User login
CRP levels could predict SSRI success
C-reactive protein (CRP) has been shown to predict antidepressant treatment outcomes in depressed patients, but previous studies have been small and under restricted conditions, and data from large, real-world studies are lacking, wrote Yuqian Pan of First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan, China, and colleagues.
In a study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders , the researchers identified depressed patients aged 12-60 years who had tested CRP levels. The participants were followed through outpatient visits or telephone interviews to collect information on medication use and assess efficacy based on the Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement scale.
CRP was separated into the low CRP group of 709 patients (CRP < 1 mg/L) and a high CRP group of 209 patients (CRP ≥ 1 mg/L). The primary outcome was efficacy defined as effective and ineffective for high and low CRP levels in patients using different medications: Selected serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, (SNRIs), melatonin receptor agonists (MTs), and norepinephrinergic and specific serotonergic antidepressants (NaSSAs).
The researchers compared efficacy in different groups according to CRP levels.
Overall, patients with low CRP showed significantly greater efficacy with SSRIs than did those with high CRP (hazard ratio [HR], 1.257, P = .047). SNRIs were more effective than SSRIs for treating patients with high CRP levels (HR, 1.652, P = .037).
A possible reason for the difference in efficacy is the correlation between CRP and body mass index; previous studies have shown that SSRIs may be less effective in obese individuals, the researchers said.
“Another possible explanation is that at high levels of inflammation, neurons, microglia, and macrophages respond to inflammatory challenges at the cellular level by activating metabolic pathways,” they said.
No significant changes in CRP levels were observed before and after starting medication use, which supports the stability of CRP as a biomarker under normal circumstances.
No difference in efficacy appeared between SSRIs and SNRIs in patients with low CRP, “which may indicate that SNRIs have stronger anti-inflammatory effects than SSRIs,” a finding consistent with previous studies, they said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the small number of patients taking MT and NaSSA, the irregular time intervals for before and after SSRI treatment in 90 patients, the lack of classification by antidepressant type, and the potential for recall bias, the researchers noted.
However, the results suggest that CRP could predict the efficacy of SSRIs in depressed patients in a real-world setting, which may inform treatment decisions, they said.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
C-reactive protein (CRP) has been shown to predict antidepressant treatment outcomes in depressed patients, but previous studies have been small and under restricted conditions, and data from large, real-world studies are lacking, wrote Yuqian Pan of First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan, China, and colleagues.
In a study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders , the researchers identified depressed patients aged 12-60 years who had tested CRP levels. The participants were followed through outpatient visits or telephone interviews to collect information on medication use and assess efficacy based on the Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement scale.
CRP was separated into the low CRP group of 709 patients (CRP < 1 mg/L) and a high CRP group of 209 patients (CRP ≥ 1 mg/L). The primary outcome was efficacy defined as effective and ineffective for high and low CRP levels in patients using different medications: Selected serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, (SNRIs), melatonin receptor agonists (MTs), and norepinephrinergic and specific serotonergic antidepressants (NaSSAs).
The researchers compared efficacy in different groups according to CRP levels.
Overall, patients with low CRP showed significantly greater efficacy with SSRIs than did those with high CRP (hazard ratio [HR], 1.257, P = .047). SNRIs were more effective than SSRIs for treating patients with high CRP levels (HR, 1.652, P = .037).
A possible reason for the difference in efficacy is the correlation between CRP and body mass index; previous studies have shown that SSRIs may be less effective in obese individuals, the researchers said.
“Another possible explanation is that at high levels of inflammation, neurons, microglia, and macrophages respond to inflammatory challenges at the cellular level by activating metabolic pathways,” they said.
No significant changes in CRP levels were observed before and after starting medication use, which supports the stability of CRP as a biomarker under normal circumstances.
No difference in efficacy appeared between SSRIs and SNRIs in patients with low CRP, “which may indicate that SNRIs have stronger anti-inflammatory effects than SSRIs,” a finding consistent with previous studies, they said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the small number of patients taking MT and NaSSA, the irregular time intervals for before and after SSRI treatment in 90 patients, the lack of classification by antidepressant type, and the potential for recall bias, the researchers noted.
However, the results suggest that CRP could predict the efficacy of SSRIs in depressed patients in a real-world setting, which may inform treatment decisions, they said.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
C-reactive protein (CRP) has been shown to predict antidepressant treatment outcomes in depressed patients, but previous studies have been small and under restricted conditions, and data from large, real-world studies are lacking, wrote Yuqian Pan of First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan, China, and colleagues.
In a study published in the Journal of Affective Disorders , the researchers identified depressed patients aged 12-60 years who had tested CRP levels. The participants were followed through outpatient visits or telephone interviews to collect information on medication use and assess efficacy based on the Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement scale.
CRP was separated into the low CRP group of 709 patients (CRP < 1 mg/L) and a high CRP group of 209 patients (CRP ≥ 1 mg/L). The primary outcome was efficacy defined as effective and ineffective for high and low CRP levels in patients using different medications: Selected serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, (SNRIs), melatonin receptor agonists (MTs), and norepinephrinergic and specific serotonergic antidepressants (NaSSAs).
The researchers compared efficacy in different groups according to CRP levels.
Overall, patients with low CRP showed significantly greater efficacy with SSRIs than did those with high CRP (hazard ratio [HR], 1.257, P = .047). SNRIs were more effective than SSRIs for treating patients with high CRP levels (HR, 1.652, P = .037).
A possible reason for the difference in efficacy is the correlation between CRP and body mass index; previous studies have shown that SSRIs may be less effective in obese individuals, the researchers said.
“Another possible explanation is that at high levels of inflammation, neurons, microglia, and macrophages respond to inflammatory challenges at the cellular level by activating metabolic pathways,” they said.
No significant changes in CRP levels were observed before and after starting medication use, which supports the stability of CRP as a biomarker under normal circumstances.
No difference in efficacy appeared between SSRIs and SNRIs in patients with low CRP, “which may indicate that SNRIs have stronger anti-inflammatory effects than SSRIs,” a finding consistent with previous studies, they said.
The study findings were limited by several factors including the small number of patients taking MT and NaSSA, the irregular time intervals for before and after SSRI treatment in 90 patients, the lack of classification by antidepressant type, and the potential for recall bias, the researchers noted.
However, the results suggest that CRP could predict the efficacy of SSRIs in depressed patients in a real-world setting, which may inform treatment decisions, they said.
The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
A ‘setback’ for anti-inflammatory treatment in depression
In the MinoTRD trial, 6 weeks of minocycline 200 mg daily added to stable antidepressant therapy did not show a statistically significant advantage over placebo on the overall course of depressive symptoms.
“The failure of minocycline treatment to reduce depressive symptoms in a naturalistic sample of patients with TRD is a setback for anti-inflammatory treatment strategies in this clinical population,” Julian Hellmann-Regen, MD, department of psychiatry and neurosciences, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
No additional benefit
The “inflammatory hypothesis” of depression maintains that depression arises from increased immune activation and neurotrophic mechanisms.
This view is supported by observations that depression is accompanied by increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines. In addition, low-grade inflammatory processes may interfere with response to typical antidepressant medications.
Minocycline has been put forth as a novel antidepressant, and a few small trials have hinted at a benefit.
In the MinoTRD trial, 168 patients (mean age, 46 years; 53% men) with TRD were randomly allocated minocycline 200 mg/day or matching placebo in addition to usual antidepressant treatment for 6 weeks.
Results showed minocycline was well tolerated but was not superior to placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, the researchers report.
Overall, the mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at baseline was 26.5. There was no significant between-group difference in mean change in MADRS score from baseline to 6 weeks, the primary outcome.
After 6 weeks of treatment, the mean reduction in MADRS score was 8.46 points in the minocycline group versus 8.01 points in the placebo group, and the difference of 1.46 points was not significant (P = .25).
Six weeks of minocycline treatment did not alter the course of depression severity, compared with placebo, the investigators noted.
Minocycline treatment also showed no statistically significant effect on secondary outcomes of response, remission, and various other clinical rating scales.
Caveats and cautionary notes
The researchers noted that one explanation for the null result of the MinoTRD trial could be that the 6-week treatment duration was not long enough to reveal detectable differences. They point to a small study that showed a strong effect of minocycline, compared with placebo by and after 8 weeks of treatment.
However, a closer look at that study suggests the overall effect in the minocycline group was caused by an almost-complete lack of improvement in the placebo group, “which is very unusual,” the investigators wrote.
In the MinoTRD trial, the magnitude of improvement for placebo was as expected from similar trials in TRD, they pointed out.
They also noted that, unlike some other trials, the MinoTRD trial purposely recruited a naturalistic population of TRD, assuming (but not confirming) elevated baseline inflammation as a potential underlying cause in at least a subgroup of the patients.
Post hoc stratification by baseline CRP levels in MinoTRD participants did not yield any results supporting the hypothesis of minocycline treatment possibly being more effective in participants with higher-grade baseline inflammation, the researchers reported.
“Our results from this large randomized controlled trial of a pleiotropic anti-inflammatory drug in this difficult-to-treat patient population are of great clinical importance, robustly demonstrating that minocycline add-on treatment does not outperform placebo, not even in those participants with elevated levels of CRP prior to treatment initiation,” they wrote.
The trial was funded by a grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research within the Consortium Optimizing Treatment of Depression, as part of the Research Network for Psychiatric Disorders. Dr. Hellmann-Regen reported no relevant financial relationship.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the MinoTRD trial, 6 weeks of minocycline 200 mg daily added to stable antidepressant therapy did not show a statistically significant advantage over placebo on the overall course of depressive symptoms.
“The failure of minocycline treatment to reduce depressive symptoms in a naturalistic sample of patients with TRD is a setback for anti-inflammatory treatment strategies in this clinical population,” Julian Hellmann-Regen, MD, department of psychiatry and neurosciences, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
No additional benefit
The “inflammatory hypothesis” of depression maintains that depression arises from increased immune activation and neurotrophic mechanisms.
This view is supported by observations that depression is accompanied by increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines. In addition, low-grade inflammatory processes may interfere with response to typical antidepressant medications.
Minocycline has been put forth as a novel antidepressant, and a few small trials have hinted at a benefit.
In the MinoTRD trial, 168 patients (mean age, 46 years; 53% men) with TRD were randomly allocated minocycline 200 mg/day or matching placebo in addition to usual antidepressant treatment for 6 weeks.
Results showed minocycline was well tolerated but was not superior to placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, the researchers report.
Overall, the mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at baseline was 26.5. There was no significant between-group difference in mean change in MADRS score from baseline to 6 weeks, the primary outcome.
After 6 weeks of treatment, the mean reduction in MADRS score was 8.46 points in the minocycline group versus 8.01 points in the placebo group, and the difference of 1.46 points was not significant (P = .25).
Six weeks of minocycline treatment did not alter the course of depression severity, compared with placebo, the investigators noted.
Minocycline treatment also showed no statistically significant effect on secondary outcomes of response, remission, and various other clinical rating scales.
Caveats and cautionary notes
The researchers noted that one explanation for the null result of the MinoTRD trial could be that the 6-week treatment duration was not long enough to reveal detectable differences. They point to a small study that showed a strong effect of minocycline, compared with placebo by and after 8 weeks of treatment.
However, a closer look at that study suggests the overall effect in the minocycline group was caused by an almost-complete lack of improvement in the placebo group, “which is very unusual,” the investigators wrote.
In the MinoTRD trial, the magnitude of improvement for placebo was as expected from similar trials in TRD, they pointed out.
They also noted that, unlike some other trials, the MinoTRD trial purposely recruited a naturalistic population of TRD, assuming (but not confirming) elevated baseline inflammation as a potential underlying cause in at least a subgroup of the patients.
Post hoc stratification by baseline CRP levels in MinoTRD participants did not yield any results supporting the hypothesis of minocycline treatment possibly being more effective in participants with higher-grade baseline inflammation, the researchers reported.
“Our results from this large randomized controlled trial of a pleiotropic anti-inflammatory drug in this difficult-to-treat patient population are of great clinical importance, robustly demonstrating that minocycline add-on treatment does not outperform placebo, not even in those participants with elevated levels of CRP prior to treatment initiation,” they wrote.
The trial was funded by a grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research within the Consortium Optimizing Treatment of Depression, as part of the Research Network for Psychiatric Disorders. Dr. Hellmann-Regen reported no relevant financial relationship.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the MinoTRD trial, 6 weeks of minocycline 200 mg daily added to stable antidepressant therapy did not show a statistically significant advantage over placebo on the overall course of depressive symptoms.
“The failure of minocycline treatment to reduce depressive symptoms in a naturalistic sample of patients with TRD is a setback for anti-inflammatory treatment strategies in this clinical population,” Julian Hellmann-Regen, MD, department of psychiatry and neurosciences, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.
No additional benefit
The “inflammatory hypothesis” of depression maintains that depression arises from increased immune activation and neurotrophic mechanisms.
This view is supported by observations that depression is accompanied by increased levels of proinflammatory cytokines. In addition, low-grade inflammatory processes may interfere with response to typical antidepressant medications.
Minocycline has been put forth as a novel antidepressant, and a few small trials have hinted at a benefit.
In the MinoTRD trial, 168 patients (mean age, 46 years; 53% men) with TRD were randomly allocated minocycline 200 mg/day or matching placebo in addition to usual antidepressant treatment for 6 weeks.
