User login
MIND diet preserves cognition, new data show
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Adherence to the MIND diet can improve memory and thinking skills of older adults, even in the presence of Alzheimer’s disease pathology, new data from the Rush Memory and Aging Project (MAP) show.
“The MIND diet was associated with better cognitive functions independently of brain pathologies related to Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that diet may contribute to cognitive resilience, which ultimately indicates that it is never too late for dementia prevention,” lead author Klodian Dhana, MD, PhD, with the Rush Institute of Healthy Aging at Rush University, Chicago, said in an interview.
The study was published online Sept. 14, 2021, in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease.
Impact on brain pathology
“While previous investigations determined that the MIND diet is associated with a slower cognitive decline, the current study furthered the diet and brain health evidence by assessing the impact of brain pathology in the diet-cognition relationship,” Dr. Dhana said.
The MIND diet was pioneered by the late Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a Rush nutritional epidemiologist, who died in 2020 of cancer at age 64. A hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets, the MIND diet includes green leafy vegetables, fish, nuts, berries, beans, and whole grains and limits consumption of fried and fast foods, sweets, and pastries.
The current study focused on 569 older adults who died while participating in the MAP study, which began in 1997. Participants in the study were mostly White and were without known dementia. All of the participants agreed to undergo annual clinical evaluations. They also agreed to undergo brain autopsy after death.
Beginning in 2004, participants completed annual food frequency questionnaires, which were used to calculate a MIND diet score based on how often the participants ate specific foods.
The researchers used a series of regression analyses to examine associations of the MIND diet, dementia-related brain pathologies, and global cognition near the time of death. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, education, apo E4, late-life cognitive activities, and total energy intake.
(beta, 0.119; P = .003).
Notably, the researchers said, neither the strength nor the significance of association changed markedly when AD pathology and other brain pathologies were included in the model (beta, 0.111; P = .003).
The relationship between better adherence to the MIND diet and better cognition remained significant when the analysis was restricted to individuals without mild cognitive impairment at baseline (beta, 0.121; P = .005) as well as to persons in whom a postmortem diagnosis of AD was made on the basis of NIA-Reagan consensus recommendations (beta, 0.114; P = .023).
The limitations of the study include the reliance on self-reported diet information and a sample made up of mostly White volunteers who agreed to annual evaluations and postmortem organ donation, thus limiting generalizability.
Strengths of the study include the prospective design with annual assessment of cognitive function using standardized tests and collection of the dietary information using validated questionnaires. Also, the neuropathologic evaluations were performed by examiners blinded to clinical data.
“Diet changes can impact cognitive functioning and risk of dementia, for better or worse. There are fairly simple diet and lifestyle changes a person could make that may help to slow cognitive decline with aging and contribute to brain health,” Dr. Dhana said in a news release.
Builds resilience
Weighing in on the study, Heather Snyder, PhD, vice president of medical and scientific relations for the Alzheimer’s Association, said this “interesting study sheds light on the impact of nutrition on cognitive function.
“The findings add to the growing literature that lifestyle factors – like access to a heart-healthy diet – may help the brain be more resilient to disease-specific changes,” Snyder said in an interview.
“The Alzheimer’s Association’s US POINTER study is investigating how lifestyle interventions, including nutrition guidance, like the MIND diet, may impact a person’s risk of cognitive decline. An ancillary study of the US POINTER will include brain imaging to investigate how these lifestyle interventions impact the biology of the brain,” Dr. Snyder noted.
The research was supported by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health. Dr. Dhana and Dr. Snyder disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Military sexual trauma tied to risk for hypertension
a new study suggests.
“Understanding a patient’s trauma history is invaluable for treating the whole person,” Allison E. Gaffey, PhD, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and the Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, told this news organization.
“Assessing men and women’s history of trauma, including sexual trauma, is critical for recognizing nontraditional factors that contribute to their cardiovascular risk and to gain a more comprehensive understanding of their mental and physical health,” Dr. Gaffey added.
She presented her research at the joint scientific sessions of the American Heart Association Council on Hypertension, AHA Council on Kidney in Cardiovascular Disease, and American Society of Hypertension.
Lasting impact on physical health
Dr. Gaffey and colleagues analyzed data from the VA for roughly 1.2 million veterans (mean age, 30.2 years; 12% female) who were discharged from the military after Sept. 30, 2001, and who received health care services at VA medical centers from 2001 to 2017.
All were screened for sexual harassment and assault, known as military sexual trauma (MST), when they first began receiving VA care.
During 16 years of follow-up, 33,881 veterans screened positive for MST (65% women), and 307,332 developed hypertension (15% women).
Overall, MST was associated with a 30% increase in risk for incident hypertension in unadjusted models (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.33; P < .001).
After adjustment for demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, cardiovascular comorbidities, PTSD, anxiety, and depression, MST remained significantly associated with hypertension (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12; P < .001).
When women and men were examined separately, the link between MST and risk for hypertension remained for both groups, but was slightly stronger among women.
“Sexual trauma has been associated with autonomic dysfunction, inflammation, and dysregulation in the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, which could lead to elevations in BP over time,” Dr. Gaffey told this news organization.
“These findings show that even many years after being discharged from military service, exposure to military sexual trauma can continue to significantly influence veterans’ physical health,” she added.
Dr. Gaffey said it will be important to determine if early treatment of MST improves hypertension risk, particularly among those showing elevated blood pressure or stage 1 hypertension.
Social determinants of health
Willie Lawrence Jr., MD, head of the AHA National Hypertension Control Initiative oversight committee, said the findings in this study are “in line with what we know about the impact of social determinants of health on high blood pressure.”
“There are studies that suggest that things that we historically don’t look at as risk factors for hypertension – lifelong racism, crime, mental health status – do in fact predict your risk of developing hypertension,” Dr. Lawrence, from Spectrum Health in Benton Harbor, Mich., told this news organization.
“It’s not just your genetics that will determine your health, and there are a lot of things that will affect your blood pressure. Your blood pressure is really just a barometer of everything that’s going on in your life and some of the things that have gone on in your life in the past,” added Dr. Lawrence, who wasn’t involved in the study.
Funding for the study was provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Gaffey and Dr. Lawrence have no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
a new study suggests.
“Understanding a patient’s trauma history is invaluable for treating the whole person,” Allison E. Gaffey, PhD, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and the Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, told this news organization.
“Assessing men and women’s history of trauma, including sexual trauma, is critical for recognizing nontraditional factors that contribute to their cardiovascular risk and to gain a more comprehensive understanding of their mental and physical health,” Dr. Gaffey added.
She presented her research at the joint scientific sessions of the American Heart Association Council on Hypertension, AHA Council on Kidney in Cardiovascular Disease, and American Society of Hypertension.
Lasting impact on physical health
Dr. Gaffey and colleagues analyzed data from the VA for roughly 1.2 million veterans (mean age, 30.2 years; 12% female) who were discharged from the military after Sept. 30, 2001, and who received health care services at VA medical centers from 2001 to 2017.
All were screened for sexual harassment and assault, known as military sexual trauma (MST), when they first began receiving VA care.
During 16 years of follow-up, 33,881 veterans screened positive for MST (65% women), and 307,332 developed hypertension (15% women).
Overall, MST was associated with a 30% increase in risk for incident hypertension in unadjusted models (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.33; P < .001).
After adjustment for demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, cardiovascular comorbidities, PTSD, anxiety, and depression, MST remained significantly associated with hypertension (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12; P < .001).
When women and men were examined separately, the link between MST and risk for hypertension remained for both groups, but was slightly stronger among women.
“Sexual trauma has been associated with autonomic dysfunction, inflammation, and dysregulation in the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, which could lead to elevations in BP over time,” Dr. Gaffey told this news organization.
“These findings show that even many years after being discharged from military service, exposure to military sexual trauma can continue to significantly influence veterans’ physical health,” she added.
Dr. Gaffey said it will be important to determine if early treatment of MST improves hypertension risk, particularly among those showing elevated blood pressure or stage 1 hypertension.
Social determinants of health
Willie Lawrence Jr., MD, head of the AHA National Hypertension Control Initiative oversight committee, said the findings in this study are “in line with what we know about the impact of social determinants of health on high blood pressure.”
“There are studies that suggest that things that we historically don’t look at as risk factors for hypertension – lifelong racism, crime, mental health status – do in fact predict your risk of developing hypertension,” Dr. Lawrence, from Spectrum Health in Benton Harbor, Mich., told this news organization.
“It’s not just your genetics that will determine your health, and there are a lot of things that will affect your blood pressure. Your blood pressure is really just a barometer of everything that’s going on in your life and some of the things that have gone on in your life in the past,” added Dr. Lawrence, who wasn’t involved in the study.
Funding for the study was provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Gaffey and Dr. Lawrence have no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
a new study suggests.
“Understanding a patient’s trauma history is invaluable for treating the whole person,” Allison E. Gaffey, PhD, Yale University, New Haven, Conn., and the Veterans Affairs Connecticut Healthcare System, told this news organization.
“Assessing men and women’s history of trauma, including sexual trauma, is critical for recognizing nontraditional factors that contribute to their cardiovascular risk and to gain a more comprehensive understanding of their mental and physical health,” Dr. Gaffey added.
She presented her research at the joint scientific sessions of the American Heart Association Council on Hypertension, AHA Council on Kidney in Cardiovascular Disease, and American Society of Hypertension.
Lasting impact on physical health
Dr. Gaffey and colleagues analyzed data from the VA for roughly 1.2 million veterans (mean age, 30.2 years; 12% female) who were discharged from the military after Sept. 30, 2001, and who received health care services at VA medical centers from 2001 to 2017.
All were screened for sexual harassment and assault, known as military sexual trauma (MST), when they first began receiving VA care.
During 16 years of follow-up, 33,881 veterans screened positive for MST (65% women), and 307,332 developed hypertension (15% women).
Overall, MST was associated with a 30% increase in risk for incident hypertension in unadjusted models (hazard ratio, 1.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-1.33; P < .001).
After adjustment for demographic characteristics, lifestyle factors, cardiovascular comorbidities, PTSD, anxiety, and depression, MST remained significantly associated with hypertension (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.08-1.12; P < .001).
When women and men were examined separately, the link between MST and risk for hypertension remained for both groups, but was slightly stronger among women.
“Sexual trauma has been associated with autonomic dysfunction, inflammation, and dysregulation in the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, which could lead to elevations in BP over time,” Dr. Gaffey told this news organization.
“These findings show that even many years after being discharged from military service, exposure to military sexual trauma can continue to significantly influence veterans’ physical health,” she added.
Dr. Gaffey said it will be important to determine if early treatment of MST improves hypertension risk, particularly among those showing elevated blood pressure or stage 1 hypertension.
Social determinants of health
Willie Lawrence Jr., MD, head of the AHA National Hypertension Control Initiative oversight committee, said the findings in this study are “in line with what we know about the impact of social determinants of health on high blood pressure.”
“There are studies that suggest that things that we historically don’t look at as risk factors for hypertension – lifelong racism, crime, mental health status – do in fact predict your risk of developing hypertension,” Dr. Lawrence, from Spectrum Health in Benton Harbor, Mich., told this news organization.
“It’s not just your genetics that will determine your health, and there are a lot of things that will affect your blood pressure. Your blood pressure is really just a barometer of everything that’s going on in your life and some of the things that have gone on in your life in the past,” added Dr. Lawrence, who wasn’t involved in the study.
Funding for the study was provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs. Dr. Gaffey and Dr. Lawrence have no relevant disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
COVID-19: Greater mortality among psych patients remains a mystery
Antipsychotics are not responsible for the increased COVID-related death rate among patients with serious mental illness (SMI), new research shows.
The significant increase in COVID-19 mortality that continues to be reported among those with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder “underscores the importance of protective interventions for this group, including priority vaccination,” study investigator Katlyn Nemani, MD, research assistant professor, department of psychiatry, New York University, told this news organization.
The study was published online September 22 in JAMA Psychiatry.
Threefold increase in death
Previous research has linked a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, which includes schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, to an almost threefold increase in mortality among patients with COVID-19.
