User login
Patients’ sexual problems: Be proactive, make discussions routine
If the goal of a clinical encounter is to identify issues that adversely affect health, well-being, and life satisfaction, open-ended questions on sexual problems are essential, according to an expert who provided tips during a session presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists about how to begin a productive dialogue.
For identifying and treating the obstacles to sexual health, “the onus is on the provider,” said Anita H. Clayton, MD, chair of psychiatry and neurobehavioral sciences at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In a poll published more than 20 years ago, 91% of men and 84% of women reported that a satisfying sex life is important, while 90% agreed that sexual difficulties cause emotional problems, said Dr. Clayton, who sees no reason to think that those percentages have changed. Yet, patients are traditionally reluctant to raise their concerns about sexual issues to a physician.
In the same poll, about 50% of the respondents characterized themselves as “very concerned” that a clinician would simply dismiss a sexual complaint or that there would be no treatment. Of the other respondents, 40% were somewhat concerned. Dr. Clayton assumes that those numbers are still valid and that they provide the rationale for asking routinely about sexual health, she said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
Raising sexual health issues
“The clinician has to initiate the discussion and make it part of the routine examination,” said Dr. Clayton, also a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the university. She indicated that unresolved sexual issues are a common and important but treatable problem, whether the underlying issue has a medical or psychological origin.
Yet, language is critical. Many physicians might have no difficulty discussing sexual problems, but patients often do. Dr. Clayton recommended developing strategies that might it easy if not seamless to elicit information about sexual health in the context of inquiring about other clinical issues.
“Use bridging statements,” Dr. Clayton suggested.
Bridging statements allow an easy transition into a discussion of sexual function from another clinical issue, Dr. Clayton said. As examples, she suggested moving to questions about sex from inquiries about conditions, such as diabetes, or medications, such as antidepressants, that are known to have an impact on sexual dysfunction.
Avoid yes-no questions.
To prompt a dialogue, Dr. Clayton advised against using yes-no questions that allow the patient to quickly dismiss the topic with a negative response. She tries to frame a question that requires a complete thought. In an inquiry addressed to a patient with diabetes, for example, she might first inform the patient that sexual issues are common with this disorder and then ask what types of sexual issues the patient is experiencing.
Once the topic is raised, a checklist approach is appropriate. Patients might be more or less willing to talk any one of the range of issues that influence sexual health, ranging from issues of desire and arousal to discomfort or pain. The door should be opened to a discussion of specific sexual organ function, such as ability to achieve an erection or adequate lubrication.
“Do not assume the patient is heterosexual,” Dr. Clayton cautioned.
It is reasonable and appropriate to bring up sexual health during the intake history. A discussion of sexual health can be initiated by simply posing the question: “Are you sexually active?” Importantly, Dr. Clayton strongly recommended a follow-up question when adults reply that they are not sexually active.
In the ELIXIR study, which evaluated sexual function in patients with depression, more than twice as many patients reported impairments when asked by the physician than who volunteered this information spontaneously, according to Dr. Clayton, citing a study that found sexual issues in more than 70% of the 4,557 participants.
Prioritize choice of language.
Once sexual impairments are uncovered, clinicians will need to determine how to intervene, but Dr. Clayton recommended using clear and frank language to define the problem even if the language is tailored to the patient’s comfort level. Patients should be encouraged to recognize that there are solutions for most problems, but clinicians should recognize and respect cultural issues in directing patients toward solutions.
Dr. Clayton is not alone in recommending that patients be asked routinely about sexual health. Margot Savoy, MD, MPH, chair of family and community medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, has also advocated for a proactive approach.
“Patients deserve whole-patient care that includes sexual health,” said Dr. Savoy, who was coauthor of a recent article that also outlined techniques for eliciting a sexual history.
She suggested that the need to inquire should not be considered age specific.
“Asking patients about their sexual history and concerns is a critical part of routine primary care across the lifespan,” she said.
“We also need to intentionally create a safe environment where it is as normal to talk about sexual questions or concerns as it is about how to care for a cold or manage a backache,” she added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same company. Dr. Clayton disclosed financial relationships with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, AMAG, Astellas, Fabre-Kramer, Janssen, Ovoca Bio, PureTech Health, Relmada, S1 Biopharma, Safe Therapeutics, Takeda, and WCG MedAd-vante-Prophase. Dr. Savoy reported no conflicts of interest.
If the goal of a clinical encounter is to identify issues that adversely affect health, well-being, and life satisfaction, open-ended questions on sexual problems are essential, according to an expert who provided tips during a session presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists about how to begin a productive dialogue.
For identifying and treating the obstacles to sexual health, “the onus is on the provider,” said Anita H. Clayton, MD, chair of psychiatry and neurobehavioral sciences at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In a poll published more than 20 years ago, 91% of men and 84% of women reported that a satisfying sex life is important, while 90% agreed that sexual difficulties cause emotional problems, said Dr. Clayton, who sees no reason to think that those percentages have changed. Yet, patients are traditionally reluctant to raise their concerns about sexual issues to a physician.
In the same poll, about 50% of the respondents characterized themselves as “very concerned” that a clinician would simply dismiss a sexual complaint or that there would be no treatment. Of the other respondents, 40% were somewhat concerned. Dr. Clayton assumes that those numbers are still valid and that they provide the rationale for asking routinely about sexual health, she said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
Raising sexual health issues
“The clinician has to initiate the discussion and make it part of the routine examination,” said Dr. Clayton, also a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the university. She indicated that unresolved sexual issues are a common and important but treatable problem, whether the underlying issue has a medical or psychological origin.
Yet, language is critical. Many physicians might have no difficulty discussing sexual problems, but patients often do. Dr. Clayton recommended developing strategies that might it easy if not seamless to elicit information about sexual health in the context of inquiring about other clinical issues.
“Use bridging statements,” Dr. Clayton suggested.
