarm bracelet) may be needed to help prevent patients from leaving this setting unnoticed, especially those on involuntary psychiatric holds.

Re-evaluate. Ideally, re-evaluate the patient every shift. Does the patient still need an inpatient psychiatric setting? Can the involuntary psychiatric hold be discontinued?

Disposition. Is there a family member or reliable caregiver to whom the patient can be discharged? Can the patient go to a shelter or be stabilized in a short-term residential program, instead of an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Inpatient. If the patient waits 24 hours or longer, begin thinking like an inpatient psychiatric clinician. Are there any interventions you can reasonably begin in the ED that you would otherwise begin on an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Nursing. Work with ED nursing staff to familiarize them with the patient’s specific needs.

Guidelines. With the input of clinical and administrative leadership, establish local hospital-based guidelines for managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in the ED.

Boarding of psychiatric patients in the emergency department (ED) has been well documented.¹ Numerous researchers have discussed ways to address this public health crisis. In this Pearl, I use the acronym BOARDING to provide key strategies for psychiatric clinicians managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in an ED.

Be vigilant. As a patient’s time waiting in the ED increases, watch for clinical blind spots. New medical problems,² psychiatric issues, or medication errors³ may unexpectedly arise since the patient was originally stabilized by emergency medicine clinicians.

Orders. Since the patient could be waiting in the ED for 24 hours or longer, consider starting orders (eg, precautions, medications, diet, vital sign checks, labs, etc) as you would for a patient in an inpatient psychiatric unit or a dedicated psychiatric ED.

AWOL. Unlike inpatient psychiatric units, EDs generally are not locked. Extra resources (eg, sitter, safety alarm bracelet) may be needed to help prevent patients from leaving this setting unnoticed, especially those on involuntary psychiatric holds.

Re-evaluate. Ideally, re-evaluate the patient every shift. Does the patient still need an inpatient psychiatric setting? Can the involuntary psychiatric hold be discontinued?

Disposition. Is there a family member or reliable caregiver to whom the patient can be discharged? Can the patient go to a shelter or be stabilized in a short-term residential program, instead of an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Inpatient. If the patient waits 24 hours or longer, begin thinking like an inpatient psychiatric clinician. Are there any interventions you can reasonably begin in the ED that you would otherwise begin on an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Nursing. Work with ED nursing staff to familiarize them with the patient’s specific needs.

Guidelines. With the input of clinical and administrative leadership, establish local hospital-based guidelines for managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in the ED.

Boarding of psychiatric patients in the emergency department (ED) has been well documented.¹ Numerous researchers have discussed ways to address this public health crisis. In this Pearl, I use the acronym BOARDING to provide key strategies for psychiatric clinicians managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in an ED.

Be vigilant. As a patient’s time waiting in the ED increases, watch for clinical blind spots. New medical problems,² psychiatric issues, or medication errors³ may unexpectedly arise since the patient was originally stabilized by emergency medicine clinicians.

Orders. Since the patient could be waiting in the ED for 24 hours or longer, consider starting orders (eg, precautions, medications, diet, vital sign checks, labs, etc) as you would for a patient in an inpatient psychiatric unit or a dedicated psychiatric ED.

AWOL. Unlike inpatient psychiatric units, EDs generally are not locked. Extra resources (eg, sitter, safety alarm bracelet) may be needed to help prevent patients from leaving this setting unnoticed, especially those on involuntary psychiatric holds.

Re-evaluate. Ideally, re-evaluate the patient every shift. Does the patient still need an inpatient psychiatric setting? Can the involuntary psychiatric hold be discontinued?

Disposition. Is there a family member or reliable caregiver to whom the patient can be discharged? Can the patient go to a shelter or be stabilized in a short-term residential program, instead of an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Inpatient. If the patient waits 24 hours or longer, begin thinking like an inpatient psychiatric clinician. Are there any interventions you can reasonably begin in the ED that you would otherwise begin on an inpatient psychiatric unit?

Nursing. Work with ED nursing staff to familiarize them with the patient’s specific needs.

Guidelines. With the input of clinical and administrative leadership, establish local hospital-based guidelines for managing psychiatric patients who are boarding in the ED.

It has been clearly established that most human infectious diseases are caused by infectious agents that have been transmitted from animals to humans.¹ Based on published estimates from the 2000s, 60% to 76% of emerging infectious disease events are transmitted from animals to humans.²

When we consider animals that cause human diseases, we usually think of rats and bats. We rarely think of the 90 million cats owned as pets in the United States, or the approximately 30 to 80 million feral cats. Many consider cats as family members, and three-fourths of cats owned in the United States are allowed to sleep on the beds of their owners.¹ These cats may be a substantial source of human disease. Researchers at the University of Liverpool have identified 273 infectious agents carried by cats, of which 151 are known to be shared with humans.¹ The most widely known of these agents are Lyssavirus, the virus that causes rabies; Bartonella henselae, the bacteria that causes cat scratch disease; and Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii), the parasite that causes toxoplasmosis.

In my new open-access book Parasites, Pussycats and Psychosis (available at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6), I describe the relationship between cats, T. gondii, and toxoplasmosis, and detail the evidence linking T. gondii to some cases of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other diseases.¹ Though human T. gondii infection is typically asymptomatic or produces minor, flu-like symptoms, there are a few important exceptions. This article outlines those exceptions, and investigates evidence that implicates a link between T. gondii and psychosis.

How T. gondii can be transmitted

T. gondii has been called “one of the most successful parasites on earth.”³ Globally, approximately one-third of the human population is infected with T. gondii, though this varies widely by country and is dependent on dietary habits and exposure to cats. A 2014 survey reported that 11% of Americans—approximately 40 million people—have been infected, as evidenced by the presence of antibodies in their blood.¹

T. gondii begins its life cycle when a cat becomes infected, usually as a kitten. Most infected cats are asymptomatic, but for approximately 8 days they excrete up to 50 million infectious oocysts in their feces daily. Depending on the temperature, these oocysts can live for 2 years or longer.It is thought that a single oocyst can cause human infection.¹ Since cats like loose soil for defecation, the infective oocysts commonly end up in gardens, uncovered sandboxes, or animal feed piles in barns. After 24 hours, the oocysts dry out and may become aerosolized. For this reason, cat owners are advised to change their cat’s litter daily.

The number of ways T. gondii can be transmitted to humans is extensive. Farm animals can become infected from contaminated feed; this causes T. gondii oocysts in animals’ muscles, which later may cause human infection if eaten as undercooked meat. Many such family outbreaks of toxoplasmosis have been described.¹

If infective oocysts get into the water supply, they may also cause outbreaks of disease. More than 200 such outbreaks have been described, including an instance in Victoria, British Columbia, in which 100 people became clinically infected.⁴

Continue to: Family outbreaks...

Family outbreaks have also been described that involve multiple children who played in an infected sandbox or dirt pile.⁵ Similarly, an outbreak has been reported in a riding stable that was home to infected cats. Infective oocysts were thought to have become aerosolized and breathed in by the patrons.⁶ Multiple other possible modes of transmission are being investigated, including sexual transmission among humans.⁷

Human infections are not always benign

In most human T. gondii cases, the infected individual experiences mild, flu-like symptoms, often with enlarged lymph nodes, or has no symptoms.¹ Thus, most people who have been infected with T. gondii are unaware because clinicians do not routinely test for it.

There are 3 exceptions to this otherwise benign clinical picture. The first is cerebral toxoplasmosis, which occurs in individuals who are immunosuppressed because they have AIDS or are receiving treatment for cancer or organ transplantation. Cerebral toxoplasmosis can be severe and was a common cause of death in patients with AIDS before the development of effective AIDS treatments.

The second exception is congenital toxoplasmosis, when an infection occurs in a pregnant woman. Such infections can cause severe damage to the developing fetus, including abortion, stillbirth, and brain damage. Congenital toxoplasmosis infections occur in approximately 1 of every 10,000 births in the United States, or approximately 3,800 each year.⁸ As a result, pregnant women are advised not to change their cat’s litter and to be tested for evidence of T. gondii infection.