Some population-based research has also reported a link between antipsychotic medication use and increased risk for COVID-related mortality, but these studies did not take psychiatric diagnoses into account.
“This raised the question of whether the increased risk observed in this population is related to underlying psychiatric illness or its treatment,” said Dr. Nemani.
The retrospective cohort study included 464 adults (mean age, 53 years) who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 3, 2020, and Feb. 17, 2021, and who had previously been diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder. Of these, 42.2% were treated with an antipsychotic medication.
The primary endpoint was death within 60 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Covariates included sociodemographic characteristics, such as patient-reported race and ethnicity, age, and insurance type, a psychiatric diagnosis, medical comorbidities, and smoking status.
Of the total, 41 patients (8.8%) died. The 60-day fatality rate was 13.7% among patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (n = 182) and 5.7% among patients with bipolar disorder (n = 282).
Antipsychotic treatment was not significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.08; P = .99).
“This suggests that antipsychotic medication is unlikely to be responsible for the increased risk we’ve observed in this population, although this finding needs to be replicated,” said Dr. Nemani.
Surprise finding
A diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder was associated with an almost threefold increased risk for mortality compared with bipolar disorder (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.36-6.11; P = .006).
“This was a surprising finding,” said Dr. Nemani.
She noted that there is evidence suggesting the immune system may play a role in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia, and research has shown that pneumonia and infection are among the leading causes of premature mortality in this population.
As well, several potential risk factors disproportionately affect people with serious mental illness, including an increase in the prevalence of medical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, socioeconomic disadvantages, and barriers to accessing timely care. Prior studies have also found that people with SMI are less likely to receive preventive care interventions, including vaccination, said Dr. Nemani.
However, these factors are unlikely to fully account for the increased risk found in the study, she said.
“Our study population was limited to people who had received treatment within the NYU Langone Health System. We took a comprehensive list of sociodemographic and medical risk factors into account, and our research was conducted prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines,” she said.
Further research is necessary to understand what underlies the increase in susceptibility to severe infection among patients with schizophrenia and to identify interventions that may mitigate risk, said Dr. Nemani.
“This includes evaluating systems-level factors, such as access to preventive interventions and treatment, as well as investigating underlying immune mechanisms that may contribute to severe and fatal infection,” she said.
The researchers could not validate psychiatric diagnoses or capture deaths not documented in the electronic health record. In addition, the limited sample size precluded analysis of the use of individual antipsychotic medications, which may differ in their associated effects.
“It’s possible individual antipsychotic medications may be associated with harmful or protective effects,” said Dr. Nemani.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Antipsychotics are not responsible for the increased COVID-related death rate among patients with serious mental illness (SMI), new research shows.
The significant increase in COVID-19 mortality that continues to be reported among those with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder “underscores the importance of protective interventions for this group, including priority vaccination,” study investigator Katlyn Nemani, MD, research assistant professor, department of psychiatry, New York University, told this news organization.
The study was published online September 22 in JAMA Psychiatry.
Threefold increase in death
Previous research has linked a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, which includes schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, to an almost threefold increase in mortality among patients with COVID-19.
Some population-based research has also reported a link between antipsychotic medication use and increased risk for COVID-related mortality, but these studies did not take psychiatric diagnoses into account.
“This raised the question of whether the increased risk observed in this population is related to underlying psychiatric illness or its treatment,” said Dr. Nemani.
The retrospective cohort study included 464 adults (mean age, 53 years) who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 3, 2020, and Feb. 17, 2021, and who had previously been diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder. Of these, 42.2% were treated with an antipsychotic medication.
The primary endpoint was death within 60 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Covariates included sociodemographic characteristics, such as patient-reported race and ethnicity, age, and insurance type, a psychiatric diagnosis, medical comorbidities, and smoking status.
Of the total, 41 patients (8.8%) died. The 60-day fatality rate was 13.7% among patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (n = 182) and 5.7% among patients with bipolar disorder (n = 282).
Antipsychotic treatment was not significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.08; P = .99).
“This suggests that antipsychotic medication is unlikely to be responsible for the increased risk we’ve observed in this population, although this finding needs to be replicated,” said Dr. Nemani.
Surprise finding
A diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder was associated with an almost threefold increased risk for mortality compared with bipolar disorder (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.36-6.11; P = .006).
“This was a surprising finding,” said Dr. Nemani.
She noted that there is evidence suggesting the immune system may play a role in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia, and research has shown that pneumonia and infection are among the leading causes of premature mortality in this population.
As well, several potential risk factors disproportionately affect people with serious mental illness, including an increase in the prevalence of medical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, socioeconomic disadvantages, and barriers to accessing timely care. Prior studies have also found that people with SMI are less likely to receive preventive care interventions, including vaccination, said Dr. Nemani.
However, these factors are unlikely to fully account for the increased risk found in the study, she said.
“Our study population was limited to people who had received treatment within the NYU Langone Health System. We took a comprehensive list of sociodemographic and medical risk factors into account, and our research was conducted prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines,” she said.
Further research is necessary to understand what underlies the increase in susceptibility to severe infection among patients with schizophrenia and to identify interventions that may mitigate risk, said Dr. Nemani.
“This includes evaluating systems-level factors, such as access to preventive interventions and treatment, as well as investigating underlying immune mechanisms that may contribute to severe and fatal infection,” she said.
The researchers could not validate psychiatric diagnoses or capture deaths not documented in the electronic health record. In addition, the limited sample size precluded analysis of the use of individual antipsychotic medications, which may differ in their associated effects.
“It’s possible individual antipsychotic medications may be associated with harmful or protective effects,” said Dr. Nemani.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Antipsychotics are not responsible for the increased COVID-related death rate among patients with serious mental illness (SMI), new research shows.
The significant increase in COVID-19 mortality that continues to be reported among those with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder “underscores the importance of protective interventions for this group, including priority vaccination,” study investigator Katlyn Nemani, MD, research assistant professor, department of psychiatry, New York University, told this news organization.
The study was published online September 22 in JAMA Psychiatry.
Threefold increase in death
Previous research has linked a diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, which includes schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, to an almost threefold increase in mortality among patients with COVID-19.
Some population-based research has also reported a link between antipsychotic medication use and increased risk for COVID-related mortality, but these studies did not take psychiatric diagnoses into account.
“This raised the question of whether the increased risk observed in this population is related to underlying psychiatric illness or its treatment,” said Dr. Nemani.
The retrospective cohort study included 464 adults (mean age, 53 years) who were diagnosed with COVID-19 between March 3, 2020, and Feb. 17, 2021, and who had previously been diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder. Of these, 42.2% were treated with an antipsychotic medication.
The primary endpoint was death within 60 days of COVID-19 diagnosis. Covariates included sociodemographic characteristics, such as patient-reported race and ethnicity, age, and insurance type, a psychiatric diagnosis, medical comorbidities, and smoking status.
Of the total, 41 patients (8.8%) died. The 60-day fatality rate was 13.7% among patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder (n = 182) and 5.7% among patients with bipolar disorder (n = 282).
Antipsychotic treatment was not significantly associated with mortality (odds ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-2.08; P = .99).
“This suggests that antipsychotic medication is unlikely to be responsible for the increased risk we’ve observed in this population, although this finding needs to be replicated,” said Dr. Nemani.
Surprise finding
A diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder was associated with an almost threefold increased risk for mortality compared with bipolar disorder (OR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.36-6.11; P = .006).
“This was a surprising finding,” said Dr. Nemani.
She noted that there is evidence suggesting the immune system may play a role in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia, and research has shown that pneumonia and infection are among the leading causes of premature mortality in this population.
As well, several potential risk factors disproportionately affect people with serious mental illness, including an increase in the prevalence of medical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, socioeconomic disadvantages, and barriers to accessing timely care. Prior studies have also found that people with SMI are less likely to receive preventive care interventions, including vaccination, said Dr. Nemani.
However, these factors are unlikely to fully account for the increased risk found in the study, she said.
“Our study population was limited to people who had received treatment within the NYU Langone Health System. We took a comprehensive list of sociodemographic and medical risk factors into account, and our research was conducted prior to the availability of COVID-19 vaccines,” she said.
Further research is necessary to understand what underlies the increase in susceptibility to severe infection among patients with schizophrenia and to identify interventions that may mitigate risk, said Dr. Nemani.
“This includes evaluating systems-level factors, such as access to preventive interventions and treatment, as well as investigating underlying immune mechanisms that may contribute to severe and fatal infection,” she said.
The researchers could not validate psychiatric diagnoses or capture deaths not documented in the electronic health record. In addition, the limited sample size precluded analysis of the use of individual antipsychotic medications, which may differ in their associated effects.
“It’s possible individual antipsychotic medications may be associated with harmful or protective effects,” said Dr. Nemani.
The authors have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Relapse risk increased with antidepressant discontinuation
a new study shows.
The results of the Antidepressants to Prevent Relapse in Depression (ANTLER) trial also suggest that “many patients can discontinue their antidepressants safely in primary care without relapsing, when there is a tapering regime,” said lead investigator Gemma Lewis, PhD, from University College London, in an interview.
The multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2021;385:1257-67), included 478 patients, from 150 primary care practices in the United Kingdom.
The participants (73% female, average age 54 years) had a history of at least two depressive episodes or had been taking antidepressants (citalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, or mirtazapine) for at least 2 years. The vast majority of patients – 70% – had been using the drugs for more than 3 years, the researchers wrote.
Study participants were randomized to either maintain their antidepressant regimen or to taper off for up to 2 months before switching to a placebo.
Over a follow-up of 52 weeks, relapse occurred in 56% of those who discontinued, compared with 39% of those who maintained their regimen (hazard ratio, 2.06; P < .001). Relapse also occurred sooner in the discontinuation group (13 weeks vs. 19 weeks).
The definition of relapse was answering yes to either of the following two questions:
- Have you had a spell of feeling sad, miserable, or depressed?
- Have you been unable to enjoy or take an interest in things as much as you usually do?
Patients also had to report that one of these experiences had lasted for 2 weeks or more, and having had at least one of the following symptoms: depressive thoughts, fatigue, loss of concentration, or sleep disturbance.
By the end of the trial, 39% of patients in the group who discontinued taking an antidepressant had returned to taking that type of drug.
“We found that remaining on antidepressants long-term does effectively reduce the risk of relapse. However, we also found that 44% of those who discontinued their antidepressants did not relapse after a full year,” Dr. Lewis said.
Who can stop medications without relapsing is unknown
“Many people can stop their medication without relapsing, though at present we cannot identify who those people are,” noted Dr. Lewis.
“Our study did not investigate who is at higher risk of relapse … but this is something we will focus on in the future,” she said.
For primary care clinicians whose patients are considering discontinuation of antidepressant medication, “current best practice is to engage with patients’ priorities and collaborate in coming to a decision,” she noted.
“For the individual patient, it is only possible to know about the average likelihood of relapse – and the severity of potential relapses will also be unpredictable. Our findings will give patients and clinicians an estimate of the likely benefits and harms of stopping long-term maintenance antidepressants to inform shared decision-making in primary care.”
Findings are ‘important’ but ‘disappointing’
In an editorial published alongside the study (N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1327-8), Jeffrey L. Jackson, MD, MPH, from the Zablocki VA Medical Center and the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee characterized the findings as “important but disappointing.”
“They confirm what most primary care physicians already knew or intuited. The frequency of relapse after the discontinuation of treatment is high, particularly among patients with several previous depressive episodes,” he explained.
Dr. Jackson also pointed out some unknowns about the trial, including the length trial participants had been in remission for depression.
“It is unclear whether the trial results are generalizable to primary care patients with a first episode of depression,” he said, and noted that participants with three or more previous depressive episodes were more than twice as likely to relapse, compared with participants with fewer episodes.
“I encourage patients with a single bout of depression, especially episodes that are triggered by a life event, such as loss of a loved one, to consider weaning antidepressant treatment after at least 6 months of remission,” he wrote. “For those with three or more previous bouts of depression, my practice has been to recommend that they anticipate medical treatment for life or, if they wish to stop taking medication, explore nonpharmacologic approaches, such as cognitive-behavior therapy.”