Bridging statements allow an easy transition into a discussion of sexual function from another clinical issue, Dr. Clayton said. As examples, she suggested moving to questions about sex from inquiries about conditions, such as diabetes, or medications, such as antidepressants, that are known to have an impact on sexual dysfunction.
Avoid yes-no questions.
To prompt a dialogue, Dr. Clayton advised against using yes-no questions that allow the patient to quickly dismiss the topic with a negative response. She tries to frame a question that requires a complete thought. In an inquiry addressed to a patient with diabetes, for example, she might first inform the patient that sexual issues are common with this disorder and then ask what types of sexual issues the patient is experiencing.
Once the topic is raised, a checklist approach is appropriate. Patients might be more or less willing to talk any one of the range of issues that influence sexual health, ranging from issues of desire and arousal to discomfort or pain. The door should be opened to a discussion of specific sexual organ function, such as ability to achieve an erection or adequate lubrication.
“Do not assume the patient is heterosexual,” Dr. Clayton cautioned.
It is reasonable and appropriate to bring up sexual health during the intake history. A discussion of sexual health can be initiated by simply posing the question: “Are you sexually active?” Importantly, Dr. Clayton strongly recommended a follow-up question when adults reply that they are not sexually active.
In the ELIXIR study, which evaluated sexual function in patients with depression, more than twice as many patients reported impairments when asked by the physician than who volunteered this information spontaneously, according to Dr. Clayton, citing a study that found sexual issues in more than 70% of the 4,557 participants.
Prioritize choice of language.
Once sexual impairments are uncovered, clinicians will need to determine how to intervene, but Dr. Clayton recommended using clear and frank language to define the problem even if the language is tailored to the patient’s comfort level. Patients should be encouraged to recognize that there are solutions for most problems, but clinicians should recognize and respect cultural issues in directing patients toward solutions.
Dr. Clayton is not alone in recommending that patients be asked routinely about sexual health. Margot Savoy, MD, MPH, chair of family and community medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, has also advocated for a proactive approach.
“Patients deserve whole-patient care that includes sexual health,” said Dr. Savoy, who was coauthor of a recent article that also outlined techniques for eliciting a sexual history.
She suggested that the need to inquire should not be considered age specific.
“Asking patients about their sexual history and concerns is a critical part of routine primary care across the lifespan,” she said.
“We also need to intentionally create a safe environment where it is as normal to talk about sexual questions or concerns as it is about how to care for a cold or manage a backache,” she added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same company. Dr. Clayton disclosed financial relationships with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, AMAG, Astellas, Fabre-Kramer, Janssen, Ovoca Bio, PureTech Health, Relmada, S1 Biopharma, Safe Therapeutics, Takeda, and WCG MedAd-vante-Prophase. Dr. Savoy reported no conflicts of interest.
If the goal of a clinical encounter is to identify issues that adversely affect health, well-being, and life satisfaction, open-ended questions on sexual problems are essential, according to an expert who provided tips during a session presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists about how to begin a productive dialogue.
For identifying and treating the obstacles to sexual health, “the onus is on the provider,” said Anita H. Clayton, MD, chair of psychiatry and neurobehavioral sciences at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville.
In a poll published more than 20 years ago, 91% of men and 84% of women reported that a satisfying sex life is important, while 90% agreed that sexual difficulties cause emotional problems, said Dr. Clayton, who sees no reason to think that those percentages have changed. Yet, patients are traditionally reluctant to raise their concerns about sexual issues to a physician.
In the same poll, about 50% of the respondents characterized themselves as “very concerned” that a clinician would simply dismiss a sexual complaint or that there would be no treatment. Of the other respondents, 40% were somewhat concerned. Dr. Clayton assumes that those numbers are still valid and that they provide the rationale for asking routinely about sexual health, she said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
Raising sexual health issues
“The clinician has to initiate the discussion and make it part of the routine examination,” said Dr. Clayton, also a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the university. She indicated that unresolved sexual issues are a common and important but treatable problem, whether the underlying issue has a medical or psychological origin.
Yet, language is critical. Many physicians might have no difficulty discussing sexual problems, but patients often do. Dr. Clayton recommended developing strategies that might it easy if not seamless to elicit information about sexual health in the context of inquiring about other clinical issues.
“Use bridging statements,” Dr. Clayton suggested.
Bridging statements allow an easy transition into a discussion of sexual function from another clinical issue, Dr. Clayton said. As examples, she suggested moving to questions about sex from inquiries about conditions, such as diabetes, or medications, such as antidepressants, that are known to have an impact on sexual dysfunction.
Avoid yes-no questions.
To prompt a dialogue, Dr. Clayton advised against using yes-no questions that allow the patient to quickly dismiss the topic with a negative response. She tries to frame a question that requires a complete thought. In an inquiry addressed to a patient with diabetes, for example, she might first inform the patient that sexual issues are common with this disorder and then ask what types of sexual issues the patient is experiencing.
Once the topic is raised, a checklist approach is appropriate. Patients might be more or less willing to talk any one of the range of issues that influence sexual health, ranging from issues of desire and arousal to discomfort or pain. The door should be opened to a discussion of specific sexual organ function, such as ability to achieve an erection or adequate lubrication.
“Do not assume the patient is heterosexual,” Dr. Clayton cautioned.
It is reasonable and appropriate to bring up sexual health during the intake history. A discussion of sexual health can be initiated by simply posing the question: “Are you sexually active?” Importantly, Dr. Clayton strongly recommended a follow-up question when adults reply that they are not sexually active.
In the ELIXIR study, which evaluated sexual function in patients with depression, more than twice as many patients reported impairments when asked by the physician than who volunteered this information spontaneously, according to Dr. Clayton, citing a study that found sexual issues in more than 70% of the 4,557 participants.
Prioritize choice of language.