The third exception is eye disease. Toxoplasmosis is one of the most common causes of eye disease, especially of the retina. Each year in the United States, approximately 4,800 individuals develop systematic ocular toxoplasmosis.⁹

Continue to: Toxoplasmosis and psychosis

Until recently, cerebral infections, congenital infections, and eye disease were thought to be the main clinical problems associated with toxoplasmosis. However, accumulating evidence suggests that psychosis should be added to this list. Five lines of evidence support this.

1. T. gondii can cause psychotic symptoms. It has been known for decades that T. gondii can cause delusions, auditory hallucinations, and other psychotic symptoms.¹ In one of the earliest publications (1966), Ladee¹⁰ concluded “The literature not infrequently focuses attention on psychosis with schizophrenia or schizophreniform features that accompany chronic toxoplasmosis.” Among the cases Ladee¹⁰ described was a laboratory worker who became infected with T. gondii and developed delusions and hallucinations.¹⁰

2. Patients with schizophrenia who are infected with T. gondii have more severe psychotic symptoms. This finding has been reported in at least 7 studies.¹ Holub et al¹¹ evaluated 251 patients with schizophrenia who were treated in Prague Psychiatric Centre between 2000 and 2010. Overall, 57 participants were infected with T. gondii and 194 were not infected. Compared to those who were not infected, the infected group:

• had significantly more severe symptoms (P = .032) as measured on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale
• were prescribed higher doses of antipsychotic medications
• had been hospitalized longer.¹¹

3. Compared with controls, patients with psychosis are significantly more likely to have antibodies against T. gondii, indicating previous infection. To date there have been approximately 100 such studies, of which at least three-fourths reported a positive association. In a 2012 meta-analysis of 38 such studies, Torrey et al¹² reported an odds ratio (OR) of 2.7—compared to persons who have not been infected, those who have been infected with T. gondii were 2.7 times more likely to have schizophrenia.¹² This study replicated the findings of a previous meta-analysis of 23 antibody studies, which also found an OR of 2.7.¹³

4. Compared with controls, individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder are significantly more likely as a child to have lived in a home with a cat. Since 1995, 10 such studies have been published; 7 were positive, 2 were negative, and 1 was inconclusive.¹ Torrey et al¹⁴ reviewed 2,025 individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and 4,847 controls and found that 51% of the cases and 43% of the controls had owned a cat before age 13; this difference was highly significant (P < .001). In fact, it is surprising that any study can find a statistically significant association between cat ownership and childhood psychosis. This is because a child who did not own a cat could become infected in many locations where cats have been present, including sandboxes at school, a babysitter’s or friend’s house, or a public park. And even if a child became infected at home, they would not necessarily have owned a cat, since the neighbor’s cat could have been responsible for the oocyst contamination.

Continue to: Epidemiologically...

5. Epidemiologically, there is a close temporal correlation between the rise of cats as pets and the rise of psychosis. This can be illustrated most clearly in England, where the rise of cat ownership has been documented by writers and where there is data on the rise of psychosis, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries.¹

How many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii?

In 2014, using data from the antibody studies discussed above,^12,13 Smith¹⁵ sought to discover how many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii. He concluded that 21% of cases of schizophrenia might have been caused by T. gondii. Based on the annual incidence of schizophrenia in the United States, this would mean an estimated >10,000 new cases of schizophrenia each year are attributable to this parasite.

Some researchers have found links between T. gondii and several nonpsychiatric diseases and conditions, including epilepsy and brain cancer (Box^1,16-19).

Box

Clinical implications: What to tell patients about cats

What do these studies of toxoplasmosis imply for psychiatric care? As mental health professionals, part of our job is to educate our patients. Anything that appears to be a risk factor for the development of psychosis is thus of interest. Consider discussing the following with your patients.

Are cats safe? Cats that are kept exclusively indoors are safe pets because they are unlikely to become infected with T. gondii. However, cats that are allowed to go outdoors may not be safe, especially for children and young adults. What is needed is an effective vaccine that could be given to newborn kittens to prevent infection, but development of this type of vaccine has never been prioritized. At the community level, programs to decrease the number of stray and feral cats would also decrease the risk of infection.

Continue to: How to decrease risk

How to decrease risk. On a personal level, we can decrease T. gondii infections by not eating undercooked meat. Pregnant women and individuals who are immunocompromised should not change cat litter. When gardening, we should wear gloves because cats favor loose soil for depositing their feces. We should also protect children by covering sandboxes when not in use and by not allowing children to play in uncovered public sandboxes.

Treatment. Toxoplasmosis typically is treated with pyrimethamine, usually in combination with a sulfa drug. However, pyrimethamine does not cross the blood brain barrier and thus is ineffective when T. gondii infects the brain. The development of a drug that will effectively treat T. gondii in the brain should be a high priority.

For additional details on the studies discussed in this article as well as more resources on the impact T. gondii can have if proper precautions are not taken, see my open-access book at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6.

Bottom Line

Some evidence suggests that infection with Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) may cause psychotic symptoms, may increase an individual’s risk of developing psychosis, and may result in more severe psychotic symptoms. Cats can transmit T. gondii to humans. Educate patients that they can reduce their risk by keeping their cats inside, avoiding exposure to cat feces, particularly while pregnant or if immunocompromised, and not eating undercooked meat.

Related Resources

• Torrey EF. Parasites, Pussycats, and Psychosis: The Unknown Dangers of Human Toxoplasmosis. Springer Nature; 2022. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6

Drug Brand Names

Pyrimethamine • Daraprim

It has been clearly established that most human infectious diseases are caused by infectious agents that have been transmitted from animals to humans.¹ Based on published estimates from the 2000s, 60% to 76% of emerging infectious disease events are transmitted from animals to humans.²

When we consider animals that cause human diseases, we usually think of rats and bats. We rarely think of the 90 million cats owned as pets in the United States, or the approximately 30 to 80 million feral cats. Many consider cats as family members, and three-fourths of cats owned in the United States are allowed to sleep on the beds of their owners.¹ These cats may be a substantial source of human disease. Researchers at the University of Liverpool have identified 273 infectious agents carried by cats, of which 151 are known to be shared with humans.¹ The most widely known of these agents are Lyssavirus, the virus that causes rabies; Bartonella henselae, the bacteria that causes cat scratch disease; and Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii), the parasite that causes toxoplasmosis.

In my new open-access book Parasites, Pussycats and Psychosis (available at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6), I describe the relationship between cats, T. gondii, and toxoplasmosis, and detail the evidence linking T. gondii to some cases of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other diseases.¹ Though human T. gondii infection is typically asymptomatic or produces minor, flu-like symptoms, there are a few important exceptions. This article outlines those exceptions, and investigates evidence that implicates a link between T. gondii and psychosis.

How T. gondii can be transmitted

T. gondii has been called “one of the most successful parasites on earth.”³ Globally, approximately one-third of the human population is infected with T. gondii, though this varies widely by country and is dependent on dietary habits and exposure to cats. A 2014 survey reported that 11% of Americans—approximately 40 million people—have been infected, as evidenced by the presence of antibodies in their blood.¹

T. gondii begins its life cycle when a cat becomes infected, usually as a kitten. Most infected cats are asymptomatic, but for approximately 8 days they excrete up to 50 million infectious oocysts in their feces daily. Depending on the temperature, these oocysts can live for 2 years or longer.It is thought that a single oocyst can cause human infection.¹ Since cats like loose soil for defecation, the infective oocysts commonly end up in gardens, uncovered sandboxes, or animal feed piles in barns. After 24 hours, the oocysts dry out and may become aerosolized. For this reason, cat owners are advised to change their cat’s litter daily.

The number of ways T. gondii can be transmitted to humans is extensive. Farm animals can become infected from contaminated feed; this causes T. gondii oocysts in animals’ muscles, which later may cause human infection if eaten as undercooked meat. Many such family outbreaks of toxoplasmosis have been described.¹

If infective oocysts get into the water supply, they may also cause outbreaks of disease. More than 200 such outbreaks have been described, including an instance in Victoria, British Columbia, in which 100 people became clinically infected.⁴

Continue to: Family outbreaks...