Protective effect of antidepressants was clear
“This is an important paper providing an evidence base to the often-cited recommendation that after two or more episodes of depression, antidepressant medication should be continued indefinitely,” said Neil Skolnik, MD, professor of family and community medicine at the Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.
“The protective effect of antidepressant medication here was clear – those who discontinued antidepressant medication had a clinically and significantly higher rate of relapse at the end of a year.”
Side effects can be significant
“It is important to note, though, that in the discontinuation group, 44% of patients did not experience a relapse,” Dr. Skolnik said. “While antidepressants work without significant side effects for many patients, for others there are significant side effects that include adverse sexual side effects, effects on appetite and weight, nighttime sweats, and other side effects.”
“So, this study should not be confused to mean that all patients who have had recurrent depression should remain on antidepressants long term. The decision about whether to continue an antidepressant is influenced by many things and should be a shared decision-making process between clinician and patient, informed by the important results of this study, the current situation of the patient, and most importantly, the patient’s informed decision of what they would like to do,” he said.
The study was funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research
Dr. Lewis, Dr. Jackson, and Dr. Skolnik reported no conflicts of interest.
a new study shows.
The results of the Antidepressants to Prevent Relapse in Depression (ANTLER) trial also suggest that “many patients can discontinue their antidepressants safely in primary care without relapsing, when there is a tapering regime,” said lead investigator Gemma Lewis, PhD, from University College London, in an interview.
The multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2021;385:1257-67), included 478 patients, from 150 primary care practices in the United Kingdom.
The participants (73% female, average age 54 years) had a history of at least two depressive episodes or had been taking antidepressants (citalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, or mirtazapine) for at least 2 years. The vast majority of patients – 70% – had been using the drugs for more than 3 years, the researchers wrote.
Study participants were randomized to either maintain their antidepressant regimen or to taper off for up to 2 months before switching to a placebo.
Over a follow-up of 52 weeks, relapse occurred in 56% of those who discontinued, compared with 39% of those who maintained their regimen (hazard ratio, 2.06; P < .001). Relapse also occurred sooner in the discontinuation group (13 weeks vs. 19 weeks).
The definition of relapse was answering yes to either of the following two questions:
- Have you had a spell of feeling sad, miserable, or depressed?
- Have you been unable to enjoy or take an interest in things as much as you usually do?
Patients also had to report that one of these experiences had lasted for 2 weeks or more, and having had at least one of the following symptoms: depressive thoughts, fatigue, loss of concentration, or sleep disturbance.
By the end of the trial, 39% of patients in the group who discontinued taking an antidepressant had returned to taking that type of drug.
“We found that remaining on antidepressants long-term does effectively reduce the risk of relapse. However, we also found that 44% of those who discontinued their antidepressants did not relapse after a full year,” Dr. Lewis said.
Who can stop medications without relapsing is unknown
“Many people can stop their medication without relapsing, though at present we cannot identify who those people are,” noted Dr. Lewis.
“Our study did not investigate who is at higher risk of relapse … but this is something we will focus on in the future,” she said.
For primary care clinicians whose patients are considering discontinuation of antidepressant medication, “current best practice is to engage with patients’ priorities and collaborate in coming to a decision,” she noted.
“For the individual patient, it is only possible to know about the average likelihood of relapse – and the severity of potential relapses will also be unpredictable. Our findings will give patients and clinicians an estimate of the likely benefits and harms of stopping long-term maintenance antidepressants to inform shared decision-making in primary care.”
Findings are ‘important’ but ‘disappointing’
In an editorial published alongside the study (N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1327-8), Jeffrey L. Jackson, MD, MPH, from the Zablocki VA Medical Center and the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee characterized the findings as “important but disappointing.”
“They confirm what most primary care physicians already knew or intuited. The frequency of relapse after the discontinuation of treatment is high, particularly among patients with several previous depressive episodes,” he explained.
Dr. Jackson also pointed out some unknowns about the trial, including the length trial participants had been in remission for depression.
“It is unclear whether the trial results are generalizable to primary care patients with a first episode of depression,” he said, and noted that participants with three or more previous depressive episodes were more than twice as likely to relapse, compared with participants with fewer episodes.
“I encourage patients with a single bout of depression, especially episodes that are triggered by a life event, such as loss of a loved one, to consider weaning antidepressant treatment after at least 6 months of remission,” he wrote. “For those with three or more previous bouts of depression, my practice has been to recommend that they anticipate medical treatment for life or, if they wish to stop taking medication, explore nonpharmacologic approaches, such as cognitive-behavior therapy.”
Protective effect of antidepressants was clear
“This is an important paper providing an evidence base to the often-cited recommendation that after two or more episodes of depression, antidepressant medication should be continued indefinitely,” said Neil Skolnik, MD, professor of family and community medicine at the Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.
“The protective effect of antidepressant medication here was clear – those who discontinued antidepressant medication had a clinically and significantly higher rate of relapse at the end of a year.”
Side effects can be significant
“It is important to note, though, that in the discontinuation group, 44% of patients did not experience a relapse,” Dr. Skolnik said. “While antidepressants work without significant side effects for many patients, for others there are significant side effects that include adverse sexual side effects, effects on appetite and weight, nighttime sweats, and other side effects.”
“So, this study should not be confused to mean that all patients who have had recurrent depression should remain on antidepressants long term. The decision about whether to continue an antidepressant is influenced by many things and should be a shared decision-making process between clinician and patient, informed by the important results of this study, the current situation of the patient, and most importantly, the patient’s informed decision of what they would like to do,” he said.
The study was funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research
Dr. Lewis, Dr. Jackson, and Dr. Skolnik reported no conflicts of interest.
a new study shows.
The results of the Antidepressants to Prevent Relapse in Depression (ANTLER) trial also suggest that “many patients can discontinue their antidepressants safely in primary care without relapsing, when there is a tapering regime,” said lead investigator Gemma Lewis, PhD, from University College London, in an interview.
The multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine (2021;385:1257-67), included 478 patients, from 150 primary care practices in the United Kingdom.
The participants (73% female, average age 54 years) had a history of at least two depressive episodes or had been taking antidepressants (citalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, or mirtazapine) for at least 2 years. The vast majority of patients – 70% – had been using the drugs for more than 3 years, the researchers wrote.
Study participants were randomized to either maintain their antidepressant regimen or to taper off for up to 2 months before switching to a placebo.
Over a follow-up of 52 weeks, relapse occurred in 56% of those who discontinued, compared with 39% of those who maintained their regimen (hazard ratio, 2.06; P < .001). Relapse also occurred sooner in the discontinuation group (13 weeks vs. 19 weeks).
The definition of relapse was answering yes to either of the following two questions:
- Have you had a spell of feeling sad, miserable, or depressed?
- Have you been unable to enjoy or take an interest in things as much as you usually do?
Patients also had to report that one of these experiences had lasted for 2 weeks or more, and having had at least one of the following symptoms: depressive thoughts, fatigue, loss of concentration, or sleep disturbance.
By the end of the trial, 39% of patients in the group who discontinued taking an antidepressant had returned to taking that type of drug.
“We found that remaining on antidepressants long-term does effectively reduce the risk of relapse. However, we also found that 44% of those who discontinued their antidepressants did not relapse after a full year,” Dr. Lewis said.
Who can stop medications without relapsing is unknown
“Many people can stop their medication without relapsing, though at present we cannot identify who those people are,” noted Dr. Lewis.
“Our study did not investigate who is at higher risk of relapse … but this is something we will focus on in the future,” she said.
For primary care clinicians whose patients are considering discontinuation of antidepressant medication, “current best practice is to engage with patients’ priorities and collaborate in coming to a decision,” she noted.
“For the individual patient, it is only possible to know about the average likelihood of relapse – and the severity of potential relapses will also be unpredictable. Our findings will give patients and clinicians an estimate of the likely benefits and harms of stopping long-term maintenance antidepressants to inform shared decision-making in primary care.”
Findings are ‘important’ but ‘disappointing’
In an editorial published alongside the study (N Engl J Med. 2021;385:1327-8), Jeffrey L. Jackson, MD, MPH, from the Zablocki VA Medical Center and the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee characterized the findings as “important but disappointing.”
“They confirm what most primary care physicians already knew or intuited. The frequency of relapse after the discontinuation of treatment is high, particularly among patients with several previous depressive episodes,” he explained.
Dr. Jackson also pointed out some unknowns about the trial, including the length trial participants had been in remission for depression.
“It is unclear whether the trial results are generalizable to primary care patients with a first episode of depression,” he said, and noted that participants with three or more previous depressive episodes were more than twice as likely to relapse, compared with participants with fewer episodes.
“I encourage patients with a single bout of depression, especially episodes that are triggered by a life event, such as loss of a loved one, to consider weaning antidepressant treatment after at least 6 months of remission,” he wrote. “For those with three or more previous bouts of depression, my practice has been to recommend that they anticipate medical treatment for life or, if they wish to stop taking medication, explore nonpharmacologic approaches, such as cognitive-behavior therapy.”
Protective effect of antidepressants was clear
“This is an important paper providing an evidence base to the often-cited recommendation that after two or more episodes of depression, antidepressant medication should be continued indefinitely,” said Neil Skolnik, MD, professor of family and community medicine at the Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, who was not involved in the study.
“The protective effect of antidepressant medication here was clear – those who discontinued antidepressant medication had a clinically and significantly higher rate of relapse at the end of a year.”
Side effects can be significant
“It is important to note, though, that in the discontinuation group, 44% of patients did not experience a relapse,” Dr. Skolnik said. “While antidepressants work without significant side effects for many patients, for others there are significant side effects that include adverse sexual side effects, effects on appetite and weight, nighttime sweats, and other side effects.”
“So, this study should not be confused to mean that all patients who have had recurrent depression should remain on antidepressants long term. The decision about whether to continue an antidepressant is influenced by many things and should be a shared decision-making process between clinician and patient, informed by the important results of this study, the current situation of the patient, and most importantly, the patient’s informed decision of what they would like to do,” he said.
The study was funded by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research
Dr. Lewis, Dr. Jackson, and Dr. Skolnik reported no conflicts of interest.
FROM NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
Antipsychotic effective for bipolar depression in phase 3 trial
Results of a phase 3 study show that treatment with lumateperone (Caplyta) significantly improved depressive symptoms for patients with major depressive episodes associated with both bipolar I and bipolar II disorders.
“Bipolar depression represents the most prevalent and debilitating presentation of bipolar disorder. There is a critical need for more treatments that are effective and have favorable safety profiles,” study investigator Gary S. Sachs, MD, associate clinical professor in psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in a company news release.
“The strong efficacy and impressive safety results reported in this trial for a broad patient population position lumateperone as a potentially important advancement in the treatment of this disorder,” said Dr. Sachs, who is also founding director of the Bipolar Clinic and Research Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The findings were published online September 23 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
First-in-class antipsychotic
Lumateperone is a first-in-class antipsychotic that acts synergistically through the serotonergic, dopaminergic, and glutamatergic systems.
It was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in late 2019 for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia, as reported at the time by this news organization.
All were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive 6 weeks of lumateperone monotherapy at 42 mg/d or matching placebo.
At day 43, lumateperone treatment was associated with significantly greater improvement from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score in comparison with placebo (drug-placebo difference, -4.6 points; P < .0001; effect size = -0.56), which met the study’s primary endpoint.
The study drug led to significant improvement in MADRS total score as early as the first week, which was the first time point measured. Improvement continued throughout the study.
Treatment with lumateperone also led to significantly greater improvement in the key secondary endpoints of total score on the severity scale of the Clinical Global Impressions Scale–Bipolar Version (CGI-BP-S) (P < .0001; effect size = -0.46) and the CGI-BP-S depression score (P < .001; effect size = -50).
In addition, it was superior to placebo both for patients with bipolar I disorder and those with bipolar II disorder.
Somnolence and nausea were the most commonly reported adverse events associated with lumateperone. Minimal changes were observed in weight and vital signs and in results of metabolic or endocrine assessments. These findings are in line with previous studies involving patients with schizophrenia.
The incidence of extrapyramidal symptom–related events was low and was similar to those with placebo.