Once sexual impairments are uncovered, clinicians will need to determine how to intervene, but Dr. Clayton recommended using clear and frank language to define the problem even if the language is tailored to the patient’s comfort level. Patients should be encouraged to recognize that there are solutions for most problems, but clinicians should recognize and respect cultural issues in directing patients toward solutions.
Dr. Clayton is not alone in recommending that patients be asked routinely about sexual health. Margot Savoy, MD, MPH, chair of family and community medicine, Temple University, Philadelphia, has also advocated for a proactive approach.
“Patients deserve whole-patient care that includes sexual health,” said Dr. Savoy, who was coauthor of a recent article that also outlined techniques for eliciting a sexual history.
She suggested that the need to inquire should not be considered age specific.
“Asking patients about their sexual history and concerns is a critical part of routine primary care across the lifespan,” she said.
“We also need to intentionally create a safe environment where it is as normal to talk about sexual questions or concerns as it is about how to care for a cold or manage a backache,” she added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same company. Dr. Clayton disclosed financial relationships with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, AMAG, Astellas, Fabre-Kramer, Janssen, Ovoca Bio, PureTech Health, Relmada, S1 Biopharma, Safe Therapeutics, Takeda, and WCG MedAd-vante-Prophase. Dr. Savoy reported no conflicts of interest.
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE
Guidance provided for telepsychiatry in tardive dyskinesia
Expert panel reviewed best practices in 2020 while pandemic limited in-person visits
Tardive dyskinesia (TD) can be reasonably managed through telemedicine, but it should be employed as part of a hybrid strategy that ideally includes an office visit at the time of diagnosis and yearly intervals thereafter, according to an expert who spoke at a meeting presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
In psychiatry in general and in TD specifically, telepsychiatry is useful, but “is not a one-size-fits-all approach,” according to Rif S. El-Mallakh, MD, director of the mood disorder research program at the University of Louisville (Ky.).
Telepsychiatry was already growing as a strategy to expand psychiatric services to communities with limited resources in mental health when the COVID-19 pandemic arrived. Dependence on this type of patient care then exploded out of necessity but in advance of how it might best be applied in specific circumstances.
Best practices panel convened in 2020
The project to develop best practices in TD began in July 2020, when the pandemic was still limiting normal clinician-patient interactions. It was expected from the beginning that recommendations would be applicable to postpandemic circumstances.
There is no reason to expect the forces driving the growth of telepsychiatry, which include convenience of patients and efficiency for clinicians, to dissipate once the pandemic resolves, Dr. El-Mallakh said at the virtual meeting, sponsored by MedscapeLive.
, which consisted of six neurologists, three psychiatrists, and three psychiatric nurse practitioners. The goal was to gather information about the current practice of TD diagnosis and treatment in real-world settings.
With the information on current practices providing a baseline, a virtual roundtable was then convened to develop best-practices recommendations. The deliberations were performed on the basis of expert opinion. There were no statistical methods applied to data collected from the qualitative interviews.
Four key points in recommendations
The panel agreed on four key points: an in-person visit is preferred for initial evaluation and diagnosis; when applied for the evaluation of TD, telepsychiatry should include video; virtual visits cannot completely replace in-person visits; and patients with TD should be evaluated in person at least once per year.
In addition, the panelists recommended specific steps aimed at maximizing the quality of the virtual visit, including confirming that patients have appropriate equipment for video and audio communication. It is also important to recognize that patients or caregivers may require instruction on how to set up the equipment.
Prior to a telemedicine visit, it is appropriate to provide patients with a checklist that includes instructions on adequate lighting and audio. In addition, patient expectations about the goals and processes in the video should be explained.
“Instructional videos prior to the visit might be helpful,” Dr. El-Mallakh said.
Immediately prior to each visit, visual and audio quality should be verified. This allows technical issues, if any, to be resolved.
For the evaluation of TD, the ability to adequately observe body movements is crucial but can pose a challenge in telepsychiatry. To capture hyperkinetic movements and functional impairments with adequate clarity, it might be necessary to engage caregivers to hold the camera or otherwise help the clinician gain an adequate view. Clinicians should consider the limitations of telepsychiatry.
In addition to the challenges of a differential diagnosis for TD that should include such entities as parkinsonism and other drug-induced movement disorders, Dr. El-Mallakh cautioned, “comorbidities add another layer of complexity to TD diagnosis.”
Some in-office visits recommended
It is this complexity that led to the recommendation for an in-person evaluation for new-onset TD, although the expert panel did not characterize an initial in-office visit as mandatory.
Once a diagnosis of TD is established, telepsychiatry can be an efficient strategy for education and for confirming that treatments remain effective. However, Dr. El-Mallakh pointed out that patients can and often do have more than one drug-induced movement disorder at the time of diagnosis or develop additional clinical issues over time.
According to the expert panel, telepsychiatry should not be considered an adequate strategy to manage TD by itself, but “it can be an important component” of care of these patients if used judiciously.
“We have all come to recognize the benefits of telepsychiatry and some of the limitations,” said Jonathan M. Meyer, MD, clinical professor of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego. An author or coauthor of several articles on TD, including a recent study of patient awareness of TD symptoms while on vesicular monoamine transporter 2 inhibitors, Dr. Meyer identified technical problems as among the limitations.
“For movement disorders in particular, low bandwidth, poor video quality and lighting, and inadequate visualization of the trunk and limbs all present issues in diagnosing TD, scoring its severity, and differentiating it from other movement disorders,” he said.
“Nonetheless, I agree with the panel conclusions that in many instances, a video visit can be used to diagnose TD, assess severity, and monitor changes in symptoms over time,” he added, but he did express caution.
“For cases where the diagnosis is in doubt or where comorbid disorders require physical assessment, an in-person examination should be performed before embarking on any TD treatment strategy,” Dr. Meyer said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. El-Mallakh has ties with Allergan, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Takeda, Teva, and Neurocrine Biosciences, which provided funding for this expert panel and summary. Dr. Meyer has ties with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, Merck, Neurocrine, Otsuka, Sunovion, and Teva.