Family outbreaks have also been described that involve multiple children who played in an infected sandbox or dirt pile.⁵ Similarly, an outbreak has been reported in a riding stable that was home to infected cats. Infective oocysts were thought to have become aerosolized and breathed in by the patrons.⁶ Multiple other possible modes of transmission are being investigated, including sexual transmission among humans.⁷

Human infections are not always benign

In most human T. gondii cases, the infected individual experiences mild, flu-like symptoms, often with enlarged lymph nodes, or has no symptoms.¹ Thus, most people who have been infected with T. gondii are unaware because clinicians do not routinely test for it.

There are 3 exceptions to this otherwise benign clinical picture. The first is cerebral toxoplasmosis, which occurs in individuals who are immunosuppressed because they have AIDS or are receiving treatment for cancer or organ transplantation. Cerebral toxoplasmosis can be severe and was a common cause of death in patients with AIDS before the development of effective AIDS treatments.

The second exception is congenital toxoplasmosis, when an infection occurs in a pregnant woman. Such infections can cause severe damage to the developing fetus, including abortion, stillbirth, and brain damage. Congenital toxoplasmosis infections occur in approximately 1 of every 10,000 births in the United States, or approximately 3,800 each year.⁸ As a result, pregnant women are advised not to change their cat’s litter and to be tested for evidence of T. gondii infection.

The third exception is eye disease. Toxoplasmosis is one of the most common causes of eye disease, especially of the retina. Each year in the United States, approximately 4,800 individuals develop systematic ocular toxoplasmosis.⁹

Continue to: Toxoplasmosis and psychosis

Until recently, cerebral infections, congenital infections, and eye disease were thought to be the main clinical problems associated with toxoplasmosis. However, accumulating evidence suggests that psychosis should be added to this list. Five lines of evidence support this.

1. T. gondii can cause psychotic symptoms. It has been known for decades that T. gondii can cause delusions, auditory hallucinations, and other psychotic symptoms.¹ In one of the earliest publications (1966), Ladee¹⁰ concluded “The literature not infrequently focuses attention on psychosis with schizophrenia or schizophreniform features that accompany chronic toxoplasmosis.” Among the cases Ladee¹⁰ described was a laboratory worker who became infected with T. gondii and developed delusions and hallucinations.¹⁰

2. Patients with schizophrenia who are infected with T. gondii have more severe psychotic symptoms. This finding has been reported in at least 7 studies.¹ Holub et al¹¹ evaluated 251 patients with schizophrenia who were treated in Prague Psychiatric Centre between 2000 and 2010. Overall, 57 participants were infected with T. gondii and 194 were not infected. Compared to those who were not infected, the infected group:

• had significantly more severe symptoms (P = .032) as measured on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale
• were prescribed higher doses of antipsychotic medications
• had been hospitalized longer.¹¹

3. Compared with controls, patients with psychosis are significantly more likely to have antibodies against T. gondii, indicating previous infection. To date there have been approximately 100 such studies, of which at least three-fourths reported a positive association. In a 2012 meta-analysis of 38 such studies, Torrey et al¹² reported an odds ratio (OR) of 2.7—compared to persons who have not been infected, those who have been infected with T. gondii were 2.7 times more likely to have schizophrenia.¹² This study replicated the findings of a previous meta-analysis of 23 antibody studies, which also found an OR of 2.7.¹³

4. Compared with controls, individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder are significantly more likely as a child to have lived in a home with a cat. Since 1995, 10 such studies have been published; 7 were positive, 2 were negative, and 1 was inconclusive.¹ Torrey et al¹⁴ reviewed 2,025 individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and 4,847 controls and found that 51% of the cases and 43% of the controls had owned a cat before age 13; this difference was highly significant (P < .001). In fact, it is surprising that any study can find a statistically significant association between cat ownership and childhood psychosis. This is because a child who did not own a cat could become infected in many locations where cats have been present, including sandboxes at school, a babysitter’s or friend’s house, or a public park. And even if a child became infected at home, they would not necessarily have owned a cat, since the neighbor’s cat could have been responsible for the oocyst contamination.

Continue to: Epidemiologically...

5. Epidemiologically, there is a close temporal correlation between the rise of cats as pets and the rise of psychosis. This can be illustrated most clearly in England, where the rise of cat ownership has been documented by writers and where there is data on the rise of psychosis, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries.¹

How many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii?

In 2014, using data from the antibody studies discussed above,^12,13 Smith¹⁵ sought to discover how many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii. He concluded that 21% of cases of schizophrenia might have been caused by T. gondii. Based on the annual incidence of schizophrenia in the United States, this would mean an estimated >10,000 new cases of schizophrenia each year are attributable to this parasite.

Some researchers have found links between T. gondii and several nonpsychiatric diseases and conditions, including epilepsy and brain cancer (Box^1,16-19).

Box

Clinical implications: What to tell patients about cats

What do these studies of toxoplasmosis imply for psychiatric care? As mental health professionals, part of our job is to educate our patients. Anything that appears to be a risk factor for the development of psychosis is thus of interest. Consider discussing the following with your patients.

Are cats safe? Cats that are kept exclusively indoors are safe pets because they are unlikely to become infected with T. gondii. However, cats that are allowed to go outdoors may not be safe, especially for children and young adults. What is needed is an effective vaccine that could be given to newborn kittens to prevent infection, but development of this type of vaccine has never been prioritized. At the community level, programs to decrease the number of stray and feral cats would also decrease the risk of infection.

Continue to: How to decrease risk

How to decrease risk. On a personal level, we can decrease T. gondii infections by not eating undercooked meat. Pregnant women and individuals who are immunocompromised should not change cat litter. When gardening, we should wear gloves because cats favor loose soil for depositing their feces. We should also protect children by covering sandboxes when not in use and by not allowing children to play in uncovered public sandboxes.

Treatment. Toxoplasmosis typically is treated with pyrimethamine, usually in combination with a sulfa drug. However, pyrimethamine does not cross the blood brain barrier and thus is ineffective when T. gondii infects the brain. The development of a drug that will effectively treat T. gondii in the brain should be a high priority.

For additional details on the studies discussed in this article as well as more resources on the impact T. gondii can have if proper precautions are not taken, see my open-access book at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6.

Bottom Line

Some evidence suggests that infection with Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) may cause psychotic symptoms, may increase an individual’s risk of developing psychosis, and may result in more severe psychotic symptoms. Cats can transmit T. gondii to humans. Educate patients that they can reduce their risk by keeping their cats inside, avoiding exposure to cat feces, particularly while pregnant or if immunocompromised, and not eating undercooked meat.

Related Resources

• Torrey EF. Parasites, Pussycats, and Psychosis: The Unknown Dangers of Human Toxoplasmosis. Springer Nature; 2022. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6

Drug Brand Names

Pyrimethamine • Daraprim

It has been clearly established that most human infectious diseases are caused by infectious agents that have been transmitted from animals to humans.¹ Based on published estimates from the 2000s, 60% to 76% of emerging infectious disease events are transmitted from animals to humans.²

When we consider animals that cause human diseases, we usually think of rats and bats. We rarely think of the 90 million cats owned as pets in the United States, or the approximately 30 to 80 million feral cats. Many consider cats as family members, and three-fourths of cats owned in the United States are allowed to sleep on the beds of their owners.¹ These cats may be a substantial source of human disease. Researchers at the University of Liverpool have identified 273 infectious agents carried by cats, of which 151 are known to be shared with humans.¹ The most widely known of these agents are Lyssavirus, the virus that causes rabies; Bartonella henselae, the bacteria that causes cat scratch disease; and Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii), the parasite that causes toxoplasmosis.

In my new open-access book Parasites, Pussycats and Psychosis (available at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6), I describe the relationship between cats, T. gondii, and toxoplasmosis, and detail the evidence linking T. gondii to some cases of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and other diseases.¹ Though human T. gondii infection is typically asymptomatic or produces minor, flu-like symptoms, there are a few important exceptions. This article outlines those exceptions, and investigates evidence that implicates a link between T. gondii and psychosis.