The company has submitted a supplemental new drug application for lumateperone for the treatment of bipolar depression, which is currently under review with the FDA. The target action date is December 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Results of a phase 3 study show that treatment with lumateperone (Caplyta) significantly improved depressive symptoms for patients with major depressive episodes associated with both bipolar I and bipolar II disorders.
“Bipolar depression represents the most prevalent and debilitating presentation of bipolar disorder. There is a critical need for more treatments that are effective and have favorable safety profiles,” study investigator Gary S. Sachs, MD, associate clinical professor in psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in a company news release.
“The strong efficacy and impressive safety results reported in this trial for a broad patient population position lumateperone as a potentially important advancement in the treatment of this disorder,” said Dr. Sachs, who is also founding director of the Bipolar Clinic and Research Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The findings were published online September 23 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
First-in-class antipsychotic
Lumateperone is a first-in-class antipsychotic that acts synergistically through the serotonergic, dopaminergic, and glutamatergic systems.
It was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in late 2019 for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia, as reported at the time by this news organization.
All were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive 6 weeks of lumateperone monotherapy at 42 mg/d or matching placebo.
At day 43, lumateperone treatment was associated with significantly greater improvement from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score in comparison with placebo (drug-placebo difference, -4.6 points; P < .0001; effect size = -0.56), which met the study’s primary endpoint.
The study drug led to significant improvement in MADRS total score as early as the first week, which was the first time point measured. Improvement continued throughout the study.
Treatment with lumateperone also led to significantly greater improvement in the key secondary endpoints of total score on the severity scale of the Clinical Global Impressions Scale–Bipolar Version (CGI-BP-S) (P < .0001; effect size = -0.46) and the CGI-BP-S depression score (P < .001; effect size = -50).
In addition, it was superior to placebo both for patients with bipolar I disorder and those with bipolar II disorder.
Somnolence and nausea were the most commonly reported adverse events associated with lumateperone. Minimal changes were observed in weight and vital signs and in results of metabolic or endocrine assessments. These findings are in line with previous studies involving patients with schizophrenia.
The incidence of extrapyramidal symptom–related events was low and was similar to those with placebo.
The company has submitted a supplemental new drug application for lumateperone for the treatment of bipolar depression, which is currently under review with the FDA. The target action date is December 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Results of a phase 3 study show that treatment with lumateperone (Caplyta) significantly improved depressive symptoms for patients with major depressive episodes associated with both bipolar I and bipolar II disorders.
“Bipolar depression represents the most prevalent and debilitating presentation of bipolar disorder. There is a critical need for more treatments that are effective and have favorable safety profiles,” study investigator Gary S. Sachs, MD, associate clinical professor in psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said in a company news release.
“The strong efficacy and impressive safety results reported in this trial for a broad patient population position lumateperone as a potentially important advancement in the treatment of this disorder,” said Dr. Sachs, who is also founding director of the Bipolar Clinic and Research Program at Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
The findings were published online September 23 in the American Journal of Psychiatry.
First-in-class antipsychotic
Lumateperone is a first-in-class antipsychotic that acts synergistically through the serotonergic, dopaminergic, and glutamatergic systems.
It was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in late 2019 for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia, as reported at the time by this news organization.
All were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive 6 weeks of lumateperone monotherapy at 42 mg/d or matching placebo.
At day 43, lumateperone treatment was associated with significantly greater improvement from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score in comparison with placebo (drug-placebo difference, -4.6 points; P < .0001; effect size = -0.56), which met the study’s primary endpoint.
The study drug led to significant improvement in MADRS total score as early as the first week, which was the first time point measured. Improvement continued throughout the study.
Treatment with lumateperone also led to significantly greater improvement in the key secondary endpoints of total score on the severity scale of the Clinical Global Impressions Scale–Bipolar Version (CGI-BP-S) (P < .0001; effect size = -0.46) and the CGI-BP-S depression score (P < .001; effect size = -50).
In addition, it was superior to placebo both for patients with bipolar I disorder and those with bipolar II disorder.
Somnolence and nausea were the most commonly reported adverse events associated with lumateperone. Minimal changes were observed in weight and vital signs and in results of metabolic or endocrine assessments. These findings are in line with previous studies involving patients with schizophrenia.
The incidence of extrapyramidal symptom–related events was low and was similar to those with placebo.
The company has submitted a supplemental new drug application for lumateperone for the treatment of bipolar depression, which is currently under review with the FDA. The target action date is December 17.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Nutritious meals, more fruits and vegetables boost children’s mental and emotional health
Good nutrition has long been linked to better behavior and academic performance in schoolchildren, as longstanding breakfast and lunch programs in U.S. schools attest. Now British researchers report that nutrition, a modifiable risk factor that can adversely impact mental health, should be part of public health strategies to boost children’s psychological wellness.
In a cross-sectional study published online Sept. 27 in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health, a team from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, found a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in schoolchildren of both primary and secondary school age. They also found that some school kids ate neither breakfast nor lunch.
In particular, eating more fruits and vegetables was significantly associated with better mental health in secondary schoolchildren, while a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in students across the age spectrum, according to senior lecturer Richard P. Hayhoe, PhD, of East Anglia University and Anglia Ruskin University in Norwich and colleagues.
They found that primary school pupils who ate only a snack for breakfast had mental well-being scores 5.50 units lower than those eating a substantial breakfast, while having no lunch was tied to scores more than 6 units lower.
“The importance of good-quality nutrition for childhood growth and development is well established,” the authors wrote. “As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being.”
Their current analysis examined data on 7,570 secondary and 1,253 primary school children from 50 schools participating in the Norfolk Children and Young People Health and Well-being Survey 2017.
Multivariable linear regression measured the association between nutritional factors and mental well-being assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale for secondary school pupils or by the Stirling Children’s Well-being Scale for primary school pupils. All analyses were adjusted for covariates including demographic, health variables, living/home situations, and adverse experiences.
“The 2017 survey provided a means for Norfolk children and young people to share their feelings on topics such as healthy lifestyles and nutrition, relationships, school experiences, bullying, and their mental well-being,” Dr. Hayhoe said in an interview. “Initial analysis of the data suggested an association between nutrition and well-being and so we decided to investigate this further.”
Dr. Hayhoe added that, as in the United States, youngsters in England get a high proportion of their daily calories from ultraprocessed convenience foods of lesser nutritional value.
“But what we didn’t know was whether the dietary habits of children in our survey had any association with their mental well-being,” he said. “Our current findings suggest that increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and ensuring all schoolchildren eat a nutritional breakfast and lunch may be of benefit to their mental well-being.”
His group cautions, however, that this is an observational study that cannot establish direct causation.
“This study provides the first insights into how fruit and vegetable intake affects children’s mental health, and contributes to the emerging evidence around ‘food and mood,’ ” said Sumantra Ray, MD, executive director of the NNEdPro Global Centre for Nutrition and Health in Cambridge, England.
“The findings are timely, not only because of the impact the pandemic has had on mental well-being, food security, and diet quality, especially in school children, but also in light of the recently published National Food Strategy for England, which highlighted gaps in school meal provision,” added Dr. Ray, who was not involved in the study.
Study results
In total, 10,853 schoolchildren completed the survey: 9% of Norfolk primary school children aged 9-11 and 22% of secondary school students, with approximately 6% of these in the 17- and 18-year-old age bracket. Comprehensive dietary questions explored fruit and vegetable intake, as well as type of breakfast and lunch eaten, alcohol intake, eligibility for free school meals, and satisfaction with weight.
The survey also gathered information on parameters ranging from having one’s own bedroom and bed and exposure to violence or discord in the home.
“Some of these were found to be associated with lower mental well-being scores, but we did not specifically investigate the interaction between these factors and the nutritional factors,” Dr. Hayhoe said. However, the difference in mental well-being between children who ate the most fruit and vegetables and those who ate the least was on a similar scale to those reporting daily, or almost daily, arguing or violence at home, he said.
Average mental health was assessed using validated age-appropriate measures. The mean mental health score of participants was 46.6 out of 70 for secondary school students and 46 out of 60 for primary school pupils.
Among the survey findings were:
- Just 25% of secondary school participants and 28.5% of primary school pupils reported eating the recommended five portions of fruits and vegetables a day, with 10% and 9%, respectively, eating none.
- 21% of secondary and 12% of primary school pupils consumed only a non–energy drink or nothing for breakfast, while 11.5% of secondary schoolchildren ate no lunch. In one high school class of 30, for example, four had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the morning, and three had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the afternoon.
- Higher combined fruit and vegetable intake was significantly associated in dose-related fashion with higher mental health scores: 3.73 (95% confidence interval, 2.94- 4.53) units higher in those consuming five or more fruits and vegetables (P < .001), compared with none.
- Breakfast or lunch type also correlated with significant differences in well-being scores. Compared with children consuming a conventional breakfast (porridge, toast, cereal, yogurt, fruit, or a cooked meal), those eating no breakfast had mean well-being scores that were 2.73 (95% CI, 2.11-3.35) units lower (P < .001). Those consuming only an energy drink scored even worse: 3.14 (95% CI, 1.20- 5.09) units lower (P = .002).
- Skipping lunch resulted in a 2.95-unit drop in well-being score (95% CI, 2.22-3.68, P < .001), compared with consuming a packed lunch.
In terms of the amounts of fruits and vegetables consumed, one or two daily portions were associated with a score 1.42 units higher, while three or four portions correlated with a score 2.34 units higher. Those eating five or more portions scored 3.73 units higher.
- For primary school pupils, eating only a snack for breakfast was associated with a score 5.50 units lower, and consuming only a non–energy drink was tied to a score 2.67 units lower than eating a conventional breakfast. Not eating any breakfast was associated with a score 3.62 units lower.
- Eating school food versus a packed lunch was associated with a score 1.27 units lower, although this wasn’t statistically significant. Having no lunch was associated with a score 6.08 units lower, although only a few children fell into this group.
“As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being,” the authors wrote, calling for further investigation of the association between nutrition and mental well-being.
This study was commissioned by Norfolk County Council Public Health and the Norfolk Safeguarding Children Board. The University of East Anglia and Social Care Partners provided funding to support Dr. Hayhoe’s work on this project.
Some coauthors are employed by the Norfolk County Council that commissioned the survey.
Good nutrition has long been linked to better behavior and academic performance in schoolchildren, as longstanding breakfast and lunch programs in U.S. schools attest. Now British researchers report that nutrition, a modifiable risk factor that can adversely impact mental health, should be part of public health strategies to boost children’s psychological wellness.
In a cross-sectional study published online Sept. 27 in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health, a team from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, found a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in schoolchildren of both primary and secondary school age. They also found that some school kids ate neither breakfast nor lunch.
In particular, eating more fruits and vegetables was significantly associated with better mental health in secondary schoolchildren, while a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in students across the age spectrum, according to senior lecturer Richard P. Hayhoe, PhD, of East Anglia University and Anglia Ruskin University in Norwich and colleagues.
They found that primary school pupils who ate only a snack for breakfast had mental well-being scores 5.50 units lower than those eating a substantial breakfast, while having no lunch was tied to scores more than 6 units lower.
“The importance of good-quality nutrition for childhood growth and development is well established,” the authors wrote. “As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being.”
Their current analysis examined data on 7,570 secondary and 1,253 primary school children from 50 schools participating in the Norfolk Children and Young People Health and Well-being Survey 2017.
Multivariable linear regression measured the association between nutritional factors and mental well-being assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale for secondary school pupils or by the Stirling Children’s Well-being Scale for primary school pupils. All analyses were adjusted for covariates including demographic, health variables, living/home situations, and adverse experiences.
“The 2017 survey provided a means for Norfolk children and young people to share their feelings on topics such as healthy lifestyles and nutrition, relationships, school experiences, bullying, and their mental well-being,” Dr. Hayhoe said in an interview. “Initial analysis of the data suggested an association between nutrition and well-being and so we decided to investigate this further.”
Dr. Hayhoe added that, as in the United States, youngsters in England get a high proportion of their daily calories from ultraprocessed convenience foods of lesser nutritional value.
“But what we didn’t know was whether the dietary habits of children in our survey had any association with their mental well-being,” he said. “Our current findings suggest that increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and ensuring all schoolchildren eat a nutritional breakfast and lunch may be of benefit to their mental well-being.”