Expert panel reviewed best practices in 2020 while pandemic limited in-person visits
Expert panel reviewed best practices in 2020 while pandemic limited in-person visits
Tardive dyskinesia (TD) can be reasonably managed through telemedicine, but it should be employed as part of a hybrid strategy that ideally includes an office visit at the time of diagnosis and yearly intervals thereafter, according to an expert who spoke at a meeting presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
In psychiatry in general and in TD specifically, telepsychiatry is useful, but “is not a one-size-fits-all approach,” according to Rif S. El-Mallakh, MD, director of the mood disorder research program at the University of Louisville (Ky.).
Telepsychiatry was already growing as a strategy to expand psychiatric services to communities with limited resources in mental health when the COVID-19 pandemic arrived. Dependence on this type of patient care then exploded out of necessity but in advance of how it might best be applied in specific circumstances.
Best practices panel convened in 2020
The project to develop best practices in TD began in July 2020, when the pandemic was still limiting normal clinician-patient interactions. It was expected from the beginning that recommendations would be applicable to postpandemic circumstances.
There is no reason to expect the forces driving the growth of telepsychiatry, which include convenience of patients and efficiency for clinicians, to dissipate once the pandemic resolves, Dr. El-Mallakh said at the virtual meeting, sponsored by MedscapeLive.
, which consisted of six neurologists, three psychiatrists, and three psychiatric nurse practitioners. The goal was to gather information about the current practice of TD diagnosis and treatment in real-world settings.
With the information on current practices providing a baseline, a virtual roundtable was then convened to develop best-practices recommendations. The deliberations were performed on the basis of expert opinion. There were no statistical methods applied to data collected from the qualitative interviews.
Four key points in recommendations
The panel agreed on four key points: an in-person visit is preferred for initial evaluation and diagnosis; when applied for the evaluation of TD, telepsychiatry should include video; virtual visits cannot completely replace in-person visits; and patients with TD should be evaluated in person at least once per year.
In addition, the panelists recommended specific steps aimed at maximizing the quality of the virtual visit, including confirming that patients have appropriate equipment for video and audio communication. It is also important to recognize that patients or caregivers may require instruction on how to set up the equipment.
Prior to a telemedicine visit, it is appropriate to provide patients with a checklist that includes instructions on adequate lighting and audio. In addition, patient expectations about the goals and processes in the video should be explained.
“Instructional videos prior to the visit might be helpful,” Dr. El-Mallakh said.
Immediately prior to each visit, visual and audio quality should be verified. This allows technical issues, if any, to be resolved.
For the evaluation of TD, the ability to adequately observe body movements is crucial but can pose a challenge in telepsychiatry. To capture hyperkinetic movements and functional impairments with adequate clarity, it might be necessary to engage caregivers to hold the camera or otherwise help the clinician gain an adequate view. Clinicians should consider the limitations of telepsychiatry.
In addition to the challenges of a differential diagnosis for TD that should include such entities as parkinsonism and other drug-induced movement disorders, Dr. El-Mallakh cautioned, “comorbidities add another layer of complexity to TD diagnosis.”
Some in-office visits recommended
It is this complexity that led to the recommendation for an in-person evaluation for new-onset TD, although the expert panel did not characterize an initial in-office visit as mandatory.
Once a diagnosis of TD is established, telepsychiatry can be an efficient strategy for education and for confirming that treatments remain effective. However, Dr. El-Mallakh pointed out that patients can and often do have more than one drug-induced movement disorder at the time of diagnosis or develop additional clinical issues over time.
According to the expert panel, telepsychiatry should not be considered an adequate strategy to manage TD by itself, but “it can be an important component” of care of these patients if used judiciously.
“We have all come to recognize the benefits of telepsychiatry and some of the limitations,” said Jonathan M. Meyer, MD, clinical professor of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego. An author or coauthor of several articles on TD, including a recent study of patient awareness of TD symptoms while on vesicular monoamine transporter 2 inhibitors, Dr. Meyer identified technical problems as among the limitations.
“For movement disorders in particular, low bandwidth, poor video quality and lighting, and inadequate visualization of the trunk and limbs all present issues in diagnosing TD, scoring its severity, and differentiating it from other movement disorders,” he said.
“Nonetheless, I agree with the panel conclusions that in many instances, a video visit can be used to diagnose TD, assess severity, and monitor changes in symptoms over time,” he added, but he did express caution.
“For cases where the diagnosis is in doubt or where comorbid disorders require physical assessment, an in-person examination should be performed before embarking on any TD treatment strategy,” Dr. Meyer said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. El-Mallakh has ties with Allergan, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Takeda, Teva, and Neurocrine Biosciences, which provided funding for this expert panel and summary. Dr. Meyer has ties with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, Merck, Neurocrine, Otsuka, Sunovion, and Teva.
Tardive dyskinesia (TD) can be reasonably managed through telemedicine, but it should be employed as part of a hybrid strategy that ideally includes an office visit at the time of diagnosis and yearly intervals thereafter, according to an expert who spoke at a meeting presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
In psychiatry in general and in TD specifically, telepsychiatry is useful, but “is not a one-size-fits-all approach,” according to Rif S. El-Mallakh, MD, director of the mood disorder research program at the University of Louisville (Ky.).
Telepsychiatry was already growing as a strategy to expand psychiatric services to communities with limited resources in mental health when the COVID-19 pandemic arrived. Dependence on this type of patient care then exploded out of necessity but in advance of how it might best be applied in specific circumstances.
Best practices panel convened in 2020
The project to develop best practices in TD began in July 2020, when the pandemic was still limiting normal clinician-patient interactions. It was expected from the beginning that recommendations would be applicable to postpandemic circumstances.