How T. gondii can be transmitted

T. gondii has been called “one of the most successful parasites on earth.”³ Globally, approximately one-third of the human population is infected with T. gondii, though this varies widely by country and is dependent on dietary habits and exposure to cats. A 2014 survey reported that 11% of Americans—approximately 40 million people—have been infected, as evidenced by the presence of antibodies in their blood.¹

T. gondii begins its life cycle when a cat becomes infected, usually as a kitten. Most infected cats are asymptomatic, but for approximately 8 days they excrete up to 50 million infectious oocysts in their feces daily. Depending on the temperature, these oocysts can live for 2 years or longer.It is thought that a single oocyst can cause human infection.¹ Since cats like loose soil for defecation, the infective oocysts commonly end up in gardens, uncovered sandboxes, or animal feed piles in barns. After 24 hours, the oocysts dry out and may become aerosolized. For this reason, cat owners are advised to change their cat’s litter daily.

The number of ways T. gondii can be transmitted to humans is extensive. Farm animals can become infected from contaminated feed; this causes T. gondii oocysts in animals’ muscles, which later may cause human infection if eaten as undercooked meat. Many such family outbreaks of toxoplasmosis have been described.¹

If infective oocysts get into the water supply, they may also cause outbreaks of disease. More than 200 such outbreaks have been described, including an instance in Victoria, British Columbia, in which 100 people became clinically infected.⁴

Continue to: Family outbreaks...

Family outbreaks have also been described that involve multiple children who played in an infected sandbox or dirt pile.⁵ Similarly, an outbreak has been reported in a riding stable that was home to infected cats. Infective oocysts were thought to have become aerosolized and breathed in by the patrons.⁶ Multiple other possible modes of transmission are being investigated, including sexual transmission among humans.⁷

Human infections are not always benign

In most human T. gondii cases, the infected individual experiences mild, flu-like symptoms, often with enlarged lymph nodes, or has no symptoms.¹ Thus, most people who have been infected with T. gondii are unaware because clinicians do not routinely test for it.

There are 3 exceptions to this otherwise benign clinical picture. The first is cerebral toxoplasmosis, which occurs in individuals who are immunosuppressed because they have AIDS or are receiving treatment for cancer or organ transplantation. Cerebral toxoplasmosis can be severe and was a common cause of death in patients with AIDS before the development of effective AIDS treatments.

The second exception is congenital toxoplasmosis, when an infection occurs in a pregnant woman. Such infections can cause severe damage to the developing fetus, including abortion, stillbirth, and brain damage. Congenital toxoplasmosis infections occur in approximately 1 of every 10,000 births in the United States, or approximately 3,800 each year.⁸ As a result, pregnant women are advised not to change their cat’s litter and to be tested for evidence of T. gondii infection.

The third exception is eye disease. Toxoplasmosis is one of the most common causes of eye disease, especially of the retina. Each year in the United States, approximately 4,800 individuals develop systematic ocular toxoplasmosis.⁹

Continue to: Toxoplasmosis and psychosis

Until recently, cerebral infections, congenital infections, and eye disease were thought to be the main clinical problems associated with toxoplasmosis. However, accumulating evidence suggests that psychosis should be added to this list. Five lines of evidence support this.

1. T. gondii can cause psychotic symptoms. It has been known for decades that T. gondii can cause delusions, auditory hallucinations, and other psychotic symptoms.¹ In one of the earliest publications (1966), Ladee¹⁰ concluded “The literature not infrequently focuses attention on psychosis with schizophrenia or schizophreniform features that accompany chronic toxoplasmosis.” Among the cases Ladee¹⁰ described was a laboratory worker who became infected with T. gondii and developed delusions and hallucinations.¹⁰

2. Patients with schizophrenia who are infected with T. gondii have more severe psychotic symptoms. This finding has been reported in at least 7 studies.¹ Holub et al¹¹ evaluated 251 patients with schizophrenia who were treated in Prague Psychiatric Centre between 2000 and 2010. Overall, 57 participants were infected with T. gondii and 194 were not infected. Compared to those who were not infected, the infected group:

• had significantly more severe symptoms (P = .032) as measured on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale
• were prescribed higher doses of antipsychotic medications
• had been hospitalized longer.¹¹

3. Compared with controls, patients with psychosis are significantly more likely to have antibodies against T. gondii, indicating previous infection. To date there have been approximately 100 such studies, of which at least three-fourths reported a positive association. In a 2012 meta-analysis of 38 such studies, Torrey et al¹² reported an odds ratio (OR) of 2.7—compared to persons who have not been infected, those who have been infected with T. gondii were 2.7 times more likely to have schizophrenia.¹² This study replicated the findings of a previous meta-analysis of 23 antibody studies, which also found an OR of 2.7.¹³

4. Compared with controls, individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder are significantly more likely as a child to have lived in a home with a cat. Since 1995, 10 such studies have been published; 7 were positive, 2 were negative, and 1 was inconclusive.¹ Torrey et al¹⁴ reviewed 2,025 individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and 4,847 controls and found that 51% of the cases and 43% of the controls had owned a cat before age 13; this difference was highly significant (P < .001). In fact, it is surprising that any study can find a statistically significant association between cat ownership and childhood psychosis. This is because a child who did not own a cat could become infected in many locations where cats have been present, including sandboxes at school, a babysitter’s or friend’s house, or a public park. And even if a child became infected at home, they would not necessarily have owned a cat, since the neighbor’s cat could have been responsible for the oocyst contamination.

Continue to: Epidemiologically...

5. Epidemiologically, there is a close temporal correlation between the rise of cats as pets and the rise of psychosis. This can be illustrated most clearly in England, where the rise of cat ownership has been documented by writers and where there is data on the rise of psychosis, especially in the 18th and 19th centuries.¹

How many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii?

In 2014, using data from the antibody studies discussed above,^12,13 Smith¹⁵ sought to discover how many cases of psychosis might be caused by T. gondii. He concluded that 21% of cases of schizophrenia might have been caused by T. gondii. Based on the annual incidence of schizophrenia in the United States, this would mean an estimated >10,000 new cases of schizophrenia each year are attributable to this parasite.

Some researchers have found links between T. gondii and several nonpsychiatric diseases and conditions, including epilepsy and brain cancer (Box^1,16-19).

Box

Clinical implications: What to tell patients about cats

What do these studies of toxoplasmosis imply for psychiatric care? As mental health professionals, part of our job is to educate our patients. Anything that appears to be a risk factor for the development of psychosis is thus of interest. Consider discussing the following with your patients.

Are cats safe? Cats that are kept exclusively indoors are safe pets because they are unlikely to become infected with T. gondii. However, cats that are allowed to go outdoors may not be safe, especially for children and young adults. What is needed is an effective vaccine that could be given to newborn kittens to prevent infection, but development of this type of vaccine has never been prioritized. At the community level, programs to decrease the number of stray and feral cats would also decrease the risk of infection.

Continue to: How to decrease risk

How to decrease risk. On a personal level, we can decrease T. gondii infections by not eating undercooked meat. Pregnant women and individuals who are immunocompromised should not change cat litter. When gardening, we should wear gloves because cats favor loose soil for depositing their feces. We should also protect children by covering sandboxes when not in use and by not allowing children to play in uncovered public sandboxes.

Treatment. Toxoplasmosis typically is treated with pyrimethamine, usually in combination with a sulfa drug. However, pyrimethamine does not cross the blood brain barrier and thus is ineffective when T. gondii infects the brain. The development of a drug that will effectively treat T. gondii in the brain should be a high priority.

For additional details on the studies discussed in this article as well as more resources on the impact T. gondii can have if proper precautions are not taken, see my open-access book at https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6.

Bottom Line

Some evidence suggests that infection with Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) may cause psychotic symptoms, may increase an individual’s risk of developing psychosis, and may result in more severe psychotic symptoms. Cats can transmit T. gondii to humans. Educate patients that they can reduce their risk by keeping their cats inside, avoiding exposure to cat feces, particularly while pregnant or if immunocompromised, and not eating undercooked meat.

Related Resources

• Torrey EF. Parasites, Pussycats, and Psychosis: The Unknown Dangers of Human Toxoplasmosis. Springer Nature; 2022. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-86811-6

Drug Brand Names

Pyrimethamine • Daraprim

Medical noncompliance and patient resistance to treatment are frequent problems in medical practice. According to an older report by the US Office of Inspector General, approximately 125,000 people die each year in the United States because they do not take their medication properly.¹ The World Health Organization reported that 10% to 25% of hospital and nursing home admissions are a result of patient noncompliance.² In addition, approximately 50% of prescriptions filled for chronic diseases in developed nations are not taken correctly, and up to 40% of patients do not adhere to their treatment regimens.² Among psychiatric patients, noncompliance with medications and other treatments ranges from 25% to 75%.³

In recent years, combining pharmacotherapy with psychodynamic psychotherapy has become a fairly common form of psychiatric practice. A main reason for combining these treatments is that a patient with severe psychiatric symptoms may be unable to engage in self-reflective insightful therapy until those symptoms are substantially relieved with pharmacotherapy. The efficacy of combined pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy may also be more than additive and result in a therapeutic alliance that is greater than the sum of the 2 individual treatments.⁴ Establishing a therapeutic alliance is critical to successful treatment, but this alliance can be distorted by the needs and expectations of both the patient and the clinician.

A psychodynamic understanding of the patient and the therapeutic alliance can facilitate combined treatment in several ways. It can lead to better communication, which in turn can lead to a realistic discussion of a patient’s fears and worries about any medications they have been prescribed. A dynamically aware clinician may better understand what the symptoms mean to the patient. Such clinicians will not only be able to explain the value of a medication, its target symptoms, and the rationale for taking it, but will also be able to discuss the psychological significance of the medication, along with its medical and biological significance.⁵

This article briefly reviews the therapeutic alliance and the influence of transference (the emotional reactions of the patient towards the clinician),⁶ countertransference (the emotional reactions of the clinician towards the patient),⁶ and patient resistance/nonadherence to treatment on the failure or success of pharmacotherapy. We provide case examples to illustrate how these psychodynamic factors can be at play in prescribing.

The therapeutic alliance

The therapeutic alliance is a rational agreement or contract between a patient and the clinician; it is a cornerstone of treatment in medicine.⁶ Its basic premise is that the patient’s rational expectation that their physician is appropriately qualified, will perform a suitable evaluation, and will prescribe relevant treatment is matched by the physician’s expectation that the patient will do their best to comply with treatment recommendations. For this to succeed, the contract needs to be straightforward, and there needs to be no covert agenda. A covert agenda may be in the form of unrealistic expectations and wishes rooted in insecure experiences in childhood by either party. A patient under stress may react to the physician with mistrust, excessive demands, and noncompliance. A physician under stress may react to a patient by becoming authoritative or indecisive, or by overmedicating or underprescribing.

Transference

Transference is a phenomenon whereby a patient’s feelings and attitudes are unconsciously transferred from a person or situation in the past to the clinician or treatment in the present.⁶ For example, a patient who is scared of a serious illness may adopt a helpless, childlike role and project an omnipotent, parentlike quality on the clinician (positive transference) that may be unrealistic. Positive transference may underlie a placebo response to medication in which a patient’s response is too quick or too complete, and it may be a way of unconsciously pleasing an authoritative parent figure from childhood. On the other hand, a patient may unconsciously view their physician as a controlling parent (negative transference) and react angrily or rebelliously. A patient’s flirtatious behavior toward their physician may be a form of transference from unresolved sexual trauma during childhood. However, not all patient reactions should be considered transference; a patient may be appropriately thankful and deferential, or irritated and questioning, depending on the clinician’s demeanor and treatment approach.

Countertransference

Countertransference is the response elicited in the physician by a patient’s appearance and behaviors, or by a patient’s transference projections.⁶ This response can be positive or negative and includes both feelings and associated thoughts related to the physician’s past experiences. For example, a physician in the emergency department may get angry with a patient with an alcohol use disorder because of the physician’s negative experiences with an alcoholic parent during childhood. On the other hand, a physician raised by a compulsive mother may order unnecessary tests on a demanding older female patient. Or, a clinician raised by a sheltering parent may react to a hapless and dependent patient by spending excessive time with them or providing additional medication samples. However, not all clinician reactions are countertransference. For example, a physician’s empathic or stoic demeanor may be an appropriate emotional response to a patient’s diagnosis such as cancer.

Continue to: Patient resistance/nonadherence

In 1920, Freud conceptualized the psychodynamic factors in patient resistance to treatment and theorized that many patients were unconsciously reluctant to give up their symptoms or were driven, for transference reasons, to resist the physician.⁷ This same concept may underlie patient resistance to pharmacotherapy. When symptoms constitute an important defense mechanism, patients are likely to resist medication effects until they have developed more mature defenses or more effective ways of coping.⁸ Even when patients do not resist symptom relief, they may still resist the physician’s choice of treatment due to negative transference. Such patients often negotiate the type of medication, dose, timing of the dose, and start date as a way of trying to “keep control” of a “doctor they don’t quite trust.”⁸ They may manage their own medication regimen by taking more or less than the prescribed dose. This resistance might lead to a “nocebo” effect in which a medication trial fails not because of its ineffectiveness but instead from the unconscious mind influencing the patient’s body to resist. Nonadherence to treatment may occur in patients who have attachment difficulties that make it difficult for them to trust anyone as a result of negative childhood experiences.⁹ Clinicians need to recognize the dynamics of power struggles, control, and trust. A warm, collaborative and cooperative stance is likely to be more beneficial than an authoritative and detached approach.¹⁰

The following 3 case examples illustrate how psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and the outcomes of pharmacotherapy.

CASE 1

Mr. A, age 63, has posttraumatic stress disorder originating from his father’s death by a self-inflicted gunshot wound when Mr. A was 19, and later from the symbolic loss of his mother when she remarried. He reported vivid memories of his father sexually assaulting his mother when he was 6. This fostered a protective nature in him for his mother, as well as for his 3 younger siblings. After his father’s suicide, Mr. A had to take on a paternal role for his 3 siblings. He often feels he grew up too quickly, and resents this. He feels his mother betrayed him when she got remarried. Mr. A attempts suicide, is admitted to a local hospital, and then follows up at a university hospital outpatient psychiatry clinic.

At the clinic, Mr. A begins psychodynamic psychotherapy with a female resident physician. They establish a good rapport. Mr. A begins working through his past traumas and looks forward to his therapy sessions. The physician views this as positive transference, perhaps because her personality style and appearance are similar to that of Mr. A’s mother. She also often notes a positive counter­transference during sessions; Mr. A seemingly reminds her of her father in personality and appearance. Perhaps due to this positive transference/positive countertransference dynamic, Mr. A feels comfortable with having his medication regimen simplified after years of unsuccessful medication trials and a course of electroconvulsive therapy. His regimen soon consists of only a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a glutamate modulator as an adjunct for anxiety. Psychotherapy sessions remain the mainstay of his treatment plan. Mr. A’s mood and anxiety improve significantly over a short time.

CASE 2

Ms. G, age 24, is admitted to a partial hospitalization program (PHP). Her diagnoses include seasonal affective disorder, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); she might have a genetic disposition to bipolar disorder. Ms. G recently had attempted suicide and was discharged from an inpatient unit. She is a middle child and was raised by emotionally and verbally abusive parents in a tumultuous household. Her father rarely kept a job for more than a few months, displayed rage, and lacked empathy. Ms. G feels unloved by her mother and says that her mother is emotionally unstable. Upon admission to the PHP, Ms. G is quick to question the credentials of every staff member she meets, and suggests the abuse and lack of trust she had experienced during her formative years have made her aggressive and paranoid.

Continue to: Since her teens...

Since her teens, Ms. G had received treatment for ADHD with various stimulant and nonstimulant medications that were prescribed by an outpatient psychiatrist. During her sophomore year of college, she was also prescribed medications for depression and anxiety. Ms. G speaks very highly of and praises the skill of her previous psychiatrist while voicing concerns about having to see new clinicians in the PHP. She had recently seen a therapist who moved out of state after a few sessions. Ms. G has abandonment fears and appears to react with anger toward new clinicians.

A negative transference towards Ms. G’s treatment team and the PHP as a whole are evident during the first week. She skips most group therapy sessions and criticizes the clinicians’ skills and training as ineffective. When her psychiatrist recommends changes in medication, she initially argues. She eventually agrees to take a new medication but soon reports intolerable adverse effects, which suggests negative transference toward the psychiatrist as an authority figure, and toward the medication as an extension of the psychiatrist. The treatment team also interprets this as nocebo effect. Ms. G engages in “splitting” by complaining about her psychiatrist to her therapist. The psychiatrist resents having been belittled. Ms. G demands to see a different psychiatrist, and when her demands are not met, she discharges herself from the PHP against medical advice. The treatment team interprets Ms. G’s resistance to treatment to have resulted from poor attachment during childhood and subsequent negative transference.

CASE 3

Ms. U, age 60, is seen at a local mental health center and diagnosed with major depressive disorder, likely resulting from grief and loss from her husband’s recent death. She was raised by her single mother and mostly absent father. Ms. U is a homemaker and had been married for more than 30 years. She participates in weekly psychotherapy with a young male psychiatrist, who prescribes an antidepressant. Ms. U is eager to please and makes every effort to be the perfect patient: she is always early for her appointments, takes her medications as prescribed, and frequently expresses her respect and appreciation for her psychiatrist. Within a few weeks, Ms. U’s depressive symptoms rapidly improve.

Ms. U is a talented and avid knit and crochet expert. At an appointment soon before Christmas, she gives her psychiatrist a pair of socks she knitted. While the gift is of little monetary value, the psychiatrist interprets this as part of transference, but the intimate nature of the gift makes him uncomfortable. He and Ms. U discuss this at length, which reveals definite transference as Ms. U says the psychiatrist perhaps reminds her of her husband, who also had brown skin. It is also apparent that Ms. U’s tendency to please perhaps comes from the lack of having a father figure, which her husband had fulfilled. The psychiatrist believes that Ms. U’s rapid response may be a placebo effect from positive transference. Upon further reflection, the psychiatrist realizes that Ms. U is a motherly figure to him, and that positive countertransference is at play in that he could not turn down the gift and had looked forward to the therapy sessions with her.

Bottom Line

Even clinicians who do not provide psychodynamic psychotherapy can use an awareness of psychodynamic factors to improve treatment. Psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and patient outcomes. Patients’ experiences and difficulties with attachment during childhood should be recognized and addressed as part of pharmacotherapy.

Related Resources

• Neumann M, Silva N, Opler DJ. ARISE to supportive psychotherapy. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(5):48-49. doi:10.12788/cp.0123
• Mintz D. Psychodynamic psychopharmacology. Psychiatric Times. 2011;28(9). https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychodynamic-psychopharmacology

Medical noncompliance and patient resistance to treatment are frequent problems in medical practice. According to an older report by the US Office of Inspector General, approximately 125,000 people die each year in the United States because they do not take their medication properly.¹ The World Health Organization reported that 10% to 25% of hospital and nursing home admissions are a result of patient noncompliance.² In addition, approximately 50% of prescriptions filled for chronic diseases in developed nations are not taken correctly, and up to 40% of patients do not adhere to their treatment regimens.² Among psychiatric patients, noncompliance with medications and other treatments ranges from 25% to 75%.³

In recent years, combining pharmacotherapy with psychodynamic psychotherapy has become a fairly common form of psychiatric practice. A main reason for combining these treatments is that a patient with severe psychiatric symptoms may be unable to engage in self-reflective insightful therapy until those symptoms are substantially relieved with pharmacotherapy. The efficacy of combined pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy may also be more than additive and result in a therapeutic alliance that is greater than the sum of the 2 individual treatments.⁴ Establishing a therapeutic alliance is critical to successful treatment, but this alliance can be distorted by the needs and expectations of both the patient and the clinician.

A psychodynamic understanding of the patient and the therapeutic alliance can facilitate combined treatment in several ways. It can lead to better communication, which in turn can lead to a realistic discussion of a patient’s fears and worries about any medications they have been prescribed. A dynamically aware clinician may better understand what the symptoms mean to the patient. Such clinicians will not only be able to explain the value of a medication, its target symptoms, and the rationale for taking it, but will also be able to discuss the psychological significance of the medication, along with its medical and biological significance.⁵

This article briefly reviews the therapeutic alliance and the influence of transference (the emotional reactions of the patient towards the clinician),⁶ countertransference (the emotional reactions of the clinician towards the patient),⁶ and patient resistance/nonadherence to treatment on the failure or success of pharmacotherapy. We provide case examples to illustrate how these psychodynamic factors can be at play in prescribing.

The therapeutic alliance

The therapeutic alliance is a rational agreement or contract between a patient and the clinician; it is a cornerstone of treatment in medicine.⁶ Its basic premise is that the patient’s rational expectation that their physician is appropriately qualified, will perform a suitable evaluation, and will prescribe relevant treatment is matched by the physician’s expectation that the patient will do their best to comply with treatment recommendations. For this to succeed, the contract needs to be straightforward, and there needs to be no covert agenda. A covert agenda may be in the form of unrealistic expectations and wishes rooted in insecure experiences in childhood by either party. A patient under stress may react to the physician with mistrust, excessive demands, and noncompliance. A physician under stress may react to a patient by becoming authoritative or indecisive, or by overmedicating or underprescribing.

Transference

Transference is a phenomenon whereby a patient’s feelings and attitudes are unconsciously transferred from a person or situation in the past to the clinician or treatment in the present.⁶ For example, a patient who is scared of a serious illness may adopt a helpless, childlike role and project an omnipotent, parentlike quality on the clinician (positive transference) that may be unrealistic. Positive transference may underlie a placebo response to medication in which a patient’s response is too quick or too complete, and it may be a way of unconsciously pleasing an authoritative parent figure from childhood. On the other hand, a patient may unconsciously view their physician as a controlling parent (negative transference) and react angrily or rebelliously. A patient’s flirtatious behavior toward their physician may be a form of transference from unresolved sexual trauma during childhood. However, not all patient reactions should be considered transference; a patient may be appropriately thankful and deferential, or irritated and questioning, depending on the clinician’s demeanor and treatment approach.

Countertransference

Countertransference is the response elicited in the physician by a patient’s appearance and behaviors, or by a patient’s transference projections.⁶ This response can be positive or negative and includes both feelings and associated thoughts related to the physician’s past experiences. For example, a physician in the emergency department may get angry with a patient with an alcohol use disorder because of the physician’s negative experiences with an alcoholic parent during childhood. On the other hand, a physician raised by a compulsive mother may order unnecessary tests on a demanding older female patient. Or, a clinician raised by a sheltering parent may react to a hapless and dependent patient by spending excessive time with them or providing additional medication samples. However, not all clinician reactions are countertransference. For example, a physician’s empathic or stoic demeanor may be an appropriate emotional response to a patient’s diagnosis such as cancer.

Continue to: Patient resistance/nonadherence

In 1920, Freud conceptualized the psychodynamic factors in patient resistance to treatment and theorized that many patients were unconsciously reluctant to give up their symptoms or were driven, for transference reasons, to resist the physician.⁷ This same concept may underlie patient resistance to pharmacotherapy. When symptoms constitute an important defense mechanism, patients are likely to resist medication effects until they have developed more mature defenses or more effective ways of coping.⁸ Even when patients do not resist symptom relief, they may still resist the physician’s choice of treatment due to negative transference. Such patients often negotiate the type of medication, dose, timing of the dose, and start date as a way of trying to “keep control” of a “doctor they don’t quite trust.”⁸ They may manage their own medication regimen by taking more or less than the prescribed dose. This resistance might lead to a “nocebo” effect in which a medication trial fails not because of its ineffectiveness but instead from the unconscious mind influencing the patient’s body to resist. Nonadherence to treatment may occur in patients who have attachment difficulties that make it difficult for them to trust anyone as a result of negative childhood experiences.⁹ Clinicians need to recognize the dynamics of power struggles, control, and trust. A warm, collaborative and cooperative stance is likely to be more beneficial than an authoritative and detached approach.¹⁰

The following 3 case examples illustrate how psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and the outcomes of pharmacotherapy.

CASE 1

Mr. A, age 63, has posttraumatic stress disorder originating from his father’s death by a self-inflicted gunshot wound when Mr. A was 19, and later from the symbolic loss of his mother when she remarried. He reported vivid memories of his father sexually assaulting his mother when he was 6. This fostered a protective nature in him for his mother, as well as for his 3 younger siblings. After his father’s suicide, Mr. A had to take on a paternal role for his 3 siblings. He often feels he grew up too quickly, and resents this. He feels his mother betrayed him when she got remarried. Mr. A attempts suicide, is admitted to a local hospital, and then follows up at a university hospital outpatient psychiatry clinic.

At the clinic, Mr. A begins psychodynamic psychotherapy with a female resident physician. They establish a good rapport. Mr. A begins working through his past traumas and looks forward to his therapy sessions. The physician views this as positive transference, perhaps because her personality style and appearance are similar to that of Mr. A’s mother. She also often notes a positive counter­transference during sessions; Mr. A seemingly reminds her of her father in personality and appearance. Perhaps due to this positive transference/positive countertransference dynamic, Mr. A feels comfortable with having his medication regimen simplified after years of unsuccessful medication trials and a course of electroconvulsive therapy. His regimen soon consists of only a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a glutamate modulator as an adjunct for anxiety. Psychotherapy sessions remain the mainstay of his treatment plan. Mr. A’s mood and anxiety improve significantly over a short time.

CASE 2

Ms. G, age 24, is admitted to a partial hospitalization program (PHP). Her diagnoses include seasonal affective disorder, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); she might have a genetic disposition to bipolar disorder. Ms. G recently had attempted suicide and was discharged from an inpatient unit. She is a middle child and was raised by emotionally and verbally abusive parents in a tumultuous household. Her father rarely kept a job for more than a few months, displayed rage, and lacked empathy. Ms. G feels unloved by her mother and says that her mother is emotionally unstable. Upon admission to the PHP, Ms. G is quick to question the credentials of every staff member she meets, and suggests the abuse and lack of trust she had experienced during her formative years have made her aggressive and paranoid.

Continue to: Since her teens...

Since her teens, Ms. G had received treatment for ADHD with various stimulant and nonstimulant medications that were prescribed by an outpatient psychiatrist. During her sophomore year of college, she was also prescribed medications for depression and anxiety. Ms. G speaks very highly of and praises the skill of her previous psychiatrist while voicing concerns about having to see new clinicians in the PHP. She had recently seen a therapist who moved out of state after a few sessions. Ms. G has abandonment fears and appears to react with anger toward new clinicians.

A negative transference towards Ms. G’s treatment team and the PHP as a whole are evident during the first week. She skips most group therapy sessions and criticizes the clinicians’ skills and training as ineffective. When her psychiatrist recommends changes in medication, she initially argues. She eventually agrees to take a new medication but soon reports intolerable adverse effects, which suggests negative transference toward the psychiatrist as an authority figure, and toward the medication as an extension of the psychiatrist. The treatment team also interprets this as nocebo effect. Ms. G engages in “splitting” by complaining about her psychiatrist to her therapist. The psychiatrist resents having been belittled. Ms. G demands to see a different psychiatrist, and when her demands are not met, she discharges herself from the PHP against medical advice. The treatment team interprets Ms. G’s resistance to treatment to have resulted from poor attachment during childhood and subsequent negative transference.

CASE 3

Ms. U, age 60, is seen at a local mental health center and diagnosed with major depressive disorder, likely resulting from grief and loss from her husband’s recent death. She was raised by her single mother and mostly absent father. Ms. U is a homemaker and had been married for more than 30 years. She participates in weekly psychotherapy with a young male psychiatrist, who prescribes an antidepressant. Ms. U is eager to please and makes every effort to be the perfect patient: she is always early for her appointments, takes her medications as prescribed, and frequently expresses her respect and appreciation for her psychiatrist. Within a few weeks, Ms. U’s depressive symptoms rapidly improve.

Ms. U is a talented and avid knit and crochet expert. At an appointment soon before Christmas, she gives her psychiatrist a pair of socks she knitted. While the gift is of little monetary value, the psychiatrist interprets this as part of transference, but the intimate nature of the gift makes him uncomfortable. He and Ms. U discuss this at length, which reveals definite transference as Ms. U says the psychiatrist perhaps reminds her of her husband, who also had brown skin. It is also apparent that Ms. U’s tendency to please perhaps comes from the lack of having a father figure, which her husband had fulfilled. The psychiatrist believes that Ms. U’s rapid response may be a placebo effect from positive transference. Upon further reflection, the psychiatrist realizes that Ms. U is a motherly figure to him, and that positive countertransference is at play in that he could not turn down the gift and had looked forward to the therapy sessions with her.

Bottom Line

Even clinicians who do not provide psychodynamic psychotherapy can use an awareness of psychodynamic factors to improve treatment. Psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and patient outcomes. Patients’ experiences and difficulties with attachment during childhood should be recognized and addressed as part of pharmacotherapy.

Related Resources

• Neumann M, Silva N, Opler DJ. ARISE to supportive psychotherapy. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(5):48-49. doi:10.12788/cp.0123
• Mintz D. Psychodynamic psychopharmacology. Psychiatric Times. 2011;28(9). https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychodynamic-psychopharmacology

Medical noncompliance and patient resistance to treatment are frequent problems in medical practice. According to an older report by the US Office of Inspector General, approximately 125,000 people die each year in the United States because they do not take their medication properly.¹ The World Health Organization reported that 10% to 25% of hospital and nursing home admissions are a result of patient noncompliance.² In addition, approximately 50% of prescriptions filled for chronic diseases in developed nations are not taken correctly, and up to 40% of patients do not adhere to their treatment regimens.² Among psychiatric patients, noncompliance with medications and other treatments ranges from 25% to 75%.³

In recent years, combining pharmacotherapy with psychodynamic psychotherapy has become a fairly common form of psychiatric practice. A main reason for combining these treatments is that a patient with severe psychiatric symptoms may be unable to engage in self-reflective insightful therapy until those symptoms are substantially relieved with pharmacotherapy. The efficacy of combined pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy may also be more than additive and result in a therapeutic alliance that is greater than the sum of the 2 individual treatments.⁴ Establishing a therapeutic alliance is critical to successful treatment, but this alliance can be distorted by the needs and expectations of both the patient and the clinician.

A psychodynamic understanding of the patient and the therapeutic alliance can facilitate combined treatment in several ways. It can lead to better communication, which in turn can lead to a realistic discussion of a patient’s fears and worries about any medications they have been prescribed. A dynamically aware clinician may better understand what the symptoms mean to the patient. Such clinicians will not only be able to explain the value of a medication, its target symptoms, and the rationale for taking it, but will also be able to discuss the psychological significance of the medication, along with its medical and biological significance.⁵

This article briefly reviews the therapeutic alliance and the influence of transference (the emotional reactions of the patient towards the clinician),⁶ countertransference (the emotional reactions of the clinician towards the patient),⁶ and patient resistance/nonadherence to treatment on the failure or success of pharmacotherapy. We provide case examples to illustrate how these psychodynamic factors can be at play in prescribing.

The therapeutic alliance

The therapeutic alliance is a rational agreement or contract between a patient and the clinician; it is a cornerstone of treatment in medicine.⁶ Its basic premise is that the patient’s rational expectation that their physician is appropriately qualified, will perform a suitable evaluation, and will prescribe relevant treatment is matched by the physician’s expectation that the patient will do their best to comply with treatment recommendations. For this to succeed, the contract needs to be straightforward, and there needs to be no covert agenda. A covert agenda may be in the form of unrealistic expectations and wishes rooted in insecure experiences in childhood by either party. A patient under stress may react to the physician with mistrust, excessive demands, and noncompliance. A physician under stress may react to a patient by becoming authoritative or indecisive, or by overmedicating or underprescribing.

Transference

Transference is a phenomenon whereby a patient’s feelings and attitudes are unconsciously transferred from a person or situation in the past to the clinician or treatment in the present.⁶ For example, a patient who is scared of a serious illness may adopt a helpless, childlike role and project an omnipotent, parentlike quality on the clinician (positive transference) that may be unrealistic. Positive transference may underlie a placebo response to medication in which a patient’s response is too quick or too complete, and it may be a way of unconsciously pleasing an authoritative parent figure from childhood. On the other hand, a patient may unconsciously view their physician as a controlling parent (negative transference) and react angrily or rebelliously. A patient’s flirtatious behavior toward their physician may be a form of transference from unresolved sexual trauma during childhood. However, not all patient reactions should be considered transference; a patient may be appropriately thankful and deferential, or irritated and questioning, depending on the clinician’s demeanor and treatment approach.

Countertransference

Countertransference is the response elicited in the physician by a patient’s appearance and behaviors, or by a patient’s transference projections.⁶ This response can be positive or negative and includes both feelings and associated thoughts related to the physician’s past experiences. For example, a physician in the emergency department may get angry with a patient with an alcohol use disorder because of the physician’s negative experiences with an alcoholic parent during childhood. On the other hand, a physician raised by a compulsive mother may order unnecessary tests on a demanding older female patient. Or, a clinician raised by a sheltering parent may react to a hapless and dependent patient by spending excessive time with them or providing additional medication samples. However, not all clinician reactions are countertransference. For example, a physician’s empathic or stoic demeanor may be an appropriate emotional response to a patient’s diagnosis such as cancer.

Continue to: Patient resistance/nonadherence

In 1920, Freud conceptualized the psychodynamic factors in patient resistance to treatment and theorized that many patients were unconsciously reluctant to give up their symptoms or were driven, for transference reasons, to resist the physician.⁷ This same concept may underlie patient resistance to pharmacotherapy. When symptoms constitute an important defense mechanism, patients are likely to resist medication effects until they have developed more mature defenses or more effective ways of coping.⁸ Even when patients do not resist symptom relief, they may still resist the physician’s choice of treatment due to negative transference. Such patients often negotiate the type of medication, dose, timing of the dose, and start date as a way of trying to “keep control” of a “doctor they don’t quite trust.”⁸ They may manage their own medication regimen by taking more or less than the prescribed dose. This resistance might lead to a “nocebo” effect in which a medication trial fails not because of its ineffectiveness but instead from the unconscious mind influencing the patient’s body to resist. Nonadherence to treatment may occur in patients who have attachment difficulties that make it difficult for them to trust anyone as a result of negative childhood experiences.⁹ Clinicians need to recognize the dynamics of power struggles, control, and trust. A warm, collaborative and cooperative stance is likely to be more beneficial than an authoritative and detached approach.¹⁰

The following 3 case examples illustrate how psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and the outcomes of pharmacotherapy.

CASE 1

Mr. A, age 63, has posttraumatic stress disorder originating from his father’s death by a self-inflicted gunshot wound when Mr. A was 19, and later from the symbolic loss of his mother when she remarried. He reported vivid memories of his father sexually assaulting his mother when he was 6. This fostered a protective nature in him for his mother, as well as for his 3 younger siblings. After his father’s suicide, Mr. A had to take on a paternal role for his 3 siblings. He often feels he grew up too quickly, and resents this. He feels his mother betrayed him when she got remarried. Mr. A attempts suicide, is admitted to a local hospital, and then follows up at a university hospital outpatient psychiatry clinic.

At the clinic, Mr. A begins psychodynamic psychotherapy with a female resident physician. They establish a good rapport. Mr. A begins working through his past traumas and looks forward to his therapy sessions. The physician views this as positive transference, perhaps because her personality style and appearance are similar to that of Mr. A’s mother. She also often notes a positive counter­transference during sessions; Mr. A seemingly reminds her of her father in personality and appearance. Perhaps due to this positive transference/positive countertransference dynamic, Mr. A feels comfortable with having his medication regimen simplified after years of unsuccessful medication trials and a course of electroconvulsive therapy. His regimen soon consists of only a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a glutamate modulator as an adjunct for anxiety. Psychotherapy sessions remain the mainstay of his treatment plan. Mr. A’s mood and anxiety improve significantly over a short time.

CASE 2

Ms. G, age 24, is admitted to a partial hospitalization program (PHP). Her diagnoses include seasonal affective disorder, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); she might have a genetic disposition to bipolar disorder. Ms. G recently had attempted suicide and was discharged from an inpatient unit. She is a middle child and was raised by emotionally and verbally abusive parents in a tumultuous household. Her father rarely kept a job for more than a few months, displayed rage, and lacked empathy. Ms. G feels unloved by her mother and says that her mother is emotionally unstable. Upon admission to the PHP, Ms. G is quick to question the credentials of every staff member she meets, and suggests the abuse and lack of trust she had experienced during her formative years have made her aggressive and paranoid.

Continue to: Since her teens...

Since her teens, Ms. G had received treatment for ADHD with various stimulant and nonstimulant medications that were prescribed by an outpatient psychiatrist. During her sophomore year of college, she was also prescribed medications for depression and anxiety. Ms. G speaks very highly of and praises the skill of her previous psychiatrist while voicing concerns about having to see new clinicians in the PHP. She had recently seen a therapist who moved out of state after a few sessions. Ms. G has abandonment fears and appears to react with anger toward new clinicians.

A negative transference towards Ms. G’s treatment team and the PHP as a whole are evident during the first week. She skips most group therapy sessions and criticizes the clinicians’ skills and training as ineffective. When her psychiatrist recommends changes in medication, she initially argues. She eventually agrees to take a new medication but soon reports intolerable adverse effects, which suggests negative transference toward the psychiatrist as an authority figure, and toward the medication as an extension of the psychiatrist. The treatment team also interprets this as nocebo effect. Ms. G engages in “splitting” by complaining about her psychiatrist to her therapist. The psychiatrist resents having been belittled. Ms. G demands to see a different psychiatrist, and when her demands are not met, she discharges herself from the PHP against medical advice. The treatment team interprets Ms. G’s resistance to treatment to have resulted from poor attachment during childhood and subsequent negative transference.

CASE 3

Ms. U, age 60, is seen at a local mental health center and diagnosed with major depressive disorder, likely resulting from grief and loss from her husband’s recent death. She was raised by her single mother and mostly absent father. Ms. U is a homemaker and had been married for more than 30 years. She participates in weekly psychotherapy with a young male psychiatrist, who prescribes an antidepressant. Ms. U is eager to please and makes every effort to be the perfect patient: she is always early for her appointments, takes her medications as prescribed, and frequently expresses her respect and appreciation for her psychiatrist. Within a few weeks, Ms. U’s depressive symptoms rapidly improve.

Ms. U is a talented and avid knit and crochet expert. At an appointment soon before Christmas, she gives her psychiatrist a pair of socks she knitted. While the gift is of little monetary value, the psychiatrist interprets this as part of transference, but the intimate nature of the gift makes him uncomfortable. He and Ms. U discuss this at length, which reveals definite transference as Ms. U says the psychiatrist perhaps reminds her of her husband, who also had brown skin. It is also apparent that Ms. U’s tendency to please perhaps comes from the lack of having a father figure, which her husband had fulfilled. The psychiatrist believes that Ms. U’s rapid response may be a placebo effect from positive transference. Upon further reflection, the psychiatrist realizes that Ms. U is a motherly figure to him, and that positive countertransference is at play in that he could not turn down the gift and had looked forward to the therapy sessions with her.

Bottom Line

Even clinicians who do not provide psychodynamic psychotherapy can use an awareness of psychodynamic factors to improve treatment. Psychodynamic factors such as transference and countertransference can influence the therapeutic alliance, treatment decisions, and patient outcomes. Patients’ experiences and difficulties with attachment during childhood should be recognized and addressed as part of pharmacotherapy.

Related Resources

• Neumann M, Silva N, Opler DJ. ARISE to supportive psychotherapy. Current Psychiatry. 2021;20(5):48-49. doi:10.12788/cp.0123
• Mintz D. Psychodynamic psychopharmacology. Psychiatric Times. 2011;28(9). https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/psychodynamic-psychopharmacology