His group cautions, however, that this is an observational study that cannot establish direct causation.
“This study provides the first insights into how fruit and vegetable intake affects children’s mental health, and contributes to the emerging evidence around ‘food and mood,’ ” said Sumantra Ray, MD, executive director of the NNEdPro Global Centre for Nutrition and Health in Cambridge, England.
“The findings are timely, not only because of the impact the pandemic has had on mental well-being, food security, and diet quality, especially in school children, but also in light of the recently published National Food Strategy for England, which highlighted gaps in school meal provision,” added Dr. Ray, who was not involved in the study.
Study results
In total, 10,853 schoolchildren completed the survey: 9% of Norfolk primary school children aged 9-11 and 22% of secondary school students, with approximately 6% of these in the 17- and 18-year-old age bracket. Comprehensive dietary questions explored fruit and vegetable intake, as well as type of breakfast and lunch eaten, alcohol intake, eligibility for free school meals, and satisfaction with weight.
The survey also gathered information on parameters ranging from having one’s own bedroom and bed and exposure to violence or discord in the home.
“Some of these were found to be associated with lower mental well-being scores, but we did not specifically investigate the interaction between these factors and the nutritional factors,” Dr. Hayhoe said. However, the difference in mental well-being between children who ate the most fruit and vegetables and those who ate the least was on a similar scale to those reporting daily, or almost daily, arguing or violence at home, he said.
Average mental health was assessed using validated age-appropriate measures. The mean mental health score of participants was 46.6 out of 70 for secondary school students and 46 out of 60 for primary school pupils.
Among the survey findings were:
- Just 25% of secondary school participants and 28.5% of primary school pupils reported eating the recommended five portions of fruits and vegetables a day, with 10% and 9%, respectively, eating none.
- 21% of secondary and 12% of primary school pupils consumed only a non–energy drink or nothing for breakfast, while 11.5% of secondary schoolchildren ate no lunch. In one high school class of 30, for example, four had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the morning, and three had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the afternoon.
- Higher combined fruit and vegetable intake was significantly associated in dose-related fashion with higher mental health scores: 3.73 (95% confidence interval, 2.94- 4.53) units higher in those consuming five or more fruits and vegetables (P < .001), compared with none.
- Breakfast or lunch type also correlated with significant differences in well-being scores. Compared with children consuming a conventional breakfast (porridge, toast, cereal, yogurt, fruit, or a cooked meal), those eating no breakfast had mean well-being scores that were 2.73 (95% CI, 2.11-3.35) units lower (P < .001). Those consuming only an energy drink scored even worse: 3.14 (95% CI, 1.20- 5.09) units lower (P = .002).
- Skipping lunch resulted in a 2.95-unit drop in well-being score (95% CI, 2.22-3.68, P < .001), compared with consuming a packed lunch.
In terms of the amounts of fruits and vegetables consumed, one or two daily portions were associated with a score 1.42 units higher, while three or four portions correlated with a score 2.34 units higher. Those eating five or more portions scored 3.73 units higher.
- For primary school pupils, eating only a snack for breakfast was associated with a score 5.50 units lower, and consuming only a non–energy drink was tied to a score 2.67 units lower than eating a conventional breakfast. Not eating any breakfast was associated with a score 3.62 units lower.
- Eating school food versus a packed lunch was associated with a score 1.27 units lower, although this wasn’t statistically significant. Having no lunch was associated with a score 6.08 units lower, although only a few children fell into this group.
“As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being,” the authors wrote, calling for further investigation of the association between nutrition and mental well-being.
This study was commissioned by Norfolk County Council Public Health and the Norfolk Safeguarding Children Board. The University of East Anglia and Social Care Partners provided funding to support Dr. Hayhoe’s work on this project.
Some coauthors are employed by the Norfolk County Council that commissioned the survey.
Good nutrition has long been linked to better behavior and academic performance in schoolchildren, as longstanding breakfast and lunch programs in U.S. schools attest. Now British researchers report that nutrition, a modifiable risk factor that can adversely impact mental health, should be part of public health strategies to boost children’s psychological wellness.
In a cross-sectional study published online Sept. 27 in BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health, a team from the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, found a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in schoolchildren of both primary and secondary school age. They also found that some school kids ate neither breakfast nor lunch.
In particular, eating more fruits and vegetables was significantly associated with better mental health in secondary schoolchildren, while a nutritious breakfast and lunch were linked to emotional well-being in students across the age spectrum, according to senior lecturer Richard P. Hayhoe, PhD, of East Anglia University and Anglia Ruskin University in Norwich and colleagues.
They found that primary school pupils who ate only a snack for breakfast had mental well-being scores 5.50 units lower than those eating a substantial breakfast, while having no lunch was tied to scores more than 6 units lower.
“The importance of good-quality nutrition for childhood growth and development is well established,” the authors wrote. “As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being.”
Their current analysis examined data on 7,570 secondary and 1,253 primary school children from 50 schools participating in the Norfolk Children and Young People Health and Well-being Survey 2017.
Multivariable linear regression measured the association between nutritional factors and mental well-being assessed by the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale for secondary school pupils or by the Stirling Children’s Well-being Scale for primary school pupils. All analyses were adjusted for covariates including demographic, health variables, living/home situations, and adverse experiences.
“The 2017 survey provided a means for Norfolk children and young people to share their feelings on topics such as healthy lifestyles and nutrition, relationships, school experiences, bullying, and their mental well-being,” Dr. Hayhoe said in an interview. “Initial analysis of the data suggested an association between nutrition and well-being and so we decided to investigate this further.”
Dr. Hayhoe added that, as in the United States, youngsters in England get a high proportion of their daily calories from ultraprocessed convenience foods of lesser nutritional value.
“But what we didn’t know was whether the dietary habits of children in our survey had any association with their mental well-being,” he said. “Our current findings suggest that increasing fruit and vegetable consumption and ensuring all schoolchildren eat a nutritional breakfast and lunch may be of benefit to their mental well-being.”
His group cautions, however, that this is an observational study that cannot establish direct causation.
“This study provides the first insights into how fruit and vegetable intake affects children’s mental health, and contributes to the emerging evidence around ‘food and mood,’ ” said Sumantra Ray, MD, executive director of the NNEdPro Global Centre for Nutrition and Health in Cambridge, England.
“The findings are timely, not only because of the impact the pandemic has had on mental well-being, food security, and diet quality, especially in school children, but also in light of the recently published National Food Strategy for England, which highlighted gaps in school meal provision,” added Dr. Ray, who was not involved in the study.
Study results
In total, 10,853 schoolchildren completed the survey: 9% of Norfolk primary school children aged 9-11 and 22% of secondary school students, with approximately 6% of these in the 17- and 18-year-old age bracket. Comprehensive dietary questions explored fruit and vegetable intake, as well as type of breakfast and lunch eaten, alcohol intake, eligibility for free school meals, and satisfaction with weight.
The survey also gathered information on parameters ranging from having one’s own bedroom and bed and exposure to violence or discord in the home.
“Some of these were found to be associated with lower mental well-being scores, but we did not specifically investigate the interaction between these factors and the nutritional factors,” Dr. Hayhoe said. However, the difference in mental well-being between children who ate the most fruit and vegetables and those who ate the least was on a similar scale to those reporting daily, or almost daily, arguing or violence at home, he said.
Average mental health was assessed using validated age-appropriate measures. The mean mental health score of participants was 46.6 out of 70 for secondary school students and 46 out of 60 for primary school pupils.
Among the survey findings were:
- Just 25% of secondary school participants and 28.5% of primary school pupils reported eating the recommended five portions of fruits and vegetables a day, with 10% and 9%, respectively, eating none.
- 21% of secondary and 12% of primary school pupils consumed only a non–energy drink or nothing for breakfast, while 11.5% of secondary schoolchildren ate no lunch. In one high school class of 30, for example, four had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the morning, and three had nothing to eat or drink before starting classes in the afternoon.
- Higher combined fruit and vegetable intake was significantly associated in dose-related fashion with higher mental health scores: 3.73 (95% confidence interval, 2.94- 4.53) units higher in those consuming five or more fruits and vegetables (P < .001), compared with none.
- Breakfast or lunch type also correlated with significant differences in well-being scores. Compared with children consuming a conventional breakfast (porridge, toast, cereal, yogurt, fruit, or a cooked meal), those eating no breakfast had mean well-being scores that were 2.73 (95% CI, 2.11-3.35) units lower (P < .001). Those consuming only an energy drink scored even worse: 3.14 (95% CI, 1.20- 5.09) units lower (P = .002).
- Skipping lunch resulted in a 2.95-unit drop in well-being score (95% CI, 2.22-3.68, P < .001), compared with consuming a packed lunch.
In terms of the amounts of fruits and vegetables consumed, one or two daily portions were associated with a score 1.42 units higher, while three or four portions correlated with a score 2.34 units higher. Those eating five or more portions scored 3.73 units higher.
- For primary school pupils, eating only a snack for breakfast was associated with a score 5.50 units lower, and consuming only a non–energy drink was tied to a score 2.67 units lower than eating a conventional breakfast. Not eating any breakfast was associated with a score 3.62 units lower.
- Eating school food versus a packed lunch was associated with a score 1.27 units lower, although this wasn’t statistically significant. Having no lunch was associated with a score 6.08 units lower, although only a few children fell into this group.
“As a potentially modifiable factor, both at an individual and societal level, nutrition may therefore represent an important public health target for strategies to address childhood mental well-being,” the authors wrote, calling for further investigation of the association between nutrition and mental well-being.
This study was commissioned by Norfolk County Council Public Health and the Norfolk Safeguarding Children Board. The University of East Anglia and Social Care Partners provided funding to support Dr. Hayhoe’s work on this project.
Some coauthors are employed by the Norfolk County Council that commissioned the survey.
BMJ NUTRITION, PREVENTION & HEALTH
‘Alarming’ increase in fake pills laced with fentanyl, methamphetamine, DEA warns
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has issued a public safety alert over an “alarming” increase in fake prescription pills laced with the synthetic opioid fentanyl or the stimulant methamphetamine.
“The United States is facing an unprecedented crisis of overdose deaths fueled by illegally manufactured fentanyl and methamphetamine,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram said in the alert.
“Counterfeit pills that contain these dangerous and extremely addictive drugs are more lethal and more accessible than ever before. DEA is focusing resources on taking down the violent drug traffickers causing the greatest harm and posing the greatest threat to the safety and health of Americans,” Ms. Milgram said.
Criminal drug networks are mass-producing fake fentanyl- and methamphetamine-laced pills and deceptively marketing them as legitimate prescription pills, the DEA warns.
such as oxycodone (Oxycontin, Percocet), hydrocodone (Vicodin), and alprazolam (Xanax); or stimulants like amphetamines (Adderall).
The agency has seized fake pills in every U.S. state. More than 9.5 million fake pills have been seized so far this year – more than the last 2 years combined.
The number of seized counterfeit pills with fentanyl has jumped nearly 430% since 2019. DEA lab tests reveal that two out of every five pills with fentanyl contain a potentially lethal dose.
These deadly pills are widely accessible and often sold on social media and e-commerce platforms – making them available to anyone with a smartphone, including minors, the DEA warns.
More than 93,000 people died of a drug overdose in the United States last year, according to federal statistics, and fentanyl is the primary driver of this alarming increase in overdose deaths, the DEA says.
The agency has launched a “One Pill Can Kill” public awareness campaign to educate the public of the dangers of counterfeit pills purchased outside of a licensed pharmacy. These pills are “illegal, dangerous, and potentially lethal,” the DEA warns.
This alert does not apply to legitimate pharmaceutical medications prescribed by doctors and dispensed by licensed pharmacists, the DEA says.
“The legitimate prescription supply chain is not impacted. Anyone filling a prescription at a licensed pharmacy can be confident that the medications they receive are safe when taken as directed by a medical professional,” the agency says.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has issued a public safety alert over an “alarming” increase in fake prescription pills laced with the synthetic opioid fentanyl or the stimulant methamphetamine.
“The United States is facing an unprecedented crisis of overdose deaths fueled by illegally manufactured fentanyl and methamphetamine,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram said in the alert.
“Counterfeit pills that contain these dangerous and extremely addictive drugs are more lethal and more accessible than ever before. DEA is focusing resources on taking down the violent drug traffickers causing the greatest harm and posing the greatest threat to the safety and health of Americans,” Ms. Milgram said.
Criminal drug networks are mass-producing fake fentanyl- and methamphetamine-laced pills and deceptively marketing them as legitimate prescription pills, the DEA warns.
such as oxycodone (Oxycontin, Percocet), hydrocodone (Vicodin), and alprazolam (Xanax); or stimulants like amphetamines (Adderall).
The agency has seized fake pills in every U.S. state. More than 9.5 million fake pills have been seized so far this year – more than the last 2 years combined.
The number of seized counterfeit pills with fentanyl has jumped nearly 430% since 2019. DEA lab tests reveal that two out of every five pills with fentanyl contain a potentially lethal dose.
These deadly pills are widely accessible and often sold on social media and e-commerce platforms – making them available to anyone with a smartphone, including minors, the DEA warns.
More than 93,000 people died of a drug overdose in the United States last year, according to federal statistics, and fentanyl is the primary driver of this alarming increase in overdose deaths, the DEA says.
The agency has launched a “One Pill Can Kill” public awareness campaign to educate the public of the dangers of counterfeit pills purchased outside of a licensed pharmacy. These pills are “illegal, dangerous, and potentially lethal,” the DEA warns.
This alert does not apply to legitimate pharmaceutical medications prescribed by doctors and dispensed by licensed pharmacists, the DEA says.
“The legitimate prescription supply chain is not impacted. Anyone filling a prescription at a licensed pharmacy can be confident that the medications they receive are safe when taken as directed by a medical professional,” the agency says.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has issued a public safety alert over an “alarming” increase in fake prescription pills laced with the synthetic opioid fentanyl or the stimulant methamphetamine.
“The United States is facing an unprecedented crisis of overdose deaths fueled by illegally manufactured fentanyl and methamphetamine,” DEA Administrator Anne Milgram said in the alert.
“Counterfeit pills that contain these dangerous and extremely addictive drugs are more lethal and more accessible than ever before. DEA is focusing resources on taking down the violent drug traffickers causing the greatest harm and posing the greatest threat to the safety and health of Americans,” Ms. Milgram said.
Criminal drug networks are mass-producing fake fentanyl- and methamphetamine-laced pills and deceptively marketing them as legitimate prescription pills, the DEA warns.
such as oxycodone (Oxycontin, Percocet), hydrocodone (Vicodin), and alprazolam (Xanax); or stimulants like amphetamines (Adderall).
The agency has seized fake pills in every U.S. state. More than 9.5 million fake pills have been seized so far this year – more than the last 2 years combined.
The number of seized counterfeit pills with fentanyl has jumped nearly 430% since 2019. DEA lab tests reveal that two out of every five pills with fentanyl contain a potentially lethal dose.
These deadly pills are widely accessible and often sold on social media and e-commerce platforms – making them available to anyone with a smartphone, including minors, the DEA warns.
More than 93,000 people died of a drug overdose in the United States last year, according to federal statistics, and fentanyl is the primary driver of this alarming increase in overdose deaths, the DEA says.
The agency has launched a “One Pill Can Kill” public awareness campaign to educate the public of the dangers of counterfeit pills purchased outside of a licensed pharmacy. These pills are “illegal, dangerous, and potentially lethal,” the DEA warns.
This alert does not apply to legitimate pharmaceutical medications prescribed by doctors and dispensed by licensed pharmacists, the DEA says.
“The legitimate prescription supply chain is not impacted. Anyone filling a prescription at a licensed pharmacy can be confident that the medications they receive are safe when taken as directed by a medical professional,” the agency says.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
One in three children fall short of sleep recommendations
Just over one-third of children in the United States get less sleep than recommended, with higher rates occurring among several racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
, Anne G. Wheaton, PhD, and Angelika H. Claussen, PhD, said in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Unlike previous reports, this analysis showed that adolescents were less likely than infants to have short sleep duration, 31.2% vs. 40.3%. These latest data are based on the 2016-2018 editions of the National Survey of Children’s Health, and the “difference might be explained by NSCH’s reliance on parent report rather than self-report with Youth Risk Behavior Surveys,” they suggested.
Black children had the highest prevalence of any group included in the study, as parents reported that 50.8% of all ages were not getting the recommended amount of sleep, compared with 39.1% among Hispanics, 34.6% for other races, and 28.8% for Whites. The figure for Black infants was 64.2%, almost double the prevalence for White infants (32.9%), said Dr. Wheaton and Dr. Claussen of the CDC.
Short sleep duration also was more common in children from lower-income families and among those with less educated parents. Geography had an effect as well, with prevalence “highest in the Southeast, similar to geographic variation in adequate sleep observed for adults,” they noted.
Previous research has shown that “sleep disparity was associated with various social determinants of health (e.g., poverty, food insecurity, and perceived racism), which can increase chronic and acute stress and result in environmental and psychological factors that negatively affect sleep duration and can compound long-term health risks,” the investigators wrote.
Short sleep duration by age group was defined as less the following amounts: Twelve hours for infants (4-11 months), 11 hours for children aged 1-2 years, 10 hours for children aged 3-5 years, 9 hours for children aged 6-12, and 8 hours for adolescents (13-17 years), they explained. Responses for the survey’s sleep-duration question totaled 99,842 for the 3 years included.
Just over one-third of children in the United States get less sleep than recommended, with higher rates occurring among several racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
, Anne G. Wheaton, PhD, and Angelika H. Claussen, PhD, said in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Unlike previous reports, this analysis showed that adolescents were less likely than infants to have short sleep duration, 31.2% vs. 40.3%. These latest data are based on the 2016-2018 editions of the National Survey of Children’s Health, and the “difference might be explained by NSCH’s reliance on parent report rather than self-report with Youth Risk Behavior Surveys,” they suggested.
Black children had the highest prevalence of any group included in the study, as parents reported that 50.8% of all ages were not getting the recommended amount of sleep, compared with 39.1% among Hispanics, 34.6% for other races, and 28.8% for Whites. The figure for Black infants was 64.2%, almost double the prevalence for White infants (32.9%), said Dr. Wheaton and Dr. Claussen of the CDC.
Short sleep duration also was more common in children from lower-income families and among those with less educated parents. Geography had an effect as well, with prevalence “highest in the Southeast, similar to geographic variation in adequate sleep observed for adults,” they noted.
Previous research has shown that “sleep disparity was associated with various social determinants of health (e.g., poverty, food insecurity, and perceived racism), which can increase chronic and acute stress and result in environmental and psychological factors that negatively affect sleep duration and can compound long-term health risks,” the investigators wrote.
Short sleep duration by age group was defined as less the following amounts: Twelve hours for infants (4-11 months), 11 hours for children aged 1-2 years, 10 hours for children aged 3-5 years, 9 hours for children aged 6-12, and 8 hours for adolescents (13-17 years), they explained. Responses for the survey’s sleep-duration question totaled 99,842 for the 3 years included.
Just over one-third of children in the United States get less sleep than recommended, with higher rates occurring among several racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
, Anne G. Wheaton, PhD, and Angelika H. Claussen, PhD, said in the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.
Unlike previous reports, this analysis showed that adolescents were less likely than infants to have short sleep duration, 31.2% vs. 40.3%. These latest data are based on the 2016-2018 editions of the National Survey of Children’s Health, and the “difference might be explained by NSCH’s reliance on parent report rather than self-report with Youth Risk Behavior Surveys,” they suggested.
Black children had the highest prevalence of any group included in the study, as parents reported that 50.8% of all ages were not getting the recommended amount of sleep, compared with 39.1% among Hispanics, 34.6% for other races, and 28.8% for Whites. The figure for Black infants was 64.2%, almost double the prevalence for White infants (32.9%), said Dr. Wheaton and Dr. Claussen of the CDC.
Short sleep duration also was more common in children from lower-income families and among those with less educated parents. Geography had an effect as well, with prevalence “highest in the Southeast, similar to geographic variation in adequate sleep observed for adults,” they noted.
Previous research has shown that “sleep disparity was associated with various social determinants of health (e.g., poverty, food insecurity, and perceived racism), which can increase chronic and acute stress and result in environmental and psychological factors that negatively affect sleep duration and can compound long-term health risks,” the investigators wrote.
Short sleep duration by age group was defined as less the following amounts: Twelve hours for infants (4-11 months), 11 hours for children aged 1-2 years, 10 hours for children aged 3-5 years, 9 hours for children aged 6-12, and 8 hours for adolescents (13-17 years), they explained. Responses for the survey’s sleep-duration question totaled 99,842 for the 3 years included.
FROM MMWR
Differences in Care by Race in Older Nursing Home Residents With Dementia
Study Overview
Objective. To examine differences in care, specifically hospitalization towards the end of life, among nursing home residents with dementia who were Black compared with those who were White.
Design. Population based cohort study in the US. The study included all decedents with Alzheimer’s disease or related dementia (ADRD) who resided in a nursing home from 2014 to 2017. Decedents from nursing homes were identified by death within 1 day of an identified nursing home stay or within 8 days of a hospital transfer from nursing home. Data were obtained from Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) which contains clinical data from all Medicaid or Medicare certified nursing homes, and from the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File (MBSF) and Medicare Provider and Analysis and Review (MedPAR) which contains hospitalization events for all Medicare Beneficiaries. These files were linked to identify nursing home residents with ADRD who were hospitalized at the end of life. ADRD diagnosis was identified from the chronic condition list from the MBSF and from MDS diagnosis list.
Setting and participants. The study included 665 033 residents from 14 595 nursing homes who died during the study period. Resident race was categorized as White or Black based on the MBSF. Severe cognitive impairment was identified using the MDS that categorized residents as severe or not using the Brief Interview for Mental Status and the Cognitive Performance Scale. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 86.7 (9.2) years for White residents and 82.6 (11.1) years for Black residents. Of the participants, 68.8% and 61.2% were female for Black and White residents, respectively. Approximately 23.4% of White and 32.5% of Black residents had severe cognitive impairment. For nursing home characteristics, 71.5% of the 14 595 nursing homes represented were for profit; average bedside was 109.5 (57.0) and occupancy rate was on average 81.2% (14.3%).
Main outcome measures. The study outcome measure was any hospitalization within 30 days prior to death. The outcome was selected as an indicator of quality of care because as older adults living with ADRD experience progressive worsening of cognitive symptoms, at the end of life when dementia is severe, advance care planning and communication with health care proxies and surrogates often result in coordinated care that avoids acute hospitalizations, which are often burdensome to both patient and family and may yield poorer quality of life.
Main results. The study found that approximately 29.5% of White decedents and 40.7% of Black decedents were hospitalized towards the end of life. Nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to have residents hospitalized towards the end of life with 35% of residents hospitalized in the highest quartile (27% Black) compared with 17% hospitalized for nursing homes in the lowest quartile (0% Black).After adjusting for covariates, Black residents were 7.9% more likely to be hospitalized in the last 30 days of life compared with White residents. Blacks with severe cognitive impairment has elevated risk of hospitalization by 4.9% when compared with White residents. After accounting for nursing home facility–level characteristics, nursing homes with a low proportion of Black residents had a 5.2% higher risk of hospitalizations compared with nursing homes with no Black residents, and nursing homes with a higher percentage of Black residents had a 13.3% higher risk of hospitalization compared with nursing homes with no Black residents.
Conclusion. Race is associated with care disparities in older nursing home residents with dementia. This study suggests that hospitalization towards the end of life as a quality of care marker differs across nursing homes, and nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to be hospitalized. This suggests that these nursing homes may have fewer resources and delivered poorer quality of care, and that disparities in health systems or institutions contribute to differences in quality of care for this vulnerable group.
Commentary
Disparities of health status, health care, and affordability across race and ethnicity have persisted throughout the past 20 years.1 There is further evidence to support systemic differences that can contribute to differences in health outcomes.2 Although changes in health care policy such as the Affordable Care Act have expanded health care coverage, and instituted changes that aims to improve health care quality and reduce disparities, it is clear that factors contributing to disparities in care are structural and perhaps systemic. The latest evidence comes in this study that examines racial disparities in health care quality in one of the most vulnerable populations—older adults with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. The finding that Black nursing home residents, when compared with White residents, often has higher risk of hospitalization at the end of life, even among those with severe dementia where better coordinated care, clear goals of care and perhaps instituting palliative care would result in lower rate of hospitalization. The disparities were observed across nursing homes as well, where nursing homes with higher proportion of Black residents appear to have lower quality of care.
These findings are consistent with prior work that has examined differences in Black and White population on uptake of palliative care, discussion, and the documentation of advance care planning.3 Factors that may contribute to these differences include mistrust of the health care system among minorities, and not being connected to adequate health care resources. Family members and surrogate health care decision makers may consider receiving more aggressive care as advocating for better health care for their family members.4 These differences may contribute to the differences in hospitalization rates among residents within the same nursing home; however, the differences between nursing homes even after accounting for individual differences may indicate more widespread systemic differences that is associated with race. Policy changes that will address these differences are needed to level these differences so that quality care can be delivered regardless of race.5 For this vulnerable population with a terminal illness, approaches to enhance uptake of palliative approaches and care delivery for dementia patients at terminal stage are needed and understanding and targeting factors that contribute to low uptake of these approaches will enhance end of life care. Understanding the differences in resources and systems of care in nursing homes and perhaps how palliative care is integrated in these settings will be important to address care disparities that occurs across nursing homes.
Applications for Clinical Practice
Clinicians who take care of this population of older adults with advanced dementia should be aware of the potential for racial disparities that may lead to differences in the quality of care. The underlying reasons for these differences could be targeted so that older adults in all racial groups may have equal access to quality care including palliative approaches that avoid aggressive care for terminal illnesses across settings that may yield better care and quality of life. Policy makers and health systems leaders need to consider the current realities with racial disparities that policies need to address these differences so that they may not continue to persist in our systems of care.
Financial disclosures: None.
1. Mahajan S, Caraballo C, Lu Y, et al. Trends in Differences in Health Status and Health Care Access and Affordability by Race and Ethnicity in the United States, 1999-2018. JAMA. 2021;326(7):637-648. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.9907
2. Gill TM, Zang EX, Murphy TE, et al. Association Between Neighborhood Disadvantage and Functional Well-being in Community-Living Older Persons. [published online ahead of print, 2021 Aug 23]. JAMA Intern Med. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.4260
3. Bazargan M, Bazargan-Hejazi S. Disparities in Palliative and Hospice Care and Completion of Advance Care Planning and Directives Among Non-Hispanic Blacks: A Scoping Review of Recent Literature. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):688-718. doi:10.1177/1049909120966585
4. Siler S, Arora K, Doyon K, Fischer SM. Spirituality and the Illness Experience: Perspectives of African American Older Adults. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):618-625. doi:10.1177/1049909120988280
5. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. Black-white disparities in health care. JAMA. 1990;263(17):2344-2346. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440170066038
Study Overview
Objective. To examine differences in care, specifically hospitalization towards the end of life, among nursing home residents with dementia who were Black compared with those who were White.
Design. Population based cohort study in the US. The study included all decedents with Alzheimer’s disease or related dementia (ADRD) who resided in a nursing home from 2014 to 2017. Decedents from nursing homes were identified by death within 1 day of an identified nursing home stay or within 8 days of a hospital transfer from nursing home. Data were obtained from Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) which contains clinical data from all Medicaid or Medicare certified nursing homes, and from the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File (MBSF) and Medicare Provider and Analysis and Review (MedPAR) which contains hospitalization events for all Medicare Beneficiaries. These files were linked to identify nursing home residents with ADRD who were hospitalized at the end of life. ADRD diagnosis was identified from the chronic condition list from the MBSF and from MDS diagnosis list.
Setting and participants. The study included 665 033 residents from 14 595 nursing homes who died during the study period. Resident race was categorized as White or Black based on the MBSF. Severe cognitive impairment was identified using the MDS that categorized residents as severe or not using the Brief Interview for Mental Status and the Cognitive Performance Scale. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 86.7 (9.2) years for White residents and 82.6 (11.1) years for Black residents. Of the participants, 68.8% and 61.2% were female for Black and White residents, respectively. Approximately 23.4% of White and 32.5% of Black residents had severe cognitive impairment. For nursing home characteristics, 71.5% of the 14 595 nursing homes represented were for profit; average bedside was 109.5 (57.0) and occupancy rate was on average 81.2% (14.3%).
Main outcome measures. The study outcome measure was any hospitalization within 30 days prior to death. The outcome was selected as an indicator of quality of care because as older adults living with ADRD experience progressive worsening of cognitive symptoms, at the end of life when dementia is severe, advance care planning and communication with health care proxies and surrogates often result in coordinated care that avoids acute hospitalizations, which are often burdensome to both patient and family and may yield poorer quality of life.
Main results. The study found that approximately 29.5% of White decedents and 40.7% of Black decedents were hospitalized towards the end of life. Nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to have residents hospitalized towards the end of life with 35% of residents hospitalized in the highest quartile (27% Black) compared with 17% hospitalized for nursing homes in the lowest quartile (0% Black).After adjusting for covariates, Black residents were 7.9% more likely to be hospitalized in the last 30 days of life compared with White residents. Blacks with severe cognitive impairment has elevated risk of hospitalization by 4.9% when compared with White residents. After accounting for nursing home facility–level characteristics, nursing homes with a low proportion of Black residents had a 5.2% higher risk of hospitalizations compared with nursing homes with no Black residents, and nursing homes with a higher percentage of Black residents had a 13.3% higher risk of hospitalization compared with nursing homes with no Black residents.
Conclusion. Race is associated with care disparities in older nursing home residents with dementia. This study suggests that hospitalization towards the end of life as a quality of care marker differs across nursing homes, and nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to be hospitalized. This suggests that these nursing homes may have fewer resources and delivered poorer quality of care, and that disparities in health systems or institutions contribute to differences in quality of care for this vulnerable group.
Commentary
Disparities of health status, health care, and affordability across race and ethnicity have persisted throughout the past 20 years.1 There is further evidence to support systemic differences that can contribute to differences in health outcomes.2 Although changes in health care policy such as the Affordable Care Act have expanded health care coverage, and instituted changes that aims to improve health care quality and reduce disparities, it is clear that factors contributing to disparities in care are structural and perhaps systemic. The latest evidence comes in this study that examines racial disparities in health care quality in one of the most vulnerable populations—older adults with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. The finding that Black nursing home residents, when compared with White residents, often has higher risk of hospitalization at the end of life, even among those with severe dementia where better coordinated care, clear goals of care and perhaps instituting palliative care would result in lower rate of hospitalization. The disparities were observed across nursing homes as well, where nursing homes with higher proportion of Black residents appear to have lower quality of care.
These findings are consistent with prior work that has examined differences in Black and White population on uptake of palliative care, discussion, and the documentation of advance care planning.3 Factors that may contribute to these differences include mistrust of the health care system among minorities, and not being connected to adequate health care resources. Family members and surrogate health care decision makers may consider receiving more aggressive care as advocating for better health care for their family members.4 These differences may contribute to the differences in hospitalization rates among residents within the same nursing home; however, the differences between nursing homes even after accounting for individual differences may indicate more widespread systemic differences that is associated with race. Policy changes that will address these differences are needed to level these differences so that quality care can be delivered regardless of race.5 For this vulnerable population with a terminal illness, approaches to enhance uptake of palliative approaches and care delivery for dementia patients at terminal stage are needed and understanding and targeting factors that contribute to low uptake of these approaches will enhance end of life care. Understanding the differences in resources and systems of care in nursing homes and perhaps how palliative care is integrated in these settings will be important to address care disparities that occurs across nursing homes.
Applications for Clinical Practice
Clinicians who take care of this population of older adults with advanced dementia should be aware of the potential for racial disparities that may lead to differences in the quality of care. The underlying reasons for these differences could be targeted so that older adults in all racial groups may have equal access to quality care including palliative approaches that avoid aggressive care for terminal illnesses across settings that may yield better care and quality of life. Policy makers and health systems leaders need to consider the current realities with racial disparities that policies need to address these differences so that they may not continue to persist in our systems of care.
Financial disclosures: None.
Study Overview
Objective. To examine differences in care, specifically hospitalization towards the end of life, among nursing home residents with dementia who were Black compared with those who were White.
Design. Population based cohort study in the US. The study included all decedents with Alzheimer’s disease or related dementia (ADRD) who resided in a nursing home from 2014 to 2017. Decedents from nursing homes were identified by death within 1 day of an identified nursing home stay or within 8 days of a hospital transfer from nursing home. Data were obtained from Minimum Data Set 3.0 (MDS) which contains clinical data from all Medicaid or Medicare certified nursing homes, and from the Medicare Beneficiary Summary File (MBSF) and Medicare Provider and Analysis and Review (MedPAR) which contains hospitalization events for all Medicare Beneficiaries. These files were linked to identify nursing home residents with ADRD who were hospitalized at the end of life. ADRD diagnosis was identified from the chronic condition list from the MBSF and from MDS diagnosis list.
Setting and participants. The study included 665 033 residents from 14 595 nursing homes who died during the study period. Resident race was categorized as White or Black based on the MBSF. Severe cognitive impairment was identified using the MDS that categorized residents as severe or not using the Brief Interview for Mental Status and the Cognitive Performance Scale. The mean (SD) age of the study population was 86.7 (9.2) years for White residents and 82.6 (11.1) years for Black residents. Of the participants, 68.8% and 61.2% were female for Black and White residents, respectively. Approximately 23.4% of White and 32.5% of Black residents had severe cognitive impairment. For nursing home characteristics, 71.5% of the 14 595 nursing homes represented were for profit; average bedside was 109.5 (57.0) and occupancy rate was on average 81.2% (14.3%).
Main outcome measures. The study outcome measure was any hospitalization within 30 days prior to death. The outcome was selected as an indicator of quality of care because as older adults living with ADRD experience progressive worsening of cognitive symptoms, at the end of life when dementia is severe, advance care planning and communication with health care proxies and surrogates often result in coordinated care that avoids acute hospitalizations, which are often burdensome to both patient and family and may yield poorer quality of life.
Main results. The study found that approximately 29.5% of White decedents and 40.7% of Black decedents were hospitalized towards the end of life. Nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to have residents hospitalized towards the end of life with 35% of residents hospitalized in the highest quartile (27% Black) compared with 17% hospitalized for nursing homes in the lowest quartile (0% Black).After adjusting for covariates, Black residents were 7.9% more likely to be hospitalized in the last 30 days of life compared with White residents. Blacks with severe cognitive impairment has elevated risk of hospitalization by 4.9% when compared with White residents. After accounting for nursing home facility–level characteristics, nursing homes with a low proportion of Black residents had a 5.2% higher risk of hospitalizations compared with nursing homes with no Black residents, and nursing homes with a higher percentage of Black residents had a 13.3% higher risk of hospitalization compared with nursing homes with no Black residents.
Conclusion. Race is associated with care disparities in older nursing home residents with dementia. This study suggests that hospitalization towards the end of life as a quality of care marker differs across nursing homes, and nursing homes with a higher proportion of Black residents were more likely to be hospitalized. This suggests that these nursing homes may have fewer resources and delivered poorer quality of care, and that disparities in health systems or institutions contribute to differences in quality of care for this vulnerable group.
Commentary
Disparities of health status, health care, and affordability across race and ethnicity have persisted throughout the past 20 years.1 There is further evidence to support systemic differences that can contribute to differences in health outcomes.2 Although changes in health care policy such as the Affordable Care Act have expanded health care coverage, and instituted changes that aims to improve health care quality and reduce disparities, it is clear that factors contributing to disparities in care are structural and perhaps systemic. The latest evidence comes in this study that examines racial disparities in health care quality in one of the most vulnerable populations—older adults with Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. The finding that Black nursing home residents, when compared with White residents, often has higher risk of hospitalization at the end of life, even among those with severe dementia where better coordinated care, clear goals of care and perhaps instituting palliative care would result in lower rate of hospitalization. The disparities were observed across nursing homes as well, where nursing homes with higher proportion of Black residents appear to have lower quality of care.
These findings are consistent with prior work that has examined differences in Black and White population on uptake of palliative care, discussion, and the documentation of advance care planning.3 Factors that may contribute to these differences include mistrust of the health care system among minorities, and not being connected to adequate health care resources. Family members and surrogate health care decision makers may consider receiving more aggressive care as advocating for better health care for their family members.4 These differences may contribute to the differences in hospitalization rates among residents within the same nursing home; however, the differences between nursing homes even after accounting for individual differences may indicate more widespread systemic differences that is associated with race. Policy changes that will address these differences are needed to level these differences so that quality care can be delivered regardless of race.5 For this vulnerable population with a terminal illness, approaches to enhance uptake of palliative approaches and care delivery for dementia patients at terminal stage are needed and understanding and targeting factors that contribute to low uptake of these approaches will enhance end of life care. Understanding the differences in resources and systems of care in nursing homes and perhaps how palliative care is integrated in these settings will be important to address care disparities that occurs across nursing homes.
Applications for Clinical Practice
Clinicians who take care of this population of older adults with advanced dementia should be aware of the potential for racial disparities that may lead to differences in the quality of care. The underlying reasons for these differences could be targeted so that older adults in all racial groups may have equal access to quality care including palliative approaches that avoid aggressive care for terminal illnesses across settings that may yield better care and quality of life. Policy makers and health systems leaders need to consider the current realities with racial disparities that policies need to address these differences so that they may not continue to persist in our systems of care.
Financial disclosures: None.
1. Mahajan S, Caraballo C, Lu Y, et al. Trends in Differences in Health Status and Health Care Access and Affordability by Race and Ethnicity in the United States, 1999-2018. JAMA. 2021;326(7):637-648. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.9907
2. Gill TM, Zang EX, Murphy TE, et al. Association Between Neighborhood Disadvantage and Functional Well-being in Community-Living Older Persons. [published online ahead of print, 2021 Aug 23]. JAMA Intern Med. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.4260
3. Bazargan M, Bazargan-Hejazi S. Disparities in Palliative and Hospice Care and Completion of Advance Care Planning and Directives Among Non-Hispanic Blacks: A Scoping Review of Recent Literature. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):688-718. doi:10.1177/1049909120966585
4. Siler S, Arora K, Doyon K, Fischer SM. Spirituality and the Illness Experience: Perspectives of African American Older Adults. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):618-625. doi:10.1177/1049909120988280
5. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. Black-white disparities in health care. JAMA. 1990;263(17):2344-2346. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440170066038
1. Mahajan S, Caraballo C, Lu Y, et al. Trends in Differences in Health Status and Health Care Access and Affordability by Race and Ethnicity in the United States, 1999-2018. JAMA. 2021;326(7):637-648. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.9907
2. Gill TM, Zang EX, Murphy TE, et al. Association Between Neighborhood Disadvantage and Functional Well-being in Community-Living Older Persons. [published online ahead of print, 2021 Aug 23]. JAMA Intern Med. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.4260
3. Bazargan M, Bazargan-Hejazi S. Disparities in Palliative and Hospice Care and Completion of Advance Care Planning and Directives Among Non-Hispanic Blacks: A Scoping Review of Recent Literature. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):688-718. doi:10.1177/1049909120966585
4. Siler S, Arora K, Doyon K, Fischer SM. Spirituality and the Illness Experience: Perspectives of African American Older Adults. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2021;38(6):618-625. doi:10.1177/1049909120988280
5. Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. Black-white disparities in health care. JAMA. 1990;263(17):2344-2346. doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03440170066038
Dopamine and reward: The story of social media
How often do you find yourself on social media? The first thing I do when I wake up is check my email and text messages, as well as my Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram notifications.
Some 150,000 messages are shared on Facebook each minute; 293 million daily active users worldwide were recorded on Snapchat during the second quarter of 2021; 127.2 million monthly active users in the United States are projected to be on Instagram by 2023.
Social media has gained the hearts and wonder of many around the world. It’s absolutely incredible how ingrained it has become in our lives as a medium for creativity, outlet for communication, and platform for information. In fact, these online network tools have now become essential during COVID-19 to ensure productive workflow, keep in touch with our loved ones, and, overall, maintain social capital. Social media has truly emerged as a powerful form of living beyond our physical selves.
Yet, increased (and addictive) social media use is associated with negative health outcomes, especially among adolescents. For example, in a study reporting parent and adolescent accounts of social media use, it was reported that social media use was associated with hyperactivity/impulsivity, depression, anxiety, loneliness, and a fear of missing out. Furthermore, a meta-analysis investigating the relationship between social media use and depressive symptoms among adolescents found a small but significant and positive relationship between the two. However, additional research is required to elucidate this association.
Notwithstanding, the addictive nature of social media has previously been called out as analogous to the addictive nature of gambling. Let’s think about it. Whether you’re on Instagram, TikTok, or a similar platform, you can’t help but scroll from one video to the next. It’s one 5- to 10-second video after the next, and before you know it, you’ve spent the past hour going through random videos – but you can’t stop. Why is that so?
Social media actually “rewires” our brain such that we expect instant gratification. In other words, when we get a notification, message, like, or share, we expect fast and short-term pleasure/reward because the brain will produce a “hit of dopamine.” However, it is important to note that the reward system is not delimited to the dopaminergic pathway and, in fact, should be understood as a complex network system (i.e., governed by changes in brain morphology through addiction and excessive behavior). Given the quick pace of the social media world, the reward pathways in our brain change and there’s an increasing demand for attention, perpetuating an addictive mindset.
When we refresh our page, we expect instant gratification. But what happens when we don’t get a like, or a message, or some sort of “reward”? Recounts of social media use by adolescents have likened online attention to popularity. Accordingly, a lack of constant attention on social media has created a vicious cycle of anxiety, loneliness, and depression because of a failure to receive “virtual” reward. Taken together, social media may be harmful because it distorts our self-image, and while social media platforms help connect us, they can also ironically make us feel isolated, lower our self-confidence, and diminish our overall sense of well-being.
As the platforms for communication and information have evolved so rapidly over the past decade, there is a need to establish boundaries between what is beneficial and what is potentially detrimental to our mental health. While social media companies should play a role in mitigating addictive social network behavior, it would also seem counterintuitive to the general business model. In that case, who takes charge? This multifaceted problem requires a multidisciplinary approach.
Leanna M.W. Lui is an MSc candidate at the University of Toronto.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
How often do you find yourself on social media? The first thing I do when I wake up is check my email and text messages, as well as my Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram notifications.
Some 150,000 messages are shared on Facebook each minute; 293 million daily active users worldwide were recorded on Snapchat during the second quarter of 2021; 127.2 million monthly active users in the United States are projected to be on Instagram by 2023.
Social media has gained the hearts and wonder of many around the world. It’s absolutely incredible how ingrained it has become in our lives as a medium for creativity, outlet for communication, and platform for information. In fact, these online network tools have now become essential during COVID-19 to ensure productive workflow, keep in touch with our loved ones, and, overall, maintain social capital. Social media has truly emerged as a powerful form of living beyond our physical selves.
Yet, increased (and addictive) social media use is associated with negative health outcomes, especially among adolescents. For example, in a study reporting parent and adolescent accounts of social media use, it was reported that social media use was associated with hyperactivity/impulsivity, depression, anxiety, loneliness, and a fear of missing out. Furthermore, a meta-analysis investigating the relationship between social media use and depressive symptoms among adolescents found a small but significant and positive relationship between the two. However, additional research is required to elucidate this association.
Notwithstanding, the addictive nature of social media has previously been called out as analogous to the addictive nature of gambling. Let’s think about it. Whether you’re on Instagram, TikTok, or a similar platform, you can’t help but scroll from one video to the next. It’s one 5- to 10-second video after the next, and before you know it, you’ve spent the past hour going through random videos – but you can’t stop. Why is that so?
Social media actually “rewires” our brain such that we expect instant gratification. In other words, when we get a notification, message, like, or share, we expect fast and short-term pleasure/reward because the brain will produce a “hit of dopamine.” However, it is important to note that the reward system is not delimited to the dopaminergic pathway and, in fact, should be understood as a complex network system (i.e., governed by changes in brain morphology through addiction and excessive behavior). Given the quick pace of the social media world, the reward pathways in our brain change and there’s an increasing demand for attention, perpetuating an addictive mindset.
When we refresh our page, we expect instant gratification. But what happens when we don’t get a like, or a message, or some sort of “reward”? Recounts of social media use by adolescents have likened online attention to popularity. Accordingly, a lack of constant attention on social media has created a vicious cycle of anxiety, loneliness, and depression because of a failure to receive “virtual” reward. Taken together, social media may be harmful because it distorts our self-image, and while social media platforms help connect us, they can also ironically make us feel isolated, lower our self-confidence, and diminish our overall sense of well-being.
As the platforms for communication and information have evolved so rapidly over the past decade, there is a need to establish boundaries between what is beneficial and what is potentially detrimental to our mental health. While social media companies should play a role in mitigating addictive social network behavior, it would also seem counterintuitive to the general business model. In that case, who takes charge? This multifaceted problem requires a multidisciplinary approach.
Leanna M.W. Lui is an MSc candidate at the University of Toronto.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
How often do you find yourself on social media? The first thing I do when I wake up is check my email and text messages, as well as my Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram notifications.
Some 150,000 messages are shared on Facebook each minute; 293 million daily active users worldwide were recorded on Snapchat during the second quarter of 2021; 127.2 million monthly active users in the United States are projected to be on Instagram by 2023.
Social media has gained the hearts and wonder of many around the world. It’s absolutely incredible how ingrained it has become in our lives as a medium for creativity, outlet for communication, and platform for information. In fact, these online network tools have now become essential during COVID-19 to ensure productive workflow, keep in touch with our loved ones, and, overall, maintain social capital. Social media has truly emerged as a powerful form of living beyond our physical selves.
Yet, increased (and addictive) social media use is associated with negative health outcomes, especially among adolescents. For example, in a study reporting parent and adolescent accounts of social media use, it was reported that social media use was associated with hyperactivity/impulsivity, depression, anxiety, loneliness, and a fear of missing out. Furthermore, a meta-analysis investigating the relationship between social media use and depressive symptoms among adolescents found a small but significant and positive relationship between the two. However, additional research is required to elucidate this association.
Notwithstanding, the addictive nature of social media has previously been called out as analogous to the addictive nature of gambling. Let’s think about it. Whether you’re on Instagram, TikTok, or a similar platform, you can’t help but scroll from one video to the next. It’s one 5- to 10-second video after the next, and before you know it, you’ve spent the past hour going through random videos – but you can’t stop. Why is that so?
Social media actually “rewires” our brain such that we expect instant gratification. In other words, when we get a notification, message, like, or share, we expect fast and short-term pleasure/reward because the brain will produce a “hit of dopamine.” However, it is important to note that the reward system is not delimited to the dopaminergic pathway and, in fact, should be understood as a complex network system (i.e., governed by changes in brain morphology through addiction and excessive behavior). Given the quick pace of the social media world, the reward pathways in our brain change and there’s an increasing demand for attention, perpetuating an addictive mindset.
When we refresh our page, we expect instant gratification. But what happens when we don’t get a like, or a message, or some sort of “reward”? Recounts of social media use by adolescents have likened online attention to popularity. Accordingly, a lack of constant attention on social media has created a vicious cycle of anxiety, loneliness, and depression because of a failure to receive “virtual” reward. Taken together, social media may be harmful because it distorts our self-image, and while social media platforms help connect us, they can also ironically make us feel isolated, lower our self-confidence, and diminish our overall sense of well-being.
As the platforms for communication and information have evolved so rapidly over the past decade, there is a need to establish boundaries between what is beneficial and what is potentially detrimental to our mental health. While social media companies should play a role in mitigating addictive social network behavior, it would also seem counterintuitive to the general business model. In that case, who takes charge? This multifaceted problem requires a multidisciplinary approach.
Leanna M.W. Lui is an MSc candidate at the University of Toronto.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.