There is no reason to expect the forces driving the growth of telepsychiatry, which include convenience of patients and efficiency for clinicians, to dissipate once the pandemic resolves, Dr. El-Mallakh said at the virtual meeting, sponsored by MedscapeLive.
, which consisted of six neurologists, three psychiatrists, and three psychiatric nurse practitioners. The goal was to gather information about the current practice of TD diagnosis and treatment in real-world settings.
With the information on current practices providing a baseline, a virtual roundtable was then convened to develop best-practices recommendations. The deliberations were performed on the basis of expert opinion. There were no statistical methods applied to data collected from the qualitative interviews.
Four key points in recommendations
The panel agreed on four key points: an in-person visit is preferred for initial evaluation and diagnosis; when applied for the evaluation of TD, telepsychiatry should include video; virtual visits cannot completely replace in-person visits; and patients with TD should be evaluated in person at least once per year.
In addition, the panelists recommended specific steps aimed at maximizing the quality of the virtual visit, including confirming that patients have appropriate equipment for video and audio communication. It is also important to recognize that patients or caregivers may require instruction on how to set up the equipment.
Prior to a telemedicine visit, it is appropriate to provide patients with a checklist that includes instructions on adequate lighting and audio. In addition, patient expectations about the goals and processes in the video should be explained.
“Instructional videos prior to the visit might be helpful,” Dr. El-Mallakh said.
Immediately prior to each visit, visual and audio quality should be verified. This allows technical issues, if any, to be resolved.
For the evaluation of TD, the ability to adequately observe body movements is crucial but can pose a challenge in telepsychiatry. To capture hyperkinetic movements and functional impairments with adequate clarity, it might be necessary to engage caregivers to hold the camera or otherwise help the clinician gain an adequate view. Clinicians should consider the limitations of telepsychiatry.
In addition to the challenges of a differential diagnosis for TD that should include such entities as parkinsonism and other drug-induced movement disorders, Dr. El-Mallakh cautioned, “comorbidities add another layer of complexity to TD diagnosis.”
Some in-office visits recommended
It is this complexity that led to the recommendation for an in-person evaluation for new-onset TD, although the expert panel did not characterize an initial in-office visit as mandatory.
Once a diagnosis of TD is established, telepsychiatry can be an efficient strategy for education and for confirming that treatments remain effective. However, Dr. El-Mallakh pointed out that patients can and often do have more than one drug-induced movement disorder at the time of diagnosis or develop additional clinical issues over time.
According to the expert panel, telepsychiatry should not be considered an adequate strategy to manage TD by itself, but “it can be an important component” of care of these patients if used judiciously.
“We have all come to recognize the benefits of telepsychiatry and some of the limitations,” said Jonathan M. Meyer, MD, clinical professor of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego. An author or coauthor of several articles on TD, including a recent study of patient awareness of TD symptoms while on vesicular monoamine transporter 2 inhibitors, Dr. Meyer identified technical problems as among the limitations.
“For movement disorders in particular, low bandwidth, poor video quality and lighting, and inadequate visualization of the trunk and limbs all present issues in diagnosing TD, scoring its severity, and differentiating it from other movement disorders,” he said.
“Nonetheless, I agree with the panel conclusions that in many instances, a video visit can be used to diagnose TD, assess severity, and monitor changes in symptoms over time,” he added, but he did express caution.
“For cases where the diagnosis is in doubt or where comorbid disorders require physical assessment, an in-person examination should be performed before embarking on any TD treatment strategy,” Dr. Meyer said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. El-Mallakh has ties with Allergan, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Takeda, Teva, and Neurocrine Biosciences, which provided funding for this expert panel and summary. Dr. Meyer has ties with Acadia, Alkermes, Allergan, Merck, Neurocrine, Otsuka, Sunovion, and Teva.
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE
AI-based software demonstrates accuracy in diagnosis of autism
A software program based on artificial intelligence (AI) is effective for distinguishing young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) from those with other conditions, according to results of a pivotal trial presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The AI-based software, which will be submitted to regulatory approval as a device, employs an algorithm that assembles inputs from a caregiver questionnaire, a video, and a clinician questionnaire, according to Sharief Taraman, MD, a pediatric neurologist at CHOC, a pediatric health care system in Orange County, Calif.
Although the device could be employed in a variety of settings, it is envisioned for use by primary care physicians. This will circumvent the need for specialist evaluation except in challenging cases. Currently, nearly all children with ASD are diagnosed in specialty care, according to data cited by Dr. Taraman.
“The lack of diagnostic tools for ASD in primary care settings contributes to an average delay of 3 years between first parental concern and diagnosis and to long wait lists for specialty evaluation,” he reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
When used with clinical judgment and criteria from the American Psychiatric Association’s 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5), the data from the trial suggest the diagnostic tool in the hands of primary care physicians “could efficiently and accurately assess ASD in children 18 to 72 months old,” said Dr. Taraman, also an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of California, Irvine.*
The AI-assisted software was evaluated in 425 children at 14 sites in 6 states. The study population was reflective of U.S. demographics. Although only 36% of the children were female, this is consistent with ASD prevalence. Only 60% of the subjects were White. Nearly 30% were Black or Latinx and other populations, such as those of Asian heritage, were represented.
Children between the ages of 18 and 72 months were eligible if both a caregiver and a health care professional were concerned that the child had ASD. About the same time that a caregiver completed a 20-item questionnaire and the primary care physician completed a 15-item questionnaire on a mobile device, the caregiver uploaded two videos of 1-2 minutes in length.
This information, along with a 33-item questionnaire completed by an analyst of the submitted videos, was then processed by the software algorithm. It provided a patient status of positive or negative for ASD, or it concluded that the status was indeterminate.
“To reduce the risk of false classifications, the indeterminate status was included as a safety feature,” Dr. Taraman explained. However, Dr. Taraman considers an indeterminate designation potentially actionable. Rather than a negative result, this status suggests a complex neurodevelopmental disorder and indicates the need for further evaluation.
The reference standard diagnosis, completed in all participants in this study, was a specialist evaluation completed independently by two experts. The presence or absence of ASD was confirmed if the experts agreed. If they did not, a third specialist made the final determination.
In comparison to the specialist determinations, all were correctly classified except for one child, in which the software was determined to have made a false-negative diagnosis. A diagnosis of ASD was reached in 29% of the study participants.
For those with a determinate designation, the sensitivity was 98.4% and the specificity was 78.9%. This translated into positive predictive and negative predictive values of 80.8% and 98.3%, respectively.
Of those identified as indeterminate by the AI-assisted algorithm, 91% were ultimately considered by specialist evaluation to have complex issues. In this group, ASD was part of the complex clinical picture in 20%. The others had non-ASD neurodevelopmental conditions, according to Dr. Taraman.
When the accuracy was evaluated across ages, ethnicity, and factors such as parent education or family income, the tool performed consistently, Dr. Taraman reported. This is important, he said, because the presence or absence of ASD is misdiagnosed in many underserved populations.
The focus on developing a methodology specific for use in primary care was based on evidence that the delay in the diagnosis of ASD is attributable to long wait times for specialty evaluations.
“There will never be enough specialists. There is a need for a way to streamline the diagnosis of ASD,” Dr. Taraman maintained. This is helpful not only to parents concerned about their children, he said, but also there are data to suggest that early intervention improves outcomes.
A specialist in ASD, Paul Carbone, MD, medical director of the child development program at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, agreed. He said early diagnosis and intervention should be a goal.
“Reducing the age of ASD diagnosis is a priority because early entry into autism-specific interventions is a strong predictor of optimal developmental outcomes for children,” Dr. Carbone said.
Although he is not familiar with this experimental AI-assisted diagnostic program, he has published on the feasibility of ASD diagnosis at the primary care level. In his study, Dr. Carbone examined the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) as one of several methodologies that might be considered.
Diagnosis of ASD “can be achieved through systematic processes within primary care that facilitate universal development surveillance and autism screening followed by prompt and timely diagnostic evaluations of at-risk children,” Dr. Carbone said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Taraman reported a financial relationship with Cognoa, the company that is developing the ASD software for clinical use. Dr. Carbone reported that he has no conflicts of interest.
*Updated, 7/7/21
A software program based on artificial intelligence (AI) is effective for distinguishing young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) from those with other conditions, according to results of a pivotal trial presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The AI-based software, which will be submitted to regulatory approval as a device, employs an algorithm that assembles inputs from a caregiver questionnaire, a video, and a clinician questionnaire, according to Sharief Taraman, MD, a pediatric neurologist at CHOC, a pediatric health care system in Orange County, Calif.
Although the device could be employed in a variety of settings, it is envisioned for use by primary care physicians. This will circumvent the need for specialist evaluation except in challenging cases. Currently, nearly all children with ASD are diagnosed in specialty care, according to data cited by Dr. Taraman.
“The lack of diagnostic tools for ASD in primary care settings contributes to an average delay of 3 years between first parental concern and diagnosis and to long wait lists for specialty evaluation,” he reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
When used with clinical judgment and criteria from the American Psychiatric Association’s 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5), the data from the trial suggest the diagnostic tool in the hands of primary care physicians “could efficiently and accurately assess ASD in children 18 to 72 months old,” said Dr. Taraman, also an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of California, Irvine.*
The AI-assisted software was evaluated in 425 children at 14 sites in 6 states. The study population was reflective of U.S. demographics. Although only 36% of the children were female, this is consistent with ASD prevalence. Only 60% of the subjects were White. Nearly 30% were Black or Latinx and other populations, such as those of Asian heritage, were represented.
Children between the ages of 18 and 72 months were eligible if both a caregiver and a health care professional were concerned that the child had ASD. About the same time that a caregiver completed a 20-item questionnaire and the primary care physician completed a 15-item questionnaire on a mobile device, the caregiver uploaded two videos of 1-2 minutes in length.
This information, along with a 33-item questionnaire completed by an analyst of the submitted videos, was then processed by the software algorithm. It provided a patient status of positive or negative for ASD, or it concluded that the status was indeterminate.
“To reduce the risk of false classifications, the indeterminate status was included as a safety feature,” Dr. Taraman explained. However, Dr. Taraman considers an indeterminate designation potentially actionable. Rather than a negative result, this status suggests a complex neurodevelopmental disorder and indicates the need for further evaluation.
The reference standard diagnosis, completed in all participants in this study, was a specialist evaluation completed independently by two experts. The presence or absence of ASD was confirmed if the experts agreed. If they did not, a third specialist made the final determination.
In comparison to the specialist determinations, all were correctly classified except for one child, in which the software was determined to have made a false-negative diagnosis. A diagnosis of ASD was reached in 29% of the study participants.
For those with a determinate designation, the sensitivity was 98.4% and the specificity was 78.9%. This translated into positive predictive and negative predictive values of 80.8% and 98.3%, respectively.
Of those identified as indeterminate by the AI-assisted algorithm, 91% were ultimately considered by specialist evaluation to have complex issues. In this group, ASD was part of the complex clinical picture in 20%. The others had non-ASD neurodevelopmental conditions, according to Dr. Taraman.
When the accuracy was evaluated across ages, ethnicity, and factors such as parent education or family income, the tool performed consistently, Dr. Taraman reported. This is important, he said, because the presence or absence of ASD is misdiagnosed in many underserved populations.
The focus on developing a methodology specific for use in primary care was based on evidence that the delay in the diagnosis of ASD is attributable to long wait times for specialty evaluations.
“There will never be enough specialists. There is a need for a way to streamline the diagnosis of ASD,” Dr. Taraman maintained. This is helpful not only to parents concerned about their children, he said, but also there are data to suggest that early intervention improves outcomes.
A specialist in ASD, Paul Carbone, MD, medical director of the child development program at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, agreed. He said early diagnosis and intervention should be a goal.
“Reducing the age of ASD diagnosis is a priority because early entry into autism-specific interventions is a strong predictor of optimal developmental outcomes for children,” Dr. Carbone said.
Although he is not familiar with this experimental AI-assisted diagnostic program, he has published on the feasibility of ASD diagnosis at the primary care level. In his study, Dr. Carbone examined the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) as one of several methodologies that might be considered.
Diagnosis of ASD “can be achieved through systematic processes within primary care that facilitate universal development surveillance and autism screening followed by prompt and timely diagnostic evaluations of at-risk children,” Dr. Carbone said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Taraman reported a financial relationship with Cognoa, the company that is developing the ASD software for clinical use. Dr. Carbone reported that he has no conflicts of interest.
*Updated, 7/7/21
A software program based on artificial intelligence (AI) is effective for distinguishing young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) from those with other conditions, according to results of a pivotal trial presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The AI-based software, which will be submitted to regulatory approval as a device, employs an algorithm that assembles inputs from a caregiver questionnaire, a video, and a clinician questionnaire, according to Sharief Taraman, MD, a pediatric neurologist at CHOC, a pediatric health care system in Orange County, Calif.
Although the device could be employed in a variety of settings, it is envisioned for use by primary care physicians. This will circumvent the need for specialist evaluation except in challenging cases. Currently, nearly all children with ASD are diagnosed in specialty care, according to data cited by Dr. Taraman.
“The lack of diagnostic tools for ASD in primary care settings contributes to an average delay of 3 years between first parental concern and diagnosis and to long wait lists for specialty evaluation,” he reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
When used with clinical judgment and criteria from the American Psychiatric Association’s 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5), the data from the trial suggest the diagnostic tool in the hands of primary care physicians “could efficiently and accurately assess ASD in children 18 to 72 months old,” said Dr. Taraman, also an associate clinical professor of pediatrics at the University of California, Irvine.*
The AI-assisted software was evaluated in 425 children at 14 sites in 6 states. The study population was reflective of U.S. demographics. Although only 36% of the children were female, this is consistent with ASD prevalence. Only 60% of the subjects were White. Nearly 30% were Black or Latinx and other populations, such as those of Asian heritage, were represented.
Children between the ages of 18 and 72 months were eligible if both a caregiver and a health care professional were concerned that the child had ASD. About the same time that a caregiver completed a 20-item questionnaire and the primary care physician completed a 15-item questionnaire on a mobile device, the caregiver uploaded two videos of 1-2 minutes in length.
This information, along with a 33-item questionnaire completed by an analyst of the submitted videos, was then processed by the software algorithm. It provided a patient status of positive or negative for ASD, or it concluded that the status was indeterminate.
“To reduce the risk of false classifications, the indeterminate status was included as a safety feature,” Dr. Taraman explained. However, Dr. Taraman considers an indeterminate designation potentially actionable. Rather than a negative result, this status suggests a complex neurodevelopmental disorder and indicates the need for further evaluation.
The reference standard diagnosis, completed in all participants in this study, was a specialist evaluation completed independently by two experts. The presence or absence of ASD was confirmed if the experts agreed. If they did not, a third specialist made the final determination.
In comparison to the specialist determinations, all were correctly classified except for one child, in which the software was determined to have made a false-negative diagnosis. A diagnosis of ASD was reached in 29% of the study participants.
For those with a determinate designation, the sensitivity was 98.4% and the specificity was 78.9%. This translated into positive predictive and negative predictive values of 80.8% and 98.3%, respectively.
Of those identified as indeterminate by the AI-assisted algorithm, 91% were ultimately considered by specialist evaluation to have complex issues. In this group, ASD was part of the complex clinical picture in 20%. The others had non-ASD neurodevelopmental conditions, according to Dr. Taraman.
When the accuracy was evaluated across ages, ethnicity, and factors such as parent education or family income, the tool performed consistently, Dr. Taraman reported. This is important, he said, because the presence or absence of ASD is misdiagnosed in many underserved populations.
The focus on developing a methodology specific for use in primary care was based on evidence that the delay in the diagnosis of ASD is attributable to long wait times for specialty evaluations.
“There will never be enough specialists. There is a need for a way to streamline the diagnosis of ASD,” Dr. Taraman maintained. This is helpful not only to parents concerned about their children, he said, but also there are data to suggest that early intervention improves outcomes.
A specialist in ASD, Paul Carbone, MD, medical director of the child development program at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, agreed. He said early diagnosis and intervention should be a goal.
“Reducing the age of ASD diagnosis is a priority because early entry into autism-specific interventions is a strong predictor of optimal developmental outcomes for children,” Dr. Carbone said.
Although he is not familiar with this experimental AI-assisted diagnostic program, he has published on the feasibility of ASD diagnosis at the primary care level. In his study, Dr. Carbone examined the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) as one of several methodologies that might be considered.
Diagnosis of ASD “can be achieved through systematic processes within primary care that facilitate universal development surveillance and autism screening followed by prompt and timely diagnostic evaluations of at-risk children,” Dr. Carbone said.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Taraman reported a financial relationship with Cognoa, the company that is developing the ASD software for clinical use. Dr. Carbone reported that he has no conflicts of interest.
*Updated, 7/7/21
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE
Risk to infant may warrant drug treatment for postpartum depression
If moderate to severe postpartum depression poses a risk to child development, that argues in favor of pharmacologic therapy, according to a detailed risk-benefit assessment presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“It is important to consider that there are potential risks of antidepressant drugs, but there are also potential risks from not providing effective treatment,” reported Neha Hudepohl, MD, at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
On a website maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the question of whether antidepressants pose a risk to breast-feeding children is answered with a “maybe.” Although many of these drugs can be detected in breast milk, according to the CDC, “most have little or no effect on milk supply or on infant well-being.”
This is enough uncertainty that antidepressants are not first-line intervention when postpartum depression is mild, said Dr. Hudepohl, director of women’s mental health at Prisma Health Upstate, Greenville, S.C. However, she noted that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is among the organizations that recommend drug treatment if symptoms are moderate to severe.
“Depression in the mother affects interactions in feeding practices, sleep routines and patterns, and safety practices,” said Dr. Hudepohl, citing published studies supporting each of these consequences.
For the child, there is some degree of uncertainty about risk from untreated maternal depression as well as from breast mild exposure to antidepressants. Conclusive statements are not offered by ACOG and others.
“Some but not all studies have shown an impact of either antenatal or postnatal depression on speech recognition in infancy of native versus nonnative languages, IQ, and cognitive development, and reduction in left frontal brain electrical activity associated with impaired positive emotions,” Dr. Hudepohl reported.
Sifting through published data, Dr. Hudepohl cited studies associating persistent postpartum depression with a more than fourfold risk of behavioral problems at the age of 3.5 years, lower grades in mathematics at age 16, and a higher prevalence of depression at age 18. Among children who had depressed mothers in infancy, there have also been studies showing a higher reactivity to stressors and higher baseline cortisol levels.
“The good news is that Dr. Hudepohl said. In fact, she cited evidence of a correlation between improvement in maternal symptoms and a reduction in the complications in children, such as behavioral problems.
Postpartum depression, which can develop anytime in the first 12 months after childbirth, is not uncommon, occurring in approximately 15% of women, according to Dr. Hudepohl. Risk factors include personal or family history of depression, anxiety or depression during pregnancy, and a prior history of postpartum depression.
Postpartum depression increases the risk of maternal suicide by about 70-fold, Dr. Hudepohl reported. She noted that the peaks in suicide attempts in the 1st and 12th month after delivery. Adverse infant outcomes are not a predictor of increase risk of attempts, but fetal or infant death are.
According to one study, about 40% of mothers with postpartum depression have intrusive thoughts that involve harming their child. About 15% fear being alone with their infant. Behaviors such as decreased playfulness, less talking, or other interactions with the child, and inconsistent response to the child are all likely to contribute to impaired maternal-child bonding, Dr. Hudepohl reported.
For women who discontinued antidepressants for pregnancy but have now developed significant postpartum depression, Dr. Hudepohl recommended using “what has worked in the past.” She considered monotherapy preferable if possible, but severe symptoms warrant more aggressive intervention. Dr. Hudepohl pointed out that the risks of antidepressants taken by the breast-feeding mother to the infant remain unclear despite multiple studies attempting to establish and quantify risk.
“Antidepressants are the most researched medication in pregnancy,” she said.
Conversely, the risks of untreated symptoms to the mother are significant, and the potential risks to the infant and family – if variable – are not insignificant.
Overall, “nonpharmacologic treatment is preferred first line for mild symptoms,” Dr. Hudepohl, but she and others consider a risk-benefit ratio growing increasingly in favor of drug therapy when this approach is the best option for bringing moderate to severe symptoms under control.
Whether depression arises during pregnancy or in the postpartum period, “psychotherapy is generally considered first-line treatment,” agreed Nancy Byatt, DO, MS, MBA, professor of psychiatry and of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester.
Dr. Byatt, who has published frequently on this topic, further agreed that risks to the mother and the child increase with uncontrolled depression in the postpartum period. With symptoms of greater intensity, the uncertain risks of medication are outweighed by substantial potential benefits.
“When a pregnant or postpartum individual has moderate to severe illness, treatment with medication is typically recommended, because the benefits are thought to outweigh the risks,” she said, echoing a consensus opinion among experts and organized medicine.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Hudepohl and Dr. Byatt reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.
If moderate to severe postpartum depression poses a risk to child development, that argues in favor of pharmacologic therapy, according to a detailed risk-benefit assessment presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“It is important to consider that there are potential risks of antidepressant drugs, but there are also potential risks from not providing effective treatment,” reported Neha Hudepohl, MD, at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
On a website maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the question of whether antidepressants pose a risk to breast-feeding children is answered with a “maybe.” Although many of these drugs can be detected in breast milk, according to the CDC, “most have little or no effect on milk supply or on infant well-being.”
This is enough uncertainty that antidepressants are not first-line intervention when postpartum depression is mild, said Dr. Hudepohl, director of women’s mental health at Prisma Health Upstate, Greenville, S.C. However, she noted that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is among the organizations that recommend drug treatment if symptoms are moderate to severe.
“Depression in the mother affects interactions in feeding practices, sleep routines and patterns, and safety practices,” said Dr. Hudepohl, citing published studies supporting each of these consequences.
For the child, there is some degree of uncertainty about risk from untreated maternal depression as well as from breast mild exposure to antidepressants. Conclusive statements are not offered by ACOG and others.
“Some but not all studies have shown an impact of either antenatal or postnatal depression on speech recognition in infancy of native versus nonnative languages, IQ, and cognitive development, and reduction in left frontal brain electrical activity associated with impaired positive emotions,” Dr. Hudepohl reported.
Sifting through published data, Dr. Hudepohl cited studies associating persistent postpartum depression with a more than fourfold risk of behavioral problems at the age of 3.5 years, lower grades in mathematics at age 16, and a higher prevalence of depression at age 18. Among children who had depressed mothers in infancy, there have also been studies showing a higher reactivity to stressors and higher baseline cortisol levels.
“The good news is that Dr. Hudepohl said. In fact, she cited evidence of a correlation between improvement in maternal symptoms and a reduction in the complications in children, such as behavioral problