12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Clinical specificity profile for novel rapid acting antidepressant drugs

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Mood disorders are recurrent/chronic diseases with variable clinical remission rates. Available antidepressants are not effective in all patients and often show a relevant response latency, with a range of adverse events, including weight gain and sexual dysfunction. Novel rapid agents were developed with the aim of overcoming at least in part these issues. Novel drugs target glutamate, gamma-aminobutyric acid, orexin, and other receptors, providing a broader range of pharmacodynamic mechanisms, that is, expected to increase the possibility of personalizing treatments on the individual clinical profile. These new drugs were developed with the aim of combining a rapid action, a tolerable profile, and higher effectiveness on specific symptoms, which were relatively poorly targeted by standard antidepressants, such as anhedonia and response to reward, suicidal ideation/behaviours, insomnia, cognitive deficits, and irritability. This review discusses the clinical specificity profile of new antidepressants, namely 4-chlorokynurenine (AV-101), dextromethorphan-bupropion, pregn-4-en-20-yn-3-one (PH-10), pimavanserin, PRAX-114, psilocybin, esmethadone (REL-1017/dextromethadone), seltorexant (JNJ-42847922/MIN-202), and zuranolone (SAGE-217). The main aim is to provide an overview of the efficacy/tolerability of these compounds in patients with mood disorders having different symptom/comorbidity patterns, to help clinicians in the optimization of the risk/benefit ratio when prescribing these drugs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references149

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

          Summary Background The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD 2017) includes a comprehensive assessment of incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability (YLDs) for 354 causes in 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2017. Previous GBD studies have shown how the decline of mortality rates from 1990 to 2016 has led to an increase in life expectancy, an ageing global population, and an expansion of the non-fatal burden of disease and injury. These studies have also shown how a substantial portion of the world's population experiences non-fatal health loss with considerable heterogeneity among different causes, locations, ages, and sexes. Ongoing objectives of the GBD study include increasing the level of estimation detail, improving analytical strategies, and increasing the amount of high-quality data. Methods We estimated incidence and prevalence for 354 diseases and injuries and 3484 sequelae. We used an updated and extensive body of literature studies, survey data, surveillance data, inpatient admission records, outpatient visit records, and health insurance claims, and additionally used results from cause of death models to inform estimates using a total of 68 781 data sources. Newly available clinical data from India, Iran, Japan, Jordan, Nepal, China, Brazil, Norway, and Italy were incorporated, as well as updated claims data from the USA and new claims data from Taiwan (province of China) and Singapore. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian meta-regression tool, as the main method of estimation, ensuring consistency between rates of incidence, prevalence, remission, and cause of death for each condition. YLDs were estimated as the product of a prevalence estimate and a disability weight for health states of each mutually exclusive sequela, adjusted for comorbidity. We updated the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary development indicator of income per capita, years of schooling, and total fertility rate. Additionally, we calculated differences between male and female YLDs to identify divergent trends across sexes. GBD 2017 complies with the Guidelines for Accurate and Transparent Health Estimates Reporting. Findings Globally, for females, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and haemoglobinopathies and haemolytic anaemias in both 1990 and 2017. For males, the causes with the greatest age-standardised prevalence were oral disorders, headache disorders, and tuberculosis including latent tuberculosis infection in both 1990 and 2017. In terms of YLDs, low back pain, headache disorders, and dietary iron deficiency were the leading Level 3 causes of YLD counts in 1990, whereas low back pain, headache disorders, and depressive disorders were the leading causes in 2017 for both sexes combined. All-cause age-standardised YLD rates decreased by 3·9% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·1–4·6) from 1990 to 2017; however, the all-age YLD rate increased by 7·2% (6·0–8·4) while the total sum of global YLDs increased from 562 million (421–723) to 853 million (642–1100). The increases for males and females were similar, with increases in all-age YLD rates of 7·9% (6·6–9·2) for males and 6·5% (5·4–7·7) for females. We found significant differences between males and females in terms of age-standardised prevalence estimates for multiple causes. The causes with the greatest relative differences between sexes in 2017 included substance use disorders (3018 cases [95% UI 2782–3252] per 100 000 in males vs s1400 [1279–1524] per 100 000 in females), transport injuries (3322 [3082–3583] vs 2336 [2154–2535]), and self-harm and interpersonal violence (3265 [2943–3630] vs 5643 [5057–6302]). Interpretation Global all-cause age-standardised YLD rates have improved only slightly over a period spanning nearly three decades. However, the magnitude of the non-fatal disease burden has expanded globally, with increasing numbers of people who have a wide spectrum of conditions. A subset of conditions has remained globally pervasive since 1990, whereas other conditions have displayed more dynamic trends, with different ages, sexes, and geographies across the globe experiencing varying burdens and trends of health loss. This study emphasises how global improvements in premature mortality for select conditions have led to older populations with complex and potentially expensive diseases, yet also highlights global achievements in certain domains of disease and injury. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change

            The construction of a depression rating scale designed to be particularly sensitive to treatment effects is described. Ratings of 54 English and 52 Swedish patients on a 65 item comprehensive psychopathology scale were used to identify the 17 most commonly occurring symptoms in primary depressive illness in the combined sample. Ratings on these 17 items for 64 patients participating in studies of four different antidepressant drugs were used to create a depression scale consisting of the 10 items which showed the largest changes with treatment and the highest correlation to overall change. The inner-rater reliability of the new depression scale was high. Scores on the scale correlated significantly with scores on a standard rating scale for depression, the Hamilton Rating Scale (HRS), indicating its validity as a general severity estimate. Its capacity to differentiate between responders and non-responders to antidepressant treatment was better than the HRS, indicating greater sensitivity to change. The practical and ethical implications in terms of smaller sample sizes in clinical trials are discussed.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Psilocybin produces substantial and sustained decreases in depression and anxiety in patients with life-threatening cancer: A randomized double-blind trial

              Cancer patients often develop chronic, clinically significant symptoms of depression and anxiety. Previous studies suggest that psilocybin may decrease depression and anxiety in cancer patients. The effects of psilocybin were studied in 51 cancer patients with life-threatening diagnoses and symptoms of depression and/or anxiety. This randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial investigated the effects of a very low (placebo-like) dose (1 or 3 mg/70 kg) vs. a high dose (22 or 30 mg/70 kg) of psilocybin administered in counterbalanced sequence with 5 weeks between sessions and a 6-month follow-up. Instructions to participants and staff minimized expectancy effects. Participants, staff, and community observers rated participant moods, attitudes, and behaviors throughout the study. High-dose psilocybin produced large decreases in clinician- and self-rated measures of depressed mood and anxiety, along with increases in quality of life, life meaning, and optimism, and decreases in death anxiety. At 6-month follow-up, these changes were sustained, with about 80% of participants continuing to show clinically significant decreases in depressed mood and anxiety. Participants attributed improvements in attitudes about life/self, mood, relationships, and spirituality to the high-dose experience, with >80% endorsing moderately or greater increased well-being/life satisfaction. Community observer ratings showed corresponding changes. Mystical-type psilocybin experience on session day mediated the effect of psilocybin dose on therapeutic outcomes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00465595
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int Clin Psychopharmacol
                Int Clin Psychopharmacol
                ICP
                International Clinical Psychopharmacology
                Lippincott Williams And Wilkins
                0268-1315
                1473-5857
                September 2023
                30 June 2023
                : 38
                : 5
                : 297-328
                Affiliations
                [a ]Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
                [b ]Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [c ]Social, Genetic & Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Alessandro Serretti, MD, Viale Carlo Pepoli 5, Bologna 40123, Italy, Tel: +39 347 3024020; fax: +39 051 521030; e-mail: alessandro.serretti@ 123456unibo.it
                Article
                00003
                10.1097/YIC.0000000000000488
                10373854
                37381161
                d32c1655-dac9-4baf-ba01-b1781359af66
                Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 8 May 2023
                : 13 June 2023
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                TRUE

                antidepressants,bipolar depression,clinical trials,gamma-aminobutyric acid,major depressive disorder,novel rapid acting antidepressant,pharmacodynamic mechanisms,postpartum depression,treatment-resistant depression

                Comments

                Comment on this article