Results showed minocycline was well tolerated but was not superior to placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, the researchers report.
Overall, the mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score at baseline was 26.5. There was no significant between-group difference in mean change in MADRS score from baseline to 6 weeks, the primary outcome.
After 6 weeks of treatment, the mean reduction in MADRS score was 8.46 points in the minocycline group versus 8.01 points in the placebo group, and the difference of 1.46 points was not significant (P = .25).
Six weeks of minocycline treatment did not alter the course of depression severity, compared with placebo, the investigators noted.
Minocycline treatment also showed no statistically significant effect on secondary outcomes of response, remission, and various other clinical rating scales.
Caveats and cautionary notes
The researchers noted that one explanation for the null result of the MinoTRD trial could be that the 6-week treatment duration was not long enough to reveal detectable differences. They point to a small study that showed a strong effect of minocycline, compared with placebo by and after 8 weeks of treatment.
However, a closer look at that study suggests the overall effect in the minocycline group was caused by an almost-complete lack of improvement in the placebo group, “which is very unusual,” the investigators wrote.
In the MinoTRD trial, the magnitude of improvement for placebo was as expected from similar trials in TRD, they pointed out.
They also noted that, unlike some other trials, the MinoTRD trial purposely recruited a naturalistic population of TRD, assuming (but not confirming) elevated baseline inflammation as a potential underlying cause in at least a subgroup of the patients.
Post hoc stratification by baseline CRP levels in MinoTRD participants did not yield any results supporting the hypothesis of minocycline treatment possibly being more effective in participants with higher-grade baseline inflammation, the researchers reported.
“Our results from this large randomized controlled trial of a pleiotropic anti-inflammatory drug in this difficult-to-treat patient population are of great clinical importance, robustly demonstrating that minocycline add-on treatment does not outperform placebo, not even in those participants with elevated levels of CRP prior to treatment initiation,” they wrote.
The trial was funded by a grant from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research within the Consortium Optimizing Treatment of Depression, as part of the Research Network for Psychiatric Disorders. Dr. Hellmann-Regen reported no relevant financial relationship.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JAMA NETWORK OPEN
Mothers’ diabetes linked to ADHD in their children
Children born to women who develop diabetes either before or during their pregnancy could be at risk for developing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, data from a large multinational cohort study appear to show.
Considering more than 4.5 million mother-child pairs, it was found that children whose mothers had diabetes around the time of their pregnancy were 16% more likely to have ADHD diagnosed than were those whose mothers did not.
An increased risk was seen regardless of the type of diabetes, and regardless of whether or not the diabetes was present before or appeared during the pregnancy.
“We found a small increased risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes, including pregestational diabetes and gestational diabetes,” Carolyn Cesta, PhD, reported at the annual meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.
Dr. Cesta, a postdoctoral researcher in the Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm noted that the effect sizes seen were lower than had been reported previously.
“This may be because we adjusted for a large number of covariates, including maternal ADHD and psychiatric disorders,” Dr. Cesta said.
ADHD and diabetes
“Previous studies have reported an increase in the risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes,” explained Dr. Cesta.
However, “these studies have been limited by the use of self-reported data, small sample sizes, lack of adjustment for important confounders, and they’re often limited to [White] populations,” she added. “There’s a lot of heterogeneity between these studies,” she said.
To try to iron out the differences seen in the prior studies, Dr. Cesta and associates looked at data from several databases based in Hong Kong (Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System), four Nordic countries (Population Health Registers for Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden), and Taiwan (National Health Insurance Database).
To create the matched mother-child pairs, the databases were searched to find women who had children born between 2001 and 2018, and who had follow-up data available up to 2020 on not only their diabetes status and child’s ADHD status, but also other parameters, such as other maternal diagnoses, maternal medications, and a host of sociodemographic factors.
More than 24 potentially confounding or covariates were considered in the analysis, which used Cox proportional hazard regression modeling and propensity score analysis to calculate hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
“We looked at whether [mothers] had a diagnosis of ADHD themselves, or other psychiatric disorders, because there is high heritability for these disorders,” Dr. Cesta said, indicating that all bases had endeavored to be covered.
Main findings
Results showed some differences in the prevalence of diabetes and ADHD between the three cohorts used in the analysis. The prevalence of any maternal diabetes ranged from 8.8% in the Hong Kong cohort to 3.3% in the Taiwan cohort, with a prevalence of 6.8% for the Nordic cohort.
Rates of pregestational diabetes were lowest in the Taiwan and Hong Kong cohorts, at 0.2% and 0.5%, respectively, and 2.2% in the Nordic cohort. Gestational diabetes rates were a respective 3.1%, 7.8%, and 4.6%.
The highest rate of ADHD in children was seen in the Taiwan cohort, at 9.6%, followed by 4.2% for the Hong Kong cohort, and 2.6% for the Nordic cohort.
The hazard ratio for having childhood ADHD was 1.16 when comparing any maternal diabetes to no maternal diabetes, 1.40 comparing mothers with and without pregestational diabetes, and a respective 1.36 and 1.37 comparing those with and without type 1 diabetes, and those with and without type 2 diabetes.
The HR for childhood ADHD comparing mothers with and without gestational diabetes was 1.13.
“Within the analysis for gestational diabetes, we had enough numbers to look at siblings that are discordant for maternal gestational diabetes,” Dr. Cesta said. Essentially “we’re comparing two siblings from the same mother, one that was exposed to gestational diabetes, one that wasn’t,” she explained.
Interestingly there was no association between ADHD and maternal gestational diabetes in the sibling analysis (HR, 1.0).
“When it comes to gestational diabetes, the evidence from our sibling analysis indicate that the association may actually be confounded by shared genetics and environmental factors,” said Dr. Cesta.
“So, future studies should explore the role of specific genetic factors in glycemic control during pregnancy and the relationship between maternal diabetes and ADHD.”
Answering long-standing questions
These data will help a lot in answering questions that clinicians have been asking themselves a long time, commented Jardena Puder, MD, who chaired the session.
“It still remains a bit puzzling that genetic and environmental factors could be responsible, if you see the same effect in type 1 [diabetes], and in type 2 [diabetes], and gestational diabetes,” said Dr. Puder, who is an endocrinologist and diabetologist at the woman-mother-child department at the Vaud University Hospital Center, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Type 1 and type 2 are “very distinct” in terms of the genetic and environmental factors involved, “so, the fact that you see [the effect] in both remains a bit puzzling,” said Dr. Puder.
“I wish we had the numbers to be able to do the sibling analysis for type 1 and type 2, just to see if we could tease anything out,” said Dr. Cesta.
“I do think this is part of the bigger question of what the relationship is between, like, metabolic disorders and psychiatric disorders, because even outside of pregnancy, we see that there’s often a comorbidity with them. So, it’s a good point.”
The next step is to look at the role of treatment and what effects glycemic control might have on the small, but still apparent, association between maternal diabetes and ADHD.
The study had multiple funders including the Hong Kong Research Grant Council, NordForsk, the Research Council of Norway, the Norwegian ADHD Research Network, the Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Commission, and European Horizon 2020.
Dr. Cesta had no conflicts of interest to disclose. Dr. Puder chaired the session in which the findings were presented and made no specific disclosures.
Children born to women who develop diabetes either before or during their pregnancy could be at risk for developing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, data from a large multinational cohort study appear to show.
Considering more than 4.5 million mother-child pairs, it was found that children whose mothers had diabetes around the time of their pregnancy were 16% more likely to have ADHD diagnosed than were those whose mothers did not.
An increased risk was seen regardless of the type of diabetes, and regardless of whether or not the diabetes was present before or appeared during the pregnancy.
“We found a small increased risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes, including pregestational diabetes and gestational diabetes,” Carolyn Cesta, PhD, reported at the annual meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.
Dr. Cesta, a postdoctoral researcher in the Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm noted that the effect sizes seen were lower than had been reported previously.
“This may be because we adjusted for a large number of covariates, including maternal ADHD and psychiatric disorders,” Dr. Cesta said.
ADHD and diabetes
“Previous studies have reported an increase in the risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes,” explained Dr. Cesta.
However, “these studies have been limited by the use of self-reported data, small sample sizes, lack of adjustment for important confounders, and they’re often limited to [White] populations,” she added. “There’s a lot of heterogeneity between these studies,” she said.
To try to iron out the differences seen in the prior studies, Dr. Cesta and associates looked at data from several databases based in Hong Kong (Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System), four Nordic countries (Population Health Registers for Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden), and Taiwan (National Health Insurance Database).
To create the matched mother-child pairs, the databases were searched to find women who had children born between 2001 and 2018, and who had follow-up data available up to 2020 on not only their diabetes status and child’s ADHD status, but also other parameters, such as other maternal diagnoses, maternal medications, and a host of sociodemographic factors.
More than 24 potentially confounding or covariates were considered in the analysis, which used Cox proportional hazard regression modeling and propensity score analysis to calculate hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
“We looked at whether [mothers] had a diagnosis of ADHD themselves, or other psychiatric disorders, because there is high heritability for these disorders,” Dr. Cesta said, indicating that all bases had endeavored to be covered.
Main findings
Results showed some differences in the prevalence of diabetes and ADHD between the three cohorts used in the analysis. The prevalence of any maternal diabetes ranged from 8.8% in the Hong Kong cohort to 3.3% in the Taiwan cohort, with a prevalence of 6.8% for the Nordic cohort.
Rates of pregestational diabetes were lowest in the Taiwan and Hong Kong cohorts, at 0.2% and 0.5%, respectively, and 2.2% in the Nordic cohort. Gestational diabetes rates were a respective 3.1%, 7.8%, and 4.6%.
The highest rate of ADHD in children was seen in the Taiwan cohort, at 9.6%, followed by 4.2% for the Hong Kong cohort, and 2.6% for the Nordic cohort.
The hazard ratio for having childhood ADHD was 1.16 when comparing any maternal diabetes to no maternal diabetes, 1.40 comparing mothers with and without pregestational diabetes, and a respective 1.36 and 1.37 comparing those with and without type 1 diabetes, and those with and without type 2 diabetes.
The HR for childhood ADHD comparing mothers with and without gestational diabetes was 1.13.
“Within the analysis for gestational diabetes, we had enough numbers to look at siblings that are discordant for maternal gestational diabetes,” Dr. Cesta said. Essentially “we’re comparing two siblings from the same mother, one that was exposed to gestational diabetes, one that wasn’t,” she explained.
Interestingly there was no association between ADHD and maternal gestational diabetes in the sibling analysis (HR, 1.0).
“When it comes to gestational diabetes, the evidence from our sibling analysis indicate that the association may actually be confounded by shared genetics and environmental factors,” said Dr. Cesta.
“So, future studies should explore the role of specific genetic factors in glycemic control during pregnancy and the relationship between maternal diabetes and ADHD.”
Answering long-standing questions
These data will help a lot in answering questions that clinicians have been asking themselves a long time, commented Jardena Puder, MD, who chaired the session.
“It still remains a bit puzzling that genetic and environmental factors could be responsible, if you see the same effect in type 1 [diabetes], and in type 2 [diabetes], and gestational diabetes,” said Dr. Puder, who is an endocrinologist and diabetologist at the woman-mother-child department at the Vaud University Hospital Center, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Type 1 and type 2 are “very distinct” in terms of the genetic and environmental factors involved, “so, the fact that you see [the effect] in both remains a bit puzzling,” said Dr. Puder.
“I wish we had the numbers to be able to do the sibling analysis for type 1 and type 2, just to see if we could tease anything out,” said Dr. Cesta.
“I do think this is part of the bigger question of what the relationship is between, like, metabolic disorders and psychiatric disorders, because even outside of pregnancy, we see that there’s often a comorbidity with them. So, it’s a good point.”
The next step is to look at the role of treatment and what effects glycemic control might have on the small, but still apparent, association between maternal diabetes and ADHD.
The study had multiple funders including the Hong Kong Research Grant Council, NordForsk, the Research Council of Norway, the Norwegian ADHD Research Network, the Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Commission, and European Horizon 2020.
Dr. Cesta had no conflicts of interest to disclose. Dr. Puder chaired the session in which the findings were presented and made no specific disclosures.
Children born to women who develop diabetes either before or during their pregnancy could be at risk for developing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, data from a large multinational cohort study appear to show.
Considering more than 4.5 million mother-child pairs, it was found that children whose mothers had diabetes around the time of their pregnancy were 16% more likely to have ADHD diagnosed than were those whose mothers did not.
An increased risk was seen regardless of the type of diabetes, and regardless of whether or not the diabetes was present before or appeared during the pregnancy.
“We found a small increased risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes, including pregestational diabetes and gestational diabetes,” Carolyn Cesta, PhD, reported at the annual meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes.
Dr. Cesta, a postdoctoral researcher in the Centre for Pharmacoepidemiology at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm noted that the effect sizes seen were lower than had been reported previously.
“This may be because we adjusted for a large number of covariates, including maternal ADHD and psychiatric disorders,” Dr. Cesta said.
ADHD and diabetes
“Previous studies have reported an increase in the risk of ADHD in children born to mothers with diabetes,” explained Dr. Cesta.
However, “these studies have been limited by the use of self-reported data, small sample sizes, lack of adjustment for important confounders, and they’re often limited to [White] populations,” she added. “There’s a lot of heterogeneity between these studies,” she said.
To try to iron out the differences seen in the prior studies, Dr. Cesta and associates looked at data from several databases based in Hong Kong (Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System), four Nordic countries (Population Health Registers for Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden), and Taiwan (National Health Insurance Database).
To create the matched mother-child pairs, the databases were searched to find women who had children born between 2001 and 2018, and who had follow-up data available up to 2020 on not only their diabetes status and child’s ADHD status, but also other parameters, such as other maternal diagnoses, maternal medications, and a host of sociodemographic factors.
More than 24 potentially confounding or covariates were considered in the analysis, which used Cox proportional hazard regression modeling and propensity score analysis to calculate hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
“We looked at whether [mothers] had a diagnosis of ADHD themselves, or other psychiatric disorders, because there is high heritability for these disorders,” Dr. Cesta said, indicating that all bases had endeavored to be covered.
Main findings
Results showed some differences in the prevalence of diabetes and ADHD between the three cohorts used in the analysis. The prevalence of any maternal diabetes ranged from 8.8% in the Hong Kong cohort to 3.3% in the Taiwan cohort, with a prevalence of 6.8% for the Nordic cohort.
Rates of pregestational diabetes were lowest in the Taiwan and Hong Kong cohorts, at 0.2% and 0.5%, respectively, and 2.2% in the Nordic cohort. Gestational diabetes rates were a respective 3.1%, 7.8%, and 4.6%.
The highest rate of ADHD in children was seen in the Taiwan cohort, at 9.6%, followed by 4.2% for the Hong Kong cohort, and 2.6% for the Nordic cohort.
The hazard ratio for having childhood ADHD was 1.16 when comparing any maternal diabetes to no maternal diabetes, 1.40 comparing mothers with and without pregestational diabetes, and a respective 1.36 and 1.37 comparing those with and without type 1 diabetes, and those with and without type 2 diabetes.
The HR for childhood ADHD comparing mothers with and without gestational diabetes was 1.13.
“Within the analysis for gestational diabetes, we had enough numbers to look at siblings that are discordant for maternal gestational diabetes,” Dr. Cesta said. Essentially “we’re comparing two siblings from the same mother, one that was exposed to gestational diabetes, one that wasn’t,” she explained.
Interestingly there was no association between ADHD and maternal gestational diabetes in the sibling analysis (HR, 1.0).
“When it comes to gestational diabetes, the evidence from our sibling analysis indicate that the association may actually be confounded by shared genetics and environmental factors,” said Dr. Cesta.
“So, future studies should explore the role of specific genetic factors in glycemic control during pregnancy and the relationship between maternal diabetes and ADHD.”
Answering long-standing questions
These data will help a lot in answering questions that clinicians have been asking themselves a long time, commented Jardena Puder, MD, who chaired the session.
“It still remains a bit puzzling that genetic and environmental factors could be responsible, if you see the same effect in type 1 [diabetes], and in type 2 [diabetes], and gestational diabetes,” said Dr. Puder, who is an endocrinologist and diabetologist at the woman-mother-child department at the Vaud University Hospital Center, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Type 1 and type 2 are “very distinct” in terms of the genetic and environmental factors involved, “so, the fact that you see [the effect] in both remains a bit puzzling,” said Dr. Puder.
“I wish we had the numbers to be able to do the sibling analysis for type 1 and type 2, just to see if we could tease anything out,” said Dr. Cesta.
“I do think this is part of the bigger question of what the relationship is between, like, metabolic disorders and psychiatric disorders, because even outside of pregnancy, we see that there’s often a comorbidity with them. So, it’s a good point.”
The next step is to look at the role of treatment and what effects glycemic control might have on the small, but still apparent, association between maternal diabetes and ADHD.
The study had multiple funders including the Hong Kong Research Grant Council, NordForsk, the Research Council of Norway, the Norwegian ADHD Research Network, the Hong Kong Innovation and Technology Commission, and European Horizon 2020.
Dr. Cesta had no conflicts of interest to disclose. Dr. Puder chaired the session in which the findings were presented and made no specific disclosures.
FROM EASD 2022
USPSTF recommends anxiety screening in adults younger than 65
For the first time, the task force is recommending screening all adults aged 64 and younger for anxiety – including pregnant and postpartum women.
This “B” recommendation reflects “moderate certainty” evidence that screening for anxiety in this population has a moderate net benefit, the task force notes in a draft recommendation statement posted on its website.
The recommendation applies to adults aged 19-64 years who do not have a diagnosed mental health disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety.
Anxiety disorders are common and often go unrecognized in primary care, leading to long delays in treatment, the task force writes. They add that more evidence is needed to identify ideal screening intervals for all populations.
“A pragmatic approach in the absence of data might include screening all adults who have not been screened previously and using clinical judgment in consideration of risk factors, comorbid conditions, and life events to determine if additional screening of high-risk patients is warranted,” they write.
For adults aged 65 and older, the task force found “insufficient” evidence on the benefits and potential harms of screening for anxiety.
“Evidence on the accuracy of screening tools and the benefits and harms of screening and treatment of screen-detected anxiety in older adults is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined,” they write.
Jury out on screening for suicide risk
The task force is continuing to recommend screening all adults for depression. This “B” recommendation reflects moderate-certainty evidence that screening for major depression in adults has a moderate net benefit.
However, they note there is not enough evidence to recommend for or against screening for suicide risk in all adults.
They therefore issued an “I” statement, indicating that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined at present.
“To address the critical need for supporting the mental health of adults in primary care, the Task Force reviewed the evidence on screening for anxiety, depression, and suicide risk,” task force member Lori Pbert, PhD, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, said in a news release.
“The good news is that screening all adults for depression, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and screening adults younger than 65 for anxiety can help identify these conditions early so people can be connected to care,” Dr. Pbert said.
“Unfortunately, evidence is limited on screening adults 65 or older for anxiety and screening all adults for suicide risk, so we are urgently calling for more research,” added task force member Gbenga Ogedegbe, MD, MPH, founding director of the Institute for Excellence in Health Equity at NYU Langone Health.
Dr. Ogedegbe, also a professor at New York University, noted that “in the absence of evidence, health care professionals should use their judgment based on individual patient circumstances when determining whether or not to screen.”
The public comment period for the draft recommendations runs until Oct. 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
For the first time, the task force is recommending screening all adults aged 64 and younger for anxiety – including pregnant and postpartum women.
This “B” recommendation reflects “moderate certainty” evidence that screening for anxiety in this population has a moderate net benefit, the task force notes in a draft recommendation statement posted on its website.
The recommendation applies to adults aged 19-64 years who do not have a diagnosed mental health disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety.
Anxiety disorders are common and often go unrecognized in primary care, leading to long delays in treatment, the task force writes. They add that more evidence is needed to identify ideal screening intervals for all populations.
“A pragmatic approach in the absence of data might include screening all adults who have not been screened previously and using clinical judgment in consideration of risk factors, comorbid conditions, and life events to determine if additional screening of high-risk patients is warranted,” they write.
For adults aged 65 and older, the task force found “insufficient” evidence on the benefits and potential harms of screening for anxiety.
“Evidence on the accuracy of screening tools and the benefits and harms of screening and treatment of screen-detected anxiety in older adults is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined,” they write.
Jury out on screening for suicide risk
The task force is continuing to recommend screening all adults for depression. This “B” recommendation reflects moderate-certainty evidence that screening for major depression in adults has a moderate net benefit.
However, they note there is not enough evidence to recommend for or against screening for suicide risk in all adults.
They therefore issued an “I” statement, indicating that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined at present.
“To address the critical need for supporting the mental health of adults in primary care, the Task Force reviewed the evidence on screening for anxiety, depression, and suicide risk,” task force member Lori Pbert, PhD, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, said in a news release.
“The good news is that screening all adults for depression, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and screening adults younger than 65 for anxiety can help identify these conditions early so people can be connected to care,” Dr. Pbert said.
“Unfortunately, evidence is limited on screening adults 65 or older for anxiety and screening all adults for suicide risk, so we are urgently calling for more research,” added task force member Gbenga Ogedegbe, MD, MPH, founding director of the Institute for Excellence in Health Equity at NYU Langone Health.
Dr. Ogedegbe, also a professor at New York University, noted that “in the absence of evidence, health care professionals should use their judgment based on individual patient circumstances when determining whether or not to screen.”
The public comment period for the draft recommendations runs until Oct. 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
For the first time, the task force is recommending screening all adults aged 64 and younger for anxiety – including pregnant and postpartum women.
This “B” recommendation reflects “moderate certainty” evidence that screening for anxiety in this population has a moderate net benefit, the task force notes in a draft recommendation statement posted on its website.
The recommendation applies to adults aged 19-64 years who do not have a diagnosed mental health disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety.
Anxiety disorders are common and often go unrecognized in primary care, leading to long delays in treatment, the task force writes. They add that more evidence is needed to identify ideal screening intervals for all populations.
“A pragmatic approach in the absence of data might include screening all adults who have not been screened previously and using clinical judgment in consideration of risk factors, comorbid conditions, and life events to determine if additional screening of high-risk patients is warranted,” they write.
For adults aged 65 and older, the task force found “insufficient” evidence on the benefits and potential harms of screening for anxiety.
“Evidence on the accuracy of screening tools and the benefits and harms of screening and treatment of screen-detected anxiety in older adults is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined,” they write.
Jury out on screening for suicide risk
The task force is continuing to recommend screening all adults for depression. This “B” recommendation reflects moderate-certainty evidence that screening for major depression in adults has a moderate net benefit.
However, they note there is not enough evidence to recommend for or against screening for suicide risk in all adults.
They therefore issued an “I” statement, indicating that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined at present.
“To address the critical need for supporting the mental health of adults in primary care, the Task Force reviewed the evidence on screening for anxiety, depression, and suicide risk,” task force member Lori Pbert, PhD, University of Massachusetts, Worcester, said in a news release.
“The good news is that screening all adults for depression, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and screening adults younger than 65 for anxiety can help identify these conditions early so people can be connected to care,” Dr. Pbert said.
“Unfortunately, evidence is limited on screening adults 65 or older for anxiety and screening all adults for suicide risk, so we are urgently calling for more research,” added task force member Gbenga Ogedegbe, MD, MPH, founding director of the Institute for Excellence in Health Equity at NYU Langone Health.
Dr. Ogedegbe, also a professor at New York University, noted that “in the absence of evidence, health care professionals should use their judgment based on individual patient circumstances when determining whether or not to screen.”
The public comment period for the draft recommendations runs until Oct. 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Eighty percent of U.S. maternal deaths are preventable: Study
More than 80% of U.S. maternal deaths across a 2-year period were due to preventable causes, according to a new CDC report.
Black mothers made up about a third of deaths, and more than 90% of deaths among Indigenous mothers were preventable.
“It’s significant. It’s staggering. It’s heartbreaking,” Allison Bryant, MD, a high-risk pregnancy specialist and senior medical director for health equity at Massachusetts General Hospital, told USA Today.
“It just means that we have so much work to do,” she said.
In the report, CDC researchers looked at pregnancy-related deaths between 2017 to 2019 based on numbers from maternal mortality review committees, which are multidisciplinary groups in 36 states that investigate the circumstances around maternal deaths.
Of the 1,018 deaths during the 2-year period, 839 occurred up to a year after delivery. About 22% of deaths happened during pregnancy, and 25% happened on the day of delivery or within a week after delivery. But 53% occurred more than 7 days after delivery.
Mental health conditions, such as overdoses and deaths by suicide, were the top underlying cause, followed by hemorrhage, or extreme bleeding. About a quarter of deaths were due to mental health conditions, followed by 14% due to hemorrhage and 13% due to heart problems. The rest were related to infection, embolism, cardiomyopathy, and high blood pressure-related disorders.
The analysis included a section on maternal deaths for American Indian and Alaska Native mothers, who are more than twice as likely as White mothers to die but are often undercounted in health data due to misclassification. More than 90% of their deaths were preventable between 2017 to 2019, with most due to mental health conditions and hemorrhage.
“It’s incredibly distressful,” Brian Thompson, MD, of the Oneida Nation and assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Upstate Medical University, New York, told USA Today.
Dr. Thompson is working with the National Indian Health Board to create the first national tribal review committee for maternal deaths.
“It really needs to be looked at and examined why that is the case if essentially all of them are preventable,” he said.
Black mothers were also three times as likely as White mothers to die and more likely to die from heart problems. Hispanic mothers, who made up 14% of deaths, were more likely to die from mental health conditions.
Some of the deaths, such as hemorrhage, should be highly preventable. Existing toolkits for clinicians provide evidence-based guidelines to prevent and treat excessive bleeding.
“No pregnant person should be passing away from a hemorrhage,” Andrea Jackson, MD, division chief of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco, told USA Today.
“We have the tools in the United States, and we know how to deal with it,” she said. “That was really disheartening to see.”
What’s more, the new CDC report highlights the need for more mental health resources during pregnancy and the postpartum period – up to a year or more after delivery – including improvements in access to care, diagnosis, and treatment.
“These are things that need to happen systemically,” LeThenia Baker, MD, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Wellstar Health, Georgia, told USA Today.
“It can’t just be a few practices here or there who are adopting best practices,” she said. “It has to be a systemic change.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
More than 80% of U.S. maternal deaths across a 2-year period were due to preventable causes, according to a new CDC report.
Black mothers made up about a third of deaths, and more than 90% of deaths among Indigenous mothers were preventable.
“It’s significant. It’s staggering. It’s heartbreaking,” Allison Bryant, MD, a high-risk pregnancy specialist and senior medical director for health equity at Massachusetts General Hospital, told USA Today.
“It just means that we have so much work to do,” she said.
In the report, CDC researchers looked at pregnancy-related deaths between 2017 to 2019 based on numbers from maternal mortality review committees, which are multidisciplinary groups in 36 states that investigate the circumstances around maternal deaths.
Of the 1,018 deaths during the 2-year period, 839 occurred up to a year after delivery. About 22% of deaths happened during pregnancy, and 25% happened on the day of delivery or within a week after delivery. But 53% occurred more than 7 days after delivery.
Mental health conditions, such as overdoses and deaths by suicide, were the top underlying cause, followed by hemorrhage, or extreme bleeding. About a quarter of deaths were due to mental health conditions, followed by 14% due to hemorrhage and 13% due to heart problems. The rest were related to infection, embolism, cardiomyopathy, and high blood pressure-related disorders.
The analysis included a section on maternal deaths for American Indian and Alaska Native mothers, who are more than twice as likely as White mothers to die but are often undercounted in health data due to misclassification. More than 90% of their deaths were preventable between 2017 to 2019, with most due to mental health conditions and hemorrhage.
“It’s incredibly distressful,” Brian Thompson, MD, of the Oneida Nation and assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Upstate Medical University, New York, told USA Today.
Dr. Thompson is working with the National Indian Health Board to create the first national tribal review committee for maternal deaths.
“It really needs to be looked at and examined why that is the case if essentially all of them are preventable,” he said.
Black mothers were also three times as likely as White mothers to die and more likely to die from heart problems. Hispanic mothers, who made up 14% of deaths, were more likely to die from mental health conditions.
Some of the deaths, such as hemorrhage, should be highly preventable. Existing toolkits for clinicians provide evidence-based guidelines to prevent and treat excessive bleeding.
“No pregnant person should be passing away from a hemorrhage,” Andrea Jackson, MD, division chief of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco, told USA Today.
“We have the tools in the United States, and we know how to deal with it,” she said. “That was really disheartening to see.”
What’s more, the new CDC report highlights the need for more mental health resources during pregnancy and the postpartum period – up to a year or more after delivery – including improvements in access to care, diagnosis, and treatment.
“These are things that need to happen systemically,” LeThenia Baker, MD, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Wellstar Health, Georgia, told USA Today.
“It can’t just be a few practices here or there who are adopting best practices,” she said. “It has to be a systemic change.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
More than 80% of U.S. maternal deaths across a 2-year period were due to preventable causes, according to a new CDC report.
Black mothers made up about a third of deaths, and more than 90% of deaths among Indigenous mothers were preventable.
“It’s significant. It’s staggering. It’s heartbreaking,” Allison Bryant, MD, a high-risk pregnancy specialist and senior medical director for health equity at Massachusetts General Hospital, told USA Today.
“It just means that we have so much work to do,” she said.
In the report, CDC researchers looked at pregnancy-related deaths between 2017 to 2019 based on numbers from maternal mortality review committees, which are multidisciplinary groups in 36 states that investigate the circumstances around maternal deaths.
Of the 1,018 deaths during the 2-year period, 839 occurred up to a year after delivery. About 22% of deaths happened during pregnancy, and 25% happened on the day of delivery or within a week after delivery. But 53% occurred more than 7 days after delivery.
Mental health conditions, such as overdoses and deaths by suicide, were the top underlying cause, followed by hemorrhage, or extreme bleeding. About a quarter of deaths were due to mental health conditions, followed by 14% due to hemorrhage and 13% due to heart problems. The rest were related to infection, embolism, cardiomyopathy, and high blood pressure-related disorders.
The analysis included a section on maternal deaths for American Indian and Alaska Native mothers, who are more than twice as likely as White mothers to die but are often undercounted in health data due to misclassification. More than 90% of their deaths were preventable between 2017 to 2019, with most due to mental health conditions and hemorrhage.
“It’s incredibly distressful,” Brian Thompson, MD, of the Oneida Nation and assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Upstate Medical University, New York, told USA Today.
Dr. Thompson is working with the National Indian Health Board to create the first national tribal review committee for maternal deaths.
“It really needs to be looked at and examined why that is the case if essentially all of them are preventable,” he said.
Black mothers were also three times as likely as White mothers to die and more likely to die from heart problems. Hispanic mothers, who made up 14% of deaths, were more likely to die from mental health conditions.
Some of the deaths, such as hemorrhage, should be highly preventable. Existing toolkits for clinicians provide evidence-based guidelines to prevent and treat excessive bleeding.
“No pregnant person should be passing away from a hemorrhage,” Andrea Jackson, MD, division chief of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, San Francisco, told USA Today.
“We have the tools in the United States, and we know how to deal with it,” she said. “That was really disheartening to see.”
What’s more, the new CDC report highlights the need for more mental health resources during pregnancy and the postpartum period – up to a year or more after delivery – including improvements in access to care, diagnosis, and treatment.
“These are things that need to happen systemically,” LeThenia Baker, MD, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Wellstar Health, Georgia, told USA Today.
“It can’t just be a few practices here or there who are adopting best practices,” she said. “It has to be a systemic change.”
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Ketamine linked to reduced suicidal thoughts, depression, anxiety
, new research suggests.
Results from a retrospective chart review analysis, which included more than 400 participants with TRD, illustrate that ketamine is a safe and rapid treatment in a real-world patient population, lead author Patrick A. Oliver, MD, founder and medical director, MindPeace Clinics, Richmond, Va., told this news organization.
The effect was perhaps most notable for reducing suicidal ideation, he said.
“In 2 weeks, we can take somebody from being suicidal to nonsuicidal. It’s a total game changer,” Dr. Oliver added.
Every year in the United States, about 12 million individuals think about suicide, 3.2 million make a plan to kill themselves, and more than 46,000 succeed, the investigators note.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry.
Molecule mixture
Primarily used as an anesthetic in hospitals, ketamine is also taken illegally as a recreational drug. Users may aim for an intense high or feeling of dissociation, or an out-of-body–type experience.
Ketamine is a mixture of two mirror-image molecules. An intranasal version of one of these molecules (esketamine) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for TRD. Both esketamine and ketamine are believed to increase neurotrophic signaling that affects synaptic function.
The study included 424 patients (mean age, 41.7 years) with major depressive disorder or another mood disorder and who received at least one ketamine infusion at a specialty clinic. Most participants had failed prior medication trials.
Patients in the study were typically started on 0.5 mg/kg of ketamine, with the dose titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation. The median dose administered after titration was 0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes.
The main treatment course of at least six infusions within 21 days was completed by 70% of the patients.
At each clinic visit, all participants completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7).
The primary outcome was PHQ-9 total scores, for which researchers looked at seven time periods: 1 week, 2-3 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 7-12 weeks, 13-24 weeks, 25-51 weeks, and 52+ weeks.
‘Blows it out of the water’
Results showed PHQ-9 total scores declined by 50% throughout the course of treatment, with much of the improvement gained within 4-6 weeks. There was a significant difference between week 1 and all later time periods (all P values < .001) and between weeks 2 and 3 and all later periods (all P values < .001).
Other measures included treatment response, defined as at least a 50% improvement on the PHQ-9, and depression remission, defined as a PHQ-9 score of less than 5. After three infusions, 14% of the patients responded and 7% were in remission. After 10 infusions, 72% responded and 38% were in remission.
These results compare favorably to other depression treatments, said Dr. Oliver. “Truthfully, with the exception of ECT [electroconvulsive therapy], this blows it all out of the water,” he added.
Dr. Oliver noted that the success rate for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is 40%-60% depending on the modality; and for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the success rate “is somewhere between the mid-20s and low-30s percent range.”
Another outcome measure was the self-harm/suicidal ideation item of the PHQ-9 questionnaire, which asks about “thoughts that you would be better off dead, or of hurting yourself in some way.” About 22% of the study participants no longer reported suicidal ideation after 3 infusions, 50% by 6 infusions, and 75% by 10 infusions.
By 15 infusions, 85% no longer reported these thoughts. “Nothing else has shown that, ever,” said Dr. Oliver.
Symptoms of generalized anxiety were also substantially improved. There was about a 30% reduction in the GAD-7 score during treatment and, again, most of the response occurred by 4-6 weeks.
Study limitations
Sex, age, and other demographic characteristics did not predict response or remission, but suicide planning trended toward higher response rates (P = .083). This suggests that a more depressed subgroup can achieve greater benefit from the treatment than can less symptomatic patients, the investigators note.
A history of psychosis also trended toward better response to treatment (P = .086) but not remission.
The researchers note that study limitations include that it was retrospective, lacked a control group, and did not require patients to be hospitalized – so the study sample may have been less severely ill than in other studies.
In addition, most patients paid out of pocket for the treatment at $495 per infusion, and they self-reported their symptoms.
As well, the researchers did not assess adverse events, although nurses made follow-up calls to patients. Dr. Oliver noted the most common side effects of ketamine are nausea, vomiting, and anxiety.
Previous research has suggested that ketamine therapy is not linked to long-term side effects, such as sexual dysfunction, weight gain, lethargy, or cognitive issues, said Dr. Oliver.
The investigators point out another study limitation was lack of detailed demographic information, such as race, income, and education, which might affect its generalizability.
Concerns and questions
Pouya Movahed Rad, MD, PhD, senior consultant and researcher in psychiatry, Lund (Sweden) University, noted several concerns, including that the clinics treating the study participants with ketamine profited from it.
He also speculated about who can afford the treatment because only a few patients in the study were reimbursed through insurance.
Dr. Movahed Rad was not involved with the current research but was principal investigator for a recent study that compared intravenous ketamine to ECT.
He questioned whether the patient population in the new study really was “real world.” Well-designed randomized controlled trials have been carried out in a “naturalistic setting, [which] get closer to real-life patients,” he said.
He also noted that the median dose after clinician titration (0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes) “may be considered very high.”
With regard to doses being titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation, “there is no obvious evidence to my knowledge that patients need to develop dissociative symptoms in order to have antidepressant effect,” said Dr. Movahed Rad.
Finally, he noted that the finding that 28% of the participants were using illegal drugs “is worrying” and wondered what drugs they were taking; he also questioned why 81% of the study population needed to take antidepressants.
The study did not receive outside funding. Dr. Oliver is the founder of MindPeace Clinics, which specialize in ketamine therapeutics. Dr. Movahed Rad has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, new research suggests.
Results from a retrospective chart review analysis, which included more than 400 participants with TRD, illustrate that ketamine is a safe and rapid treatment in a real-world patient population, lead author Patrick A. Oliver, MD, founder and medical director, MindPeace Clinics, Richmond, Va., told this news organization.
The effect was perhaps most notable for reducing suicidal ideation, he said.
“In 2 weeks, we can take somebody from being suicidal to nonsuicidal. It’s a total game changer,” Dr. Oliver added.
Every year in the United States, about 12 million individuals think about suicide, 3.2 million make a plan to kill themselves, and more than 46,000 succeed, the investigators note.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry.
Molecule mixture
Primarily used as an anesthetic in hospitals, ketamine is also taken illegally as a recreational drug. Users may aim for an intense high or feeling of dissociation, or an out-of-body–type experience.
Ketamine is a mixture of two mirror-image molecules. An intranasal version of one of these molecules (esketamine) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for TRD. Both esketamine and ketamine are believed to increase neurotrophic signaling that affects synaptic function.
The study included 424 patients (mean age, 41.7 years) with major depressive disorder or another mood disorder and who received at least one ketamine infusion at a specialty clinic. Most participants had failed prior medication trials.
Patients in the study were typically started on 0.5 mg/kg of ketamine, with the dose titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation. The median dose administered after titration was 0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes.
The main treatment course of at least six infusions within 21 days was completed by 70% of the patients.
At each clinic visit, all participants completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7).
The primary outcome was PHQ-9 total scores, for which researchers looked at seven time periods: 1 week, 2-3 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 7-12 weeks, 13-24 weeks, 25-51 weeks, and 52+ weeks.
‘Blows it out of the water’
Results showed PHQ-9 total scores declined by 50% throughout the course of treatment, with much of the improvement gained within 4-6 weeks. There was a significant difference between week 1 and all later time periods (all P values < .001) and between weeks 2 and 3 and all later periods (all P values < .001).
Other measures included treatment response, defined as at least a 50% improvement on the PHQ-9, and depression remission, defined as a PHQ-9 score of less than 5. After three infusions, 14% of the patients responded and 7% were in remission. After 10 infusions, 72% responded and 38% were in remission.
These results compare favorably to other depression treatments, said Dr. Oliver. “Truthfully, with the exception of ECT [electroconvulsive therapy], this blows it all out of the water,” he added.
Dr. Oliver noted that the success rate for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is 40%-60% depending on the modality; and for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the success rate “is somewhere between the mid-20s and low-30s percent range.”
Another outcome measure was the self-harm/suicidal ideation item of the PHQ-9 questionnaire, which asks about “thoughts that you would be better off dead, or of hurting yourself in some way.” About 22% of the study participants no longer reported suicidal ideation after 3 infusions, 50% by 6 infusions, and 75% by 10 infusions.
By 15 infusions, 85% no longer reported these thoughts. “Nothing else has shown that, ever,” said Dr. Oliver.
Symptoms of generalized anxiety were also substantially improved. There was about a 30% reduction in the GAD-7 score during treatment and, again, most of the response occurred by 4-6 weeks.
Study limitations
Sex, age, and other demographic characteristics did not predict response or remission, but suicide planning trended toward higher response rates (P = .083). This suggests that a more depressed subgroup can achieve greater benefit from the treatment than can less symptomatic patients, the investigators note.
A history of psychosis also trended toward better response to treatment (P = .086) but not remission.
The researchers note that study limitations include that it was retrospective, lacked a control group, and did not require patients to be hospitalized – so the study sample may have been less severely ill than in other studies.
In addition, most patients paid out of pocket for the treatment at $495 per infusion, and they self-reported their symptoms.
As well, the researchers did not assess adverse events, although nurses made follow-up calls to patients. Dr. Oliver noted the most common side effects of ketamine are nausea, vomiting, and anxiety.
Previous research has suggested that ketamine therapy is not linked to long-term side effects, such as sexual dysfunction, weight gain, lethargy, or cognitive issues, said Dr. Oliver.
The investigators point out another study limitation was lack of detailed demographic information, such as race, income, and education, which might affect its generalizability.
Concerns and questions
Pouya Movahed Rad, MD, PhD, senior consultant and researcher in psychiatry, Lund (Sweden) University, noted several concerns, including that the clinics treating the study participants with ketamine profited from it.
He also speculated about who can afford the treatment because only a few patients in the study were reimbursed through insurance.
Dr. Movahed Rad was not involved with the current research but was principal investigator for a recent study that compared intravenous ketamine to ECT.
He questioned whether the patient population in the new study really was “real world.” Well-designed randomized controlled trials have been carried out in a “naturalistic setting, [which] get closer to real-life patients,” he said.
He also noted that the median dose after clinician titration (0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes) “may be considered very high.”
With regard to doses being titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation, “there is no obvious evidence to my knowledge that patients need to develop dissociative symptoms in order to have antidepressant effect,” said Dr. Movahed Rad.
Finally, he noted that the finding that 28% of the participants were using illegal drugs “is worrying” and wondered what drugs they were taking; he also questioned why 81% of the study population needed to take antidepressants.
The study did not receive outside funding. Dr. Oliver is the founder of MindPeace Clinics, which specialize in ketamine therapeutics. Dr. Movahed Rad has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
, new research suggests.
Results from a retrospective chart review analysis, which included more than 400 participants with TRD, illustrate that ketamine is a safe and rapid treatment in a real-world patient population, lead author Patrick A. Oliver, MD, founder and medical director, MindPeace Clinics, Richmond, Va., told this news organization.
The effect was perhaps most notable for reducing suicidal ideation, he said.
“In 2 weeks, we can take somebody from being suicidal to nonsuicidal. It’s a total game changer,” Dr. Oliver added.
Every year in the United States, about 12 million individuals think about suicide, 3.2 million make a plan to kill themselves, and more than 46,000 succeed, the investigators note.
The findings were published online in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry.
Molecule mixture
Primarily used as an anesthetic in hospitals, ketamine is also taken illegally as a recreational drug. Users may aim for an intense high or feeling of dissociation, or an out-of-body–type experience.
Ketamine is a mixture of two mirror-image molecules. An intranasal version of one of these molecules (esketamine) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for TRD. Both esketamine and ketamine are believed to increase neurotrophic signaling that affects synaptic function.
The study included 424 patients (mean age, 41.7 years) with major depressive disorder or another mood disorder and who received at least one ketamine infusion at a specialty clinic. Most participants had failed prior medication trials.
Patients in the study were typically started on 0.5 mg/kg of ketamine, with the dose titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation. The median dose administered after titration was 0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes.
The main treatment course of at least six infusions within 21 days was completed by 70% of the patients.
At each clinic visit, all participants completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7).
The primary outcome was PHQ-9 total scores, for which researchers looked at seven time periods: 1 week, 2-3 weeks, 4-6 weeks, 7-12 weeks, 13-24 weeks, 25-51 weeks, and 52+ weeks.
‘Blows it out of the water’
Results showed PHQ-9 total scores declined by 50% throughout the course of treatment, with much of the improvement gained within 4-6 weeks. There was a significant difference between week 1 and all later time periods (all P values < .001) and between weeks 2 and 3 and all later periods (all P values < .001).
Other measures included treatment response, defined as at least a 50% improvement on the PHQ-9, and depression remission, defined as a PHQ-9 score of less than 5. After three infusions, 14% of the patients responded and 7% were in remission. After 10 infusions, 72% responded and 38% were in remission.
These results compare favorably to other depression treatments, said Dr. Oliver. “Truthfully, with the exception of ECT [electroconvulsive therapy], this blows it all out of the water,” he added.
Dr. Oliver noted that the success rate for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is 40%-60% depending on the modality; and for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, the success rate “is somewhere between the mid-20s and low-30s percent range.”
Another outcome measure was the self-harm/suicidal ideation item of the PHQ-9 questionnaire, which asks about “thoughts that you would be better off dead, or of hurting yourself in some way.” About 22% of the study participants no longer reported suicidal ideation after 3 infusions, 50% by 6 infusions, and 75% by 10 infusions.
By 15 infusions, 85% no longer reported these thoughts. “Nothing else has shown that, ever,” said Dr. Oliver.
Symptoms of generalized anxiety were also substantially improved. There was about a 30% reduction in the GAD-7 score during treatment and, again, most of the response occurred by 4-6 weeks.
Study limitations
Sex, age, and other demographic characteristics did not predict response or remission, but suicide planning trended toward higher response rates (P = .083). This suggests that a more depressed subgroup can achieve greater benefit from the treatment than can less symptomatic patients, the investigators note.
A history of psychosis also trended toward better response to treatment (P = .086) but not remission.
The researchers note that study limitations include that it was retrospective, lacked a control group, and did not require patients to be hospitalized – so the study sample may have been less severely ill than in other studies.
In addition, most patients paid out of pocket for the treatment at $495 per infusion, and they self-reported their symptoms.
As well, the researchers did not assess adverse events, although nurses made follow-up calls to patients. Dr. Oliver noted the most common side effects of ketamine are nausea, vomiting, and anxiety.
Previous research has suggested that ketamine therapy is not linked to long-term side effects, such as sexual dysfunction, weight gain, lethargy, or cognitive issues, said Dr. Oliver.
The investigators point out another study limitation was lack of detailed demographic information, such as race, income, and education, which might affect its generalizability.
Concerns and questions
Pouya Movahed Rad, MD, PhD, senior consultant and researcher in psychiatry, Lund (Sweden) University, noted several concerns, including that the clinics treating the study participants with ketamine profited from it.
He also speculated about who can afford the treatment because only a few patients in the study were reimbursed through insurance.
Dr. Movahed Rad was not involved with the current research but was principal investigator for a recent study that compared intravenous ketamine to ECT.
He questioned whether the patient population in the new study really was “real world.” Well-designed randomized controlled trials have been carried out in a “naturalistic setting, [which] get closer to real-life patients,” he said.
He also noted that the median dose after clinician titration (0.93 mg/kg over 40 minutes) “may be considered very high.”
With regard to doses being titrated to achieve symptoms of partial dissociation, “there is no obvious evidence to my knowledge that patients need to develop dissociative symptoms in order to have antidepressant effect,” said Dr. Movahed Rad.
Finally, he noted that the finding that 28% of the participants were using illegal drugs “is worrying” and wondered what drugs they were taking; he also questioned why 81% of the study population needed to take antidepressants.
The study did not receive outside funding. Dr. Oliver is the founder of MindPeace Clinics, which specialize in ketamine therapeutics. Dr. Movahed Rad has reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHIATRY
Adderall shortage reported by pharmacies, patients
Half a dozen people told Bloomberg that pharmacies told them in August and September that the drug was out of stock. The patients were told the drug might not be available for weeks, though it’s supposed to be taken daily. BuzzFeed News said 20 people across the nation said that their pharmacies didn’t have Adderall in stock.
“It’s so frustrating that getting my meds requires me to be organized, focused, and motivated – all the things I’m on these meds to help with,” Irene Kelly, who has been using Adderall for 14 years, told BuzzFeed News.
Two pharmacy chains told Bloomberg that Adderall has not always been available to sell. Walgreens spokesperson Rebekah Pajak said there were “supply chain challenges” affecting instant-release and extended-release versions of the drug. CVS pharmacies can fill Adderall prescriptions “in most cases,” CVS spokesperson Matthew Blanchette said.
Several drugmakers have had brand-name and generic versions of Adderall on back order for months, Bloomberg reported. The problem started with a labor shortage at Teva Pharmaceutical, the top seller of Adderall in the United States, that created a limited supply of brand-name and generic instant-release Adderall, according to the outlet.
That said, the Food and Drug Administration is not reporting an Adderall shortage on its drug shortages database. The federal agency says it lists a drug as being in short supply when “overall market demand is not being met by the manufacturers of the product,” Bloomberg said.
“Manufacturers continue to release product,” FDA spokesperson Cherie Duvall-Jones said, according to Bloomberg.
Demand for Adderall is growing, possibly because of rising ADHD diagnoses that occurred during telehealth medical appointments amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Bloomberg reported, noting that some of those telehealth companies have come under scrutiny by the Drug Enforcement Administration and other government agencies.
NBC News, citing IQVIA, an analytics provider for the life sciences industry, reported that 41.4 million Adderall prescriptions were issued last year, up 10.4% from 2020.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Half a dozen people told Bloomberg that pharmacies told them in August and September that the drug was out of stock. The patients were told the drug might not be available for weeks, though it’s supposed to be taken daily. BuzzFeed News said 20 people across the nation said that their pharmacies didn’t have Adderall in stock.
“It’s so frustrating that getting my meds requires me to be organized, focused, and motivated – all the things I’m on these meds to help with,” Irene Kelly, who has been using Adderall for 14 years, told BuzzFeed News.
Two pharmacy chains told Bloomberg that Adderall has not always been available to sell. Walgreens spokesperson Rebekah Pajak said there were “supply chain challenges” affecting instant-release and extended-release versions of the drug. CVS pharmacies can fill Adderall prescriptions “in most cases,” CVS spokesperson Matthew Blanchette said.
Several drugmakers have had brand-name and generic versions of Adderall on back order for months, Bloomberg reported. The problem started with a labor shortage at Teva Pharmaceutical, the top seller of Adderall in the United States, that created a limited supply of brand-name and generic instant-release Adderall, according to the outlet.
That said, the Food and Drug Administration is not reporting an Adderall shortage on its drug shortages database. The federal agency says it lists a drug as being in short supply when “overall market demand is not being met by the manufacturers of the product,” Bloomberg said.
“Manufacturers continue to release product,” FDA spokesperson Cherie Duvall-Jones said, according to Bloomberg.
Demand for Adderall is growing, possibly because of rising ADHD diagnoses that occurred during telehealth medical appointments amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Bloomberg reported, noting that some of those telehealth companies have come under scrutiny by the Drug Enforcement Administration and other government agencies.
NBC News, citing IQVIA, an analytics provider for the life sciences industry, reported that 41.4 million Adderall prescriptions were issued last year, up 10.4% from 2020.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Half a dozen people told Bloomberg that pharmacies told them in August and September that the drug was out of stock. The patients were told the drug might not be available for weeks, though it’s supposed to be taken daily. BuzzFeed News said 20 people across the nation said that their pharmacies didn’t have Adderall in stock.
“It’s so frustrating that getting my meds requires me to be organized, focused, and motivated – all the things I’m on these meds to help with,” Irene Kelly, who has been using Adderall for 14 years, told BuzzFeed News.
Two pharmacy chains told Bloomberg that Adderall has not always been available to sell. Walgreens spokesperson Rebekah Pajak said there were “supply chain challenges” affecting instant-release and extended-release versions of the drug. CVS pharmacies can fill Adderall prescriptions “in most cases,” CVS spokesperson Matthew Blanchette said.
Several drugmakers have had brand-name and generic versions of Adderall on back order for months, Bloomberg reported. The problem started with a labor shortage at Teva Pharmaceutical, the top seller of Adderall in the United States, that created a limited supply of brand-name and generic instant-release Adderall, according to the outlet.
That said, the Food and Drug Administration is not reporting an Adderall shortage on its drug shortages database. The federal agency says it lists a drug as being in short supply when “overall market demand is not being met by the manufacturers of the product,” Bloomberg said.
“Manufacturers continue to release product,” FDA spokesperson Cherie Duvall-Jones said, according to Bloomberg.
Demand for Adderall is growing, possibly because of rising ADHD diagnoses that occurred during telehealth medical appointments amid the COVID-19 pandemic, Bloomberg reported, noting that some of those telehealth companies have come under scrutiny by the Drug Enforcement Administration and other government agencies.
NBC News, citing IQVIA, an analytics provider for the life sciences industry, reported that 41.4 million Adderall prescriptions were issued last year, up 10.4% from 2020.
A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.
Brodalumab suicide risk similar to other biologics, postmarket study finds
.
The Food and Drug Administration approved brodalumab (Siliq) in 2017 for treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with a boxed warning for suicidal ideation and behavior and an associated Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) program indicating an increased risk of suicidality.
Half a decade later, “the available worldwide data do not support the notion that brodalumab has a unique risk of increased suicides,” senior investigator John Koo, MD, and coinvestigators at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in a preproof article in JAAD International, noting that postmarketing data are “often considered a better reflection of real-world outcomes than clinical trials.”
The researchers extracted data through the end of 2021 on the number of completed suicides for brodalumab and ten other biologics approved for psoriasis from the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS), an international publicly available database. The researchers included suicide data on the biologics for all indications.
The authors contacted pharmaceutical companies to determine the total number of patients prescribed each drug, securing mostly “best estimates” data on 5 of the 11 biologics available for psoriasis. The researchers then calculated the number of completed suicides per total number of prescribed patients.
For brodalumab, across 20,871 total prescriptions, there was only one verifiable suicide. It occurred in a Japanese man with terminal cancer and no nearby relatives 36 days after his first dose. The suicide rate for brodalumab was similar to that of ixekizumab, secukinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab.
“Brodalumab is a very efficacious agent and may have the fastest onset of action, yet its usage is minimal compared to the other agents because of this ‘black box’ warning ... despite the fact that it’s the least expensive of any biologic,” Dr. Koo, professor of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis and Skin Treatment Center, University of California, San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. Koo, who is board-certified in both dermatology and psychiatry, said he believes the boxed warning was never warranted. All three of the verified completed suicides that occurred during clinical trials of brodalumab for psoriasis were in people who had underlying psychiatric disorders or significant stressors, such as going to jail in one case, and depression and significant isolation in another, he said.
(An analysis of psychiatric adverse events during the psoriasis clinical trials, involving more than 4,000 patients, was published online Oct. 4, 2017, in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
George Han, MD, PhD, associate professor and director of research and teledermatology at the Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New Hyde Park, N.Y., who was not involved in the research, said the new data is reassuring.
“We sometimes put it into context [in thinking and counseling about risk] that in the trials for brodalumab, the number of suicide attempts [versus completed suicides] was not an outlier,” he said. “But it’s hard to know what to make of that, so this piece of knowledge that the postmarketing data show there’s no safety signal should give people a lot of reassurance.”
Dr. Han said he has used the medication, a fully human anti-interleukin 17 receptor A monoclonal antibody, in many patients who “have not done so well on other biologics and it’s been a lifesaver ... a couple who have switched over have maintained the longest level of clearance they’ve had with anything. It’s quite striking.”
The efficacy stems at least partly from its mechanism of blocking all cytokines in the IL-17 family – including those involved in the “feedback loops that perpetuate psoriasis” – rather than just one as other biologics do, Dr. Han said.
Usage of the drug has been hindered by the black box warning and REMS program, not only because of the extra steps required and hesitation potentially evoked, but because samples are not available, and because the “formulary access is not what it could have been otherwise,” he noted.
The Siliq REMS patient enrollment form requires patients to pledge awareness of the fact that suicidal thoughts and behaviors have occurred in treated patients and that they should seek medical attention if they experience suicidal thoughts or new or worsening depression, anxiety, or other mood changes. Prescribers must be certified with the program and must pledge on each enrollment form that they have counseled their patients.
The box warning states that there is no established causal association between treatment with brodalumab and increased risk for suicidal ideation and behaviors (SIB).
Individuals with psoriasis are an “already vulnerable population” who have been shown in reviews and meta-analyses to have a higher prevalence of depression and a higher risk of SIB than those without the disease, Dr. Koo and colleagues wrote in a narrative review published in Cutis .
Regardless of therapy, they wrote in the review, dermatologists should assess for any history of depression and SIB, and evaluate for signs and symptoms of current depression and SIB, referring patients as necessary to primary care or mental health care.
In the psoriasis trials, brodalumab treatment appeared to improve symptoms of depression and anxiety – a finding consistent with the effects reported for other biologic therapies, they wrote.
The first author on the newly published preproof is Samuel Yeroushalmi, BS, a fourth-year medical student at George Washington University, Washington.
Siliq is marketed by Valeant Pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Koo disclosed that he is an adviser/consultant/speaker for numerous pharmaceutical companies, but not those that were involved in the development of brodalumab. Dr. Han said he has relationships with numerous companies, including those that have developed brodalumab and other biologic agents used for psoriasis. The authors declared funding sources as none.
.
The Food and Drug Administration approved brodalumab (Siliq) in 2017 for treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with a boxed warning for suicidal ideation and behavior and an associated Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) program indicating an increased risk of suicidality.
Half a decade later, “the available worldwide data do not support the notion that brodalumab has a unique risk of increased suicides,” senior investigator John Koo, MD, and coinvestigators at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in a preproof article in JAAD International, noting that postmarketing data are “often considered a better reflection of real-world outcomes than clinical trials.”
The researchers extracted data through the end of 2021 on the number of completed suicides for brodalumab and ten other biologics approved for psoriasis from the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS), an international publicly available database. The researchers included suicide data on the biologics for all indications.
The authors contacted pharmaceutical companies to determine the total number of patients prescribed each drug, securing mostly “best estimates” data on 5 of the 11 biologics available for psoriasis. The researchers then calculated the number of completed suicides per total number of prescribed patients.
For brodalumab, across 20,871 total prescriptions, there was only one verifiable suicide. It occurred in a Japanese man with terminal cancer and no nearby relatives 36 days after his first dose. The suicide rate for brodalumab was similar to that of ixekizumab, secukinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab.
“Brodalumab is a very efficacious agent and may have the fastest onset of action, yet its usage is minimal compared to the other agents because of this ‘black box’ warning ... despite the fact that it’s the least expensive of any biologic,” Dr. Koo, professor of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis and Skin Treatment Center, University of California, San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. Koo, who is board-certified in both dermatology and psychiatry, said he believes the boxed warning was never warranted. All three of the verified completed suicides that occurred during clinical trials of brodalumab for psoriasis were in people who had underlying psychiatric disorders or significant stressors, such as going to jail in one case, and depression and significant isolation in another, he said.
(An analysis of psychiatric adverse events during the psoriasis clinical trials, involving more than 4,000 patients, was published online Oct. 4, 2017, in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
George Han, MD, PhD, associate professor and director of research and teledermatology at the Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New Hyde Park, N.Y., who was not involved in the research, said the new data is reassuring.
“We sometimes put it into context [in thinking and counseling about risk] that in the trials for brodalumab, the number of suicide attempts [versus completed suicides] was not an outlier,” he said. “But it’s hard to know what to make of that, so this piece of knowledge that the postmarketing data show there’s no safety signal should give people a lot of reassurance.”
Dr. Han said he has used the medication, a fully human anti-interleukin 17 receptor A monoclonal antibody, in many patients who “have not done so well on other biologics and it’s been a lifesaver ... a couple who have switched over have maintained the longest level of clearance they’ve had with anything. It’s quite striking.”
The efficacy stems at least partly from its mechanism of blocking all cytokines in the IL-17 family – including those involved in the “feedback loops that perpetuate psoriasis” – rather than just one as other biologics do, Dr. Han said.
Usage of the drug has been hindered by the black box warning and REMS program, not only because of the extra steps required and hesitation potentially evoked, but because samples are not available, and because the “formulary access is not what it could have been otherwise,” he noted.
The Siliq REMS patient enrollment form requires patients to pledge awareness of the fact that suicidal thoughts and behaviors have occurred in treated patients and that they should seek medical attention if they experience suicidal thoughts or new or worsening depression, anxiety, or other mood changes. Prescribers must be certified with the program and must pledge on each enrollment form that they have counseled their patients.
The box warning states that there is no established causal association between treatment with brodalumab and increased risk for suicidal ideation and behaviors (SIB).
Individuals with psoriasis are an “already vulnerable population” who have been shown in reviews and meta-analyses to have a higher prevalence of depression and a higher risk of SIB than those without the disease, Dr. Koo and colleagues wrote in a narrative review published in Cutis .
Regardless of therapy, they wrote in the review, dermatologists should assess for any history of depression and SIB, and evaluate for signs and symptoms of current depression and SIB, referring patients as necessary to primary care or mental health care.
In the psoriasis trials, brodalumab treatment appeared to improve symptoms of depression and anxiety – a finding consistent with the effects reported for other biologic therapies, they wrote.
The first author on the newly published preproof is Samuel Yeroushalmi, BS, a fourth-year medical student at George Washington University, Washington.
Siliq is marketed by Valeant Pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Koo disclosed that he is an adviser/consultant/speaker for numerous pharmaceutical companies, but not those that were involved in the development of brodalumab. Dr. Han said he has relationships with numerous companies, including those that have developed brodalumab and other biologic agents used for psoriasis. The authors declared funding sources as none.
.
The Food and Drug Administration approved brodalumab (Siliq) in 2017 for treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis with a boxed warning for suicidal ideation and behavior and an associated Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies (REMS) program indicating an increased risk of suicidality.
Half a decade later, “the available worldwide data do not support the notion that brodalumab has a unique risk of increased suicides,” senior investigator John Koo, MD, and coinvestigators at the University of California, San Francisco, wrote in a preproof article in JAAD International, noting that postmarketing data are “often considered a better reflection of real-world outcomes than clinical trials.”
The researchers extracted data through the end of 2021 on the number of completed suicides for brodalumab and ten other biologics approved for psoriasis from the FDA’s Adverse Events Reporting System (FAERS), an international publicly available database. The researchers included suicide data on the biologics for all indications.
The authors contacted pharmaceutical companies to determine the total number of patients prescribed each drug, securing mostly “best estimates” data on 5 of the 11 biologics available for psoriasis. The researchers then calculated the number of completed suicides per total number of prescribed patients.
For brodalumab, across 20,871 total prescriptions, there was only one verifiable suicide. It occurred in a Japanese man with terminal cancer and no nearby relatives 36 days after his first dose. The suicide rate for brodalumab was similar to that of ixekizumab, secukinumab, infliximab, and adalimumab.
“Brodalumab is a very efficacious agent and may have the fastest onset of action, yet its usage is minimal compared to the other agents because of this ‘black box’ warning ... despite the fact that it’s the least expensive of any biologic,” Dr. Koo, professor of dermatology and director of the Psoriasis and Skin Treatment Center, University of California, San Francisco, said in an interview.
Dr. Koo, who is board-certified in both dermatology and psychiatry, said he believes the boxed warning was never warranted. All three of the verified completed suicides that occurred during clinical trials of brodalumab for psoriasis were in people who had underlying psychiatric disorders or significant stressors, such as going to jail in one case, and depression and significant isolation in another, he said.
(An analysis of psychiatric adverse events during the psoriasis clinical trials, involving more than 4,000 patients, was published online Oct. 4, 2017, in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
George Han, MD, PhD, associate professor and director of research and teledermatology at the Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, New Hyde Park, N.Y., who was not involved in the research, said the new data is reassuring.
“We sometimes put it into context [in thinking and counseling about risk] that in the trials for brodalumab, the number of suicide attempts [versus completed suicides] was not an outlier,” he said. “But it’s hard to know what to make of that, so this piece of knowledge that the postmarketing data show there’s no safety signal should give people a lot of reassurance.”
Dr. Han said he has used the medication, a fully human anti-interleukin 17 receptor A monoclonal antibody, in many patients who “have not done so well on other biologics and it’s been a lifesaver ... a couple who have switched over have maintained the longest level of clearance they’ve had with anything. It’s quite striking.”
The efficacy stems at least partly from its mechanism of blocking all cytokines in the IL-17 family – including those involved in the “feedback loops that perpetuate psoriasis” – rather than just one as other biologics do, Dr. Han said.
Usage of the drug has been hindered by the black box warning and REMS program, not only because of the extra steps required and hesitation potentially evoked, but because samples are not available, and because the “formulary access is not what it could have been otherwise,” he noted.
The Siliq REMS patient enrollment form requires patients to pledge awareness of the fact that suicidal thoughts and behaviors have occurred in treated patients and that they should seek medical attention if they experience suicidal thoughts or new or worsening depression, anxiety, or other mood changes. Prescribers must be certified with the program and must pledge on each enrollment form that they have counseled their patients.
The box warning states that there is no established causal association between treatment with brodalumab and increased risk for suicidal ideation and behaviors (SIB).
Individuals with psoriasis are an “already vulnerable population” who have been shown in reviews and meta-analyses to have a higher prevalence of depression and a higher risk of SIB than those without the disease, Dr. Koo and colleagues wrote in a narrative review published in Cutis .
Regardless of therapy, they wrote in the review, dermatologists should assess for any history of depression and SIB, and evaluate for signs and symptoms of current depression and SIB, referring patients as necessary to primary care or mental health care.
In the psoriasis trials, brodalumab treatment appeared to improve symptoms of depression and anxiety – a finding consistent with the effects reported for other biologic therapies, they wrote.
The first author on the newly published preproof is Samuel Yeroushalmi, BS, a fourth-year medical student at George Washington University, Washington.
Siliq is marketed by Valeant Pharmaceuticals.
Dr. Koo disclosed that he is an adviser/consultant/speaker for numerous pharmaceutical companies, but not those that were involved in the development of brodalumab. Dr. Han said he has relationships with numerous companies, including those that have developed brodalumab and other biologic agents used for psoriasis. The authors declared funding sources as none.
Quiet quitting: Are physicians dying inside bit by bit? Or setting healthy boundaries?
In the past few months, “quiet quitting” has garnered increasing traction across social media platforms. My morning review of social media revealed thousands of posts ranging from “Why doing less at work could be good for you – and your employer” to “After ‘quiet quitting’ here comes ‘quiet firing.’ ”
But quiet quitting is neither quiet nor quitting.
Quiet quitting is a misnomer. In addition, quiet quitters are firmer with their boundaries, do not take on work above and beyond clearly stated expectations, do not respond after hours, and do not feel like they are “not doing their job” when they are not immediately available.
Individuals who “quiet quit” continue to meet the demands of their job but reject the hustle-culture mentality that you must always be available for more work and, most importantly, that your value as person and self-worth are defined and determined by your work. Quiet quitters believe that it is possible to have good boundaries and yet remain productive, engaged, and active within the workplace.
Earlier this month, NPR’s posted tutorial on how to set better boundaries at work garnered 491,000 views, reflecting employees’ difficulties in communicating their needs, thoughts, and availability to their employers. Quiet quitting refers to not only rejecting the idea of going above and beyond in the workplace but also feeling confident that there will not be negative ramifications for not consistently working beyond the expected requirements.
A focus on balance, life, loves, and family is rarely addressed or emphasized by traditional employers; employees have little skill in addressing boundaries and clarifying their value and availability. For decades, “needing” flexibility of any kind or valuing activities as much as your job were viewed as negative attributes, making those individuals less-desired employees.
Data support the quiet quitting trend. Gallup data reveal that employee engagement has fallen for 2 consecutive years in the U.S. workforce. Across the first quarter of 2022, Generation Z and younger Millennials report the lowest engagement across populations at 31%. More than half of this cohort, 54%, classified as “not engaged” in their workplace.
Why is quiet quitting gaining prominence now? COVID may play a role.
Many suggest that self-evaluation and establishing firmer boundaries is a logical response to emotional sequelae caused by COVID. Quiet quitting appears to have been fueled by the pandemic. Employees were forced into crisis mode by COVID; the lines between work, life, and home evaporated, allowing or forcing workers to evaluate their efficacy and satisfaction. With the structural impact of COVID reducing and a return to more standard work practices, it is expected that the job “rules” once held as truths come under evaluation and scrutiny.
Perhaps COVID has forced, and provided, another opportunity for us to closely examine our routines and habits and take stock of what really matters. Generations expectedly differ in their values and definitions of success. COVID has set prior established rules on fire, by forcing patterns and expectations that were neither expected nor wanted, within the context of a global health crisis. Within this backdrop, should we really believe our worth is determined by our job?
The truth is, we are still grieving what we lost during COVID and we have expectedly not assimilated to “the new normal.” Psychology has long recognized that losing structures and supports, routines and habits, causes symptoms of significant discomfort.
The idea that we would return to prior workplace expectations is naive. The idea we would “return to life as it was” is naive. It seems expected, then, that both employers and employees should evaluate their goals and communicate more openly about how each can be met.
It is incumbent upon the employers to set up clear guidelines regarding expectations, including rewards for performance and expectations for time, both within and outside of the work schedule. Employers must recognize symptoms of detachment in their employees and engage in the process of continuing clarifying roles and expectations while providing necessities for employees to succeed at their highest level. Employees, in turn, must self-examine their goals, communicate their needs, meet their responsibilities fully, and take on the challenge of determining their own definition of balance.
Maybe instead of quiet quitting, we should call it this new movement “self-awareness, growth, and evolution.” Hmmm, there’s an intriguing thought.
Dr. Calvery is professor of pediatrics at the University of Louisville (Ky.) She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the past few months, “quiet quitting” has garnered increasing traction across social media platforms. My morning review of social media revealed thousands of posts ranging from “Why doing less at work could be good for you – and your employer” to “After ‘quiet quitting’ here comes ‘quiet firing.’ ”
But quiet quitting is neither quiet nor quitting.
Quiet quitting is a misnomer. In addition, quiet quitters are firmer with their boundaries, do not take on work above and beyond clearly stated expectations, do not respond after hours, and do not feel like they are “not doing their job” when they are not immediately available.
Individuals who “quiet quit” continue to meet the demands of their job but reject the hustle-culture mentality that you must always be available for more work and, most importantly, that your value as person and self-worth are defined and determined by your work. Quiet quitters believe that it is possible to have good boundaries and yet remain productive, engaged, and active within the workplace.
Earlier this month, NPR’s posted tutorial on how to set better boundaries at work garnered 491,000 views, reflecting employees’ difficulties in communicating their needs, thoughts, and availability to their employers. Quiet quitting refers to not only rejecting the idea of going above and beyond in the workplace but also feeling confident that there will not be negative ramifications for not consistently working beyond the expected requirements.
A focus on balance, life, loves, and family is rarely addressed or emphasized by traditional employers; employees have little skill in addressing boundaries and clarifying their value and availability. For decades, “needing” flexibility of any kind or valuing activities as much as your job were viewed as negative attributes, making those individuals less-desired employees.
Data support the quiet quitting trend. Gallup data reveal that employee engagement has fallen for 2 consecutive years in the U.S. workforce. Across the first quarter of 2022, Generation Z and younger Millennials report the lowest engagement across populations at 31%. More than half of this cohort, 54%, classified as “not engaged” in their workplace.
Why is quiet quitting gaining prominence now? COVID may play a role.
Many suggest that self-evaluation and establishing firmer boundaries is a logical response to emotional sequelae caused by COVID. Quiet quitting appears to have been fueled by the pandemic. Employees were forced into crisis mode by COVID; the lines between work, life, and home evaporated, allowing or forcing workers to evaluate their efficacy and satisfaction. With the structural impact of COVID reducing and a return to more standard work practices, it is expected that the job “rules” once held as truths come under evaluation and scrutiny.
Perhaps COVID has forced, and provided, another opportunity for us to closely examine our routines and habits and take stock of what really matters. Generations expectedly differ in their values and definitions of success. COVID has set prior established rules on fire, by forcing patterns and expectations that were neither expected nor wanted, within the context of a global health crisis. Within this backdrop, should we really believe our worth is determined by our job?
The truth is, we are still grieving what we lost during COVID and we have expectedly not assimilated to “the new normal.” Psychology has long recognized that losing structures and supports, routines and habits, causes symptoms of significant discomfort.
The idea that we would return to prior workplace expectations is naive. The idea we would “return to life as it was” is naive. It seems expected, then, that both employers and employees should evaluate their goals and communicate more openly about how each can be met.
It is incumbent upon the employers to set up clear guidelines regarding expectations, including rewards for performance and expectations for time, both within and outside of the work schedule. Employers must recognize symptoms of detachment in their employees and engage in the process of continuing clarifying roles and expectations while providing necessities for employees to succeed at their highest level. Employees, in turn, must self-examine their goals, communicate their needs, meet their responsibilities fully, and take on the challenge of determining their own definition of balance.
Maybe instead of quiet quitting, we should call it this new movement “self-awareness, growth, and evolution.” Hmmm, there’s an intriguing thought.
Dr. Calvery is professor of pediatrics at the University of Louisville (Ky.) She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
In the past few months, “quiet quitting” has garnered increasing traction across social media platforms. My morning review of social media revealed thousands of posts ranging from “Why doing less at work could be good for you – and your employer” to “After ‘quiet quitting’ here comes ‘quiet firing.’ ”
But quiet quitting is neither quiet nor quitting.
Quiet quitting is a misnomer. In addition, quiet quitters are firmer with their boundaries, do not take on work above and beyond clearly stated expectations, do not respond after hours, and do not feel like they are “not doing their job” when they are not immediately available.
Individuals who “quiet quit” continue to meet the demands of their job but reject the hustle-culture mentality that you must always be available for more work and, most importantly, that your value as person and self-worth are defined and determined by your work. Quiet quitters believe that it is possible to have good boundaries and yet remain productive, engaged, and active within the workplace.
Earlier this month, NPR’s posted tutorial on how to set better boundaries at work garnered 491,000 views, reflecting employees’ difficulties in communicating their needs, thoughts, and availability to their employers. Quiet quitting refers to not only rejecting the idea of going above and beyond in the workplace but also feeling confident that there will not be negative ramifications for not consistently working beyond the expected requirements.
A focus on balance, life, loves, and family is rarely addressed or emphasized by traditional employers; employees have little skill in addressing boundaries and clarifying their value and availability. For decades, “needing” flexibility of any kind or valuing activities as much as your job were viewed as negative attributes, making those individuals less-desired employees.
Data support the quiet quitting trend. Gallup data reveal that employee engagement has fallen for 2 consecutive years in the U.S. workforce. Across the first quarter of 2022, Generation Z and younger Millennials report the lowest engagement across populations at 31%. More than half of this cohort, 54%, classified as “not engaged” in their workplace.
Why is quiet quitting gaining prominence now? COVID may play a role.
Many suggest that self-evaluation and establishing firmer boundaries is a logical response to emotional sequelae caused by COVID. Quiet quitting appears to have been fueled by the pandemic. Employees were forced into crisis mode by COVID; the lines between work, life, and home evaporated, allowing or forcing workers to evaluate their efficacy and satisfaction. With the structural impact of COVID reducing and a return to more standard work practices, it is expected that the job “rules” once held as truths come under evaluation and scrutiny.
Perhaps COVID has forced, and provided, another opportunity for us to closely examine our routines and habits and take stock of what really matters. Generations expectedly differ in their values and definitions of success. COVID has set prior established rules on fire, by forcing patterns and expectations that were neither expected nor wanted, within the context of a global health crisis. Within this backdrop, should we really believe our worth is determined by our job?
The truth is, we are still grieving what we lost during COVID and we have expectedly not assimilated to “the new normal.” Psychology has long recognized that losing structures and supports, routines and habits, causes symptoms of significant discomfort.
The idea that we would return to prior workplace expectations is naive. The idea we would “return to life as it was” is naive. It seems expected, then, that both employers and employees should evaluate their goals and communicate more openly about how each can be met.
It is incumbent upon the employers to set up clear guidelines regarding expectations, including rewards for performance and expectations for time, both within and outside of the work schedule. Employers must recognize symptoms of detachment in their employees and engage in the process of continuing clarifying roles and expectations while providing necessities for employees to succeed at their highest level. Employees, in turn, must self-examine their goals, communicate their needs, meet their responsibilities fully, and take on the challenge of determining their own definition of balance.
Maybe instead of quiet quitting, we should call it this new movement “self-awareness, growth, and evolution.” Hmmm, there’s an intriguing thought.
Dr. Calvery is professor of pediatrics at the University of Louisville (Ky.) She disclosed no relevant conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Detachment predicts worse posttraumatic outcomes
The results highlight the importance of screening for dissociation in patients who have experienced trauma, study investigator Lauren A.M. Lebois, PhD, director of the dissociative disorders and trauma research program at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass., told this news organization.
“Clinicians could identify individuals potentially at risk of a chronic, more severe psychiatric course before these people go down that road, and they have the opportunity to connect folks with a phased trauma treatment approach to speed their recovery,” said Dr. Lebois, who is also an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
The study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Underdiagnosed
Feelings of detachment or derealization are a type of dissociation. Patients with the syndrome report feeling foggy or as if they are in a dream. Dissociative diagnoses are not rare and, in fact, are more prevalent than schizophrenia.
Research supports a powerful relationship between dissociation and traumatic experiences. However, dissociation is among the most stigmatized of psychiatric conditions. Even among clinicians and researchers, beliefs about dissociation are often not based on the scientific literature, said Dr. Lebois.
“For instance, skepticism, misunderstanding, and lack of professional education about dissociation all contribute to striking rates of underdiagnosis and misdiagnoses,” she said.
Dr. Lebois and colleagues used data from the larger Advancing Understanding of Recovery After Trauma (AURORA) study and included 1,464 adults, mean age 35 years, appearing at 22 U.S. emergency departments. Patients experienced a traumatic event such as a motor vehicle crash or physical or sexual assault.
About 2 weeks after the trauma, participants reported symptoms of derealization as measured by a two-item version of the Brief Dissociative Experiences Scale.
Brain imaging data
A subset of 145 patients underwent functional MRI (fMRI), during which they completed an emotion reactivity task (viewing fearful-looking human faces) and a resting-state scan.
In addition to measuring history of childhood maltreatment, researchers assessed posttraumatic stress symptom severity at 2 weeks and again at 3 months using the posttraumatic stress disorder checklist. Also at 3 months, they measured depression and anxiety symptoms, pain, and functional impairment.
About 55% of self-report participants and 50% of MRI participants endorsed some level of persistent derealization at 2 weeks.
After controlling for potential confounders, including sex, age, childhood maltreatment, and current posttraumatic stress symptoms, researchers found persistent derealization was associated with increased ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) activity while viewing fearful faces.
The vmPFC helps to regulate emotional and physical reactions. “This region puts the ‘brakes’ on your emotional and physical reactivity – helping you to calm down” after a threatening or stressful experience has passed, said Dr. Lebois.
Researchers also found an association between higher self-reported derealization and decreased resting-state connectivity between the vmPFC and the orbitofrontal cortex and right lobule VIIIa – a region of the cerebellum involved in sensorimotor function.
“This may contribute to perceptual and affective distortions experienced during derealization – for example, feelings that surroundings are fading away, unreal, or strange,” said Dr. Lebois.
More pain, depression, anxiety
Higher levels of self-reported derealization at 2 weeks post trauma predicted higher levels of PTSD, anxiety, and depression as well as more bodily pain and impairment in work, family, and social life at 3 months.
“When we accounted for baseline levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms and trauma history, higher levels of self-reported derealization still predicted higher posttraumatic stress disorder and depression symptoms at 3 months,” said Dr. Lebois.
Additional adjusted analyses showed increased vmPFC activity during the fearful face task predicted 3-month self-reported PTSD symptoms.
Dr. Lebois “highly recommends” clinicians screen for dissociative symptoms, including derealization, in patients with trauma. Self-report screening tools are freely available online.
She noted patients with significant dissociative symptoms often do better with a “phase-oriented” approach to trauma treatment.
“In phase one, they learn emotional regulation skills to help them take more control over when they dissociate. Then they can successfully move on to trauma processing in phase two, which can involve exposure to trauma details.”
Although the field is not yet ready to use brain scans to diagnose dissociative symptoms, the new results “take us one step closer to being able to use objective neuroimaging biomarkers of derealization to augment subjective self-report measures,” said Dr. Lebois.
A limitation of the study was it could not determine a causal relationship, as some derealization may have been present before the traumatic event. The findings may not generalize to other types of dissociation, and the derealization assessment was measured only through a self-report 2 weeks after the trauma.
Another limitation was exclusion of patients with self-inflicted injuries or who were involved in domestic violence. The researchers noted the prevalence of derealization might have been even higher if such individuals were included.
An important investigation
In an accompanying editorial, Lisa M. Shin, PhD, department of psychology, Tufts University, and department of psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, notes having both clinical and neuroimaging variables as well as a large sample size makes the study “an important investigation” into predictors of psychiatric symptoms post-trauma.
Investigating a specific subtype of dissociation – persistent derealization – adds to the “novelty” of the study, she said.
The new findings “are certainly exciting for their potential clinical relevance and contributions to neurocircuitry models of PTSD,” she writes.
Some may argue administering a short, self-report measure of derealization “is far more efficient, cost-effective, and inclusive than conducting a specialized and expensive fMRI scan that is unlikely to be available to everyone,” notes Dr. Shin.
However, she added, a potential benefit of such a scan is identification of specific brain regions as potential targets for intervention. “For example, the results of this and other studies suggest that the vmPFC is a reasonable target for transcranial magnetic stimulation or its variants.”
The new results need to be replicated in a large, independent sample, said Dr. Shin. She added it would be helpful to know if other types of dissociation, and activation in other subregions of the vmPFC, also predict psychiatric outcomes after a trauma.
The study was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grants, the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, One Mind, and the Mayday Fund. Dr. Lebois has received grant support from NIMH, and her spouse receives payments from Vanderbilt University for technology licensed to Acadia Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Shin receives textbook-related royalties from Pearson.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The results highlight the importance of screening for dissociation in patients who have experienced trauma, study investigator Lauren A.M. Lebois, PhD, director of the dissociative disorders and trauma research program at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass., told this news organization.
“Clinicians could identify individuals potentially at risk of a chronic, more severe psychiatric course before these people go down that road, and they have the opportunity to connect folks with a phased trauma treatment approach to speed their recovery,” said Dr. Lebois, who is also an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
The study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Underdiagnosed
Feelings of detachment or derealization are a type of dissociation. Patients with the syndrome report feeling foggy or as if they are in a dream. Dissociative diagnoses are not rare and, in fact, are more prevalent than schizophrenia.
Research supports a powerful relationship between dissociation and traumatic experiences. However, dissociation is among the most stigmatized of psychiatric conditions. Even among clinicians and researchers, beliefs about dissociation are often not based on the scientific literature, said Dr. Lebois.
“For instance, skepticism, misunderstanding, and lack of professional education about dissociation all contribute to striking rates of underdiagnosis and misdiagnoses,” she said.
Dr. Lebois and colleagues used data from the larger Advancing Understanding of Recovery After Trauma (AURORA) study and included 1,464 adults, mean age 35 years, appearing at 22 U.S. emergency departments. Patients experienced a traumatic event such as a motor vehicle crash or physical or sexual assault.
About 2 weeks after the trauma, participants reported symptoms of derealization as measured by a two-item version of the Brief Dissociative Experiences Scale.
Brain imaging data
A subset of 145 patients underwent functional MRI (fMRI), during which they completed an emotion reactivity task (viewing fearful-looking human faces) and a resting-state scan.
In addition to measuring history of childhood maltreatment, researchers assessed posttraumatic stress symptom severity at 2 weeks and again at 3 months using the posttraumatic stress disorder checklist. Also at 3 months, they measured depression and anxiety symptoms, pain, and functional impairment.
About 55% of self-report participants and 50% of MRI participants endorsed some level of persistent derealization at 2 weeks.
After controlling for potential confounders, including sex, age, childhood maltreatment, and current posttraumatic stress symptoms, researchers found persistent derealization was associated with increased ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) activity while viewing fearful faces.
The vmPFC helps to regulate emotional and physical reactions. “This region puts the ‘brakes’ on your emotional and physical reactivity – helping you to calm down” after a threatening or stressful experience has passed, said Dr. Lebois.
Researchers also found an association between higher self-reported derealization and decreased resting-state connectivity between the vmPFC and the orbitofrontal cortex and right lobule VIIIa – a region of the cerebellum involved in sensorimotor function.
“This may contribute to perceptual and affective distortions experienced during derealization – for example, feelings that surroundings are fading away, unreal, or strange,” said Dr. Lebois.
More pain, depression, anxiety
Higher levels of self-reported derealization at 2 weeks post trauma predicted higher levels of PTSD, anxiety, and depression as well as more bodily pain and impairment in work, family, and social life at 3 months.
“When we accounted for baseline levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms and trauma history, higher levels of self-reported derealization still predicted higher posttraumatic stress disorder and depression symptoms at 3 months,” said Dr. Lebois.
Additional adjusted analyses showed increased vmPFC activity during the fearful face task predicted 3-month self-reported PTSD symptoms.
Dr. Lebois “highly recommends” clinicians screen for dissociative symptoms, including derealization, in patients with trauma. Self-report screening tools are freely available online.
She noted patients with significant dissociative symptoms often do better with a “phase-oriented” approach to trauma treatment.
“In phase one, they learn emotional regulation skills to help them take more control over when they dissociate. Then they can successfully move on to trauma processing in phase two, which can involve exposure to trauma details.”
Although the field is not yet ready to use brain scans to diagnose dissociative symptoms, the new results “take us one step closer to being able to use objective neuroimaging biomarkers of derealization to augment subjective self-report measures,” said Dr. Lebois.
A limitation of the study was it could not determine a causal relationship, as some derealization may have been present before the traumatic event. The findings may not generalize to other types of dissociation, and the derealization assessment was measured only through a self-report 2 weeks after the trauma.
Another limitation was exclusion of patients with self-inflicted injuries or who were involved in domestic violence. The researchers noted the prevalence of derealization might have been even higher if such individuals were included.
An important investigation
In an accompanying editorial, Lisa M. Shin, PhD, department of psychology, Tufts University, and department of psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, notes having both clinical and neuroimaging variables as well as a large sample size makes the study “an important investigation” into predictors of psychiatric symptoms post-trauma.
Investigating a specific subtype of dissociation – persistent derealization – adds to the “novelty” of the study, she said.
The new findings “are certainly exciting for their potential clinical relevance and contributions to neurocircuitry models of PTSD,” she writes.
Some may argue administering a short, self-report measure of derealization “is far more efficient, cost-effective, and inclusive than conducting a specialized and expensive fMRI scan that is unlikely to be available to everyone,” notes Dr. Shin.
However, she added, a potential benefit of such a scan is identification of specific brain regions as potential targets for intervention. “For example, the results of this and other studies suggest that the vmPFC is a reasonable target for transcranial magnetic stimulation or its variants.”
The new results need to be replicated in a large, independent sample, said Dr. Shin. She added it would be helpful to know if other types of dissociation, and activation in other subregions of the vmPFC, also predict psychiatric outcomes after a trauma.
The study was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grants, the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, One Mind, and the Mayday Fund. Dr. Lebois has received grant support from NIMH, and her spouse receives payments from Vanderbilt University for technology licensed to Acadia Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Shin receives textbook-related royalties from Pearson.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The results highlight the importance of screening for dissociation in patients who have experienced trauma, study investigator Lauren A.M. Lebois, PhD, director of the dissociative disorders and trauma research program at McLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass., told this news organization.
“Clinicians could identify individuals potentially at risk of a chronic, more severe psychiatric course before these people go down that road, and they have the opportunity to connect folks with a phased trauma treatment approach to speed their recovery,” said Dr. Lebois, who is also an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, Boston.
The study was published in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
Underdiagnosed
Feelings of detachment or derealization are a type of dissociation. Patients with the syndrome report feeling foggy or as if they are in a dream. Dissociative diagnoses are not rare and, in fact, are more prevalent than schizophrenia.
Research supports a powerful relationship between dissociation and traumatic experiences. However, dissociation is among the most stigmatized of psychiatric conditions. Even among clinicians and researchers, beliefs about dissociation are often not based on the scientific literature, said Dr. Lebois.
“For instance, skepticism, misunderstanding, and lack of professional education about dissociation all contribute to striking rates of underdiagnosis and misdiagnoses,” she said.
Dr. Lebois and colleagues used data from the larger Advancing Understanding of Recovery After Trauma (AURORA) study and included 1,464 adults, mean age 35 years, appearing at 22 U.S. emergency departments. Patients experienced a traumatic event such as a motor vehicle crash or physical or sexual assault.
About 2 weeks after the trauma, participants reported symptoms of derealization as measured by a two-item version of the Brief Dissociative Experiences Scale.
Brain imaging data
A subset of 145 patients underwent functional MRI (fMRI), during which they completed an emotion reactivity task (viewing fearful-looking human faces) and a resting-state scan.
In addition to measuring history of childhood maltreatment, researchers assessed posttraumatic stress symptom severity at 2 weeks and again at 3 months using the posttraumatic stress disorder checklist. Also at 3 months, they measured depression and anxiety symptoms, pain, and functional impairment.
About 55% of self-report participants and 50% of MRI participants endorsed some level of persistent derealization at 2 weeks.
After controlling for potential confounders, including sex, age, childhood maltreatment, and current posttraumatic stress symptoms, researchers found persistent derealization was associated with increased ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) activity while viewing fearful faces.
The vmPFC helps to regulate emotional and physical reactions. “This region puts the ‘brakes’ on your emotional and physical reactivity – helping you to calm down” after a threatening or stressful experience has passed, said Dr. Lebois.
Researchers also found an association between higher self-reported derealization and decreased resting-state connectivity between the vmPFC and the orbitofrontal cortex and right lobule VIIIa – a region of the cerebellum involved in sensorimotor function.
“This may contribute to perceptual and affective distortions experienced during derealization – for example, feelings that surroundings are fading away, unreal, or strange,” said Dr. Lebois.
More pain, depression, anxiety
Higher levels of self-reported derealization at 2 weeks post trauma predicted higher levels of PTSD, anxiety, and depression as well as more bodily pain and impairment in work, family, and social life at 3 months.
“When we accounted for baseline levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms and trauma history, higher levels of self-reported derealization still predicted higher posttraumatic stress disorder and depression symptoms at 3 months,” said Dr. Lebois.
Additional adjusted analyses showed increased vmPFC activity during the fearful face task predicted 3-month self-reported PTSD symptoms.
Dr. Lebois “highly recommends” clinicians screen for dissociative symptoms, including derealization, in patients with trauma. Self-report screening tools are freely available online.
She noted patients with significant dissociative symptoms often do better with a “phase-oriented” approach to trauma treatment.
“In phase one, they learn emotional regulation skills to help them take more control over when they dissociate. Then they can successfully move on to trauma processing in phase two, which can involve exposure to trauma details.”
Although the field is not yet ready to use brain scans to diagnose dissociative symptoms, the new results “take us one step closer to being able to use objective neuroimaging biomarkers of derealization to augment subjective self-report measures,” said Dr. Lebois.
A limitation of the study was it could not determine a causal relationship, as some derealization may have been present before the traumatic event. The findings may not generalize to other types of dissociation, and the derealization assessment was measured only through a self-report 2 weeks after the trauma.
Another limitation was exclusion of patients with self-inflicted injuries or who were involved in domestic violence. The researchers noted the prevalence of derealization might have been even higher if such individuals were included.
An important investigation
In an accompanying editorial, Lisa M. Shin, PhD, department of psychology, Tufts University, and department of psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, notes having both clinical and neuroimaging variables as well as a large sample size makes the study “an important investigation” into predictors of psychiatric symptoms post-trauma.
Investigating a specific subtype of dissociation – persistent derealization – adds to the “novelty” of the study, she said.
The new findings “are certainly exciting for their potential clinical relevance and contributions to neurocircuitry models of PTSD,” she writes.
Some may argue administering a short, self-report measure of derealization “is far more efficient, cost-effective, and inclusive than conducting a specialized and expensive fMRI scan that is unlikely to be available to everyone,” notes Dr. Shin.
However, she added, a potential benefit of such a scan is identification of specific brain regions as potential targets for intervention. “For example, the results of this and other studies suggest that the vmPFC is a reasonable target for transcranial magnetic stimulation or its variants.”
The new results need to be replicated in a large, independent sample, said Dr. Shin. She added it would be helpful to know if other types of dissociation, and activation in other subregions of the vmPFC, also predict psychiatric outcomes after a trauma.
The study was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grants, the U.S. Army Medical Research and Material Command, One Mind, and the Mayday Fund. Dr. Lebois has received grant support from NIMH, and her spouse receives payments from Vanderbilt University for technology licensed to Acadia Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Shin receives textbook-related royalties from Pearson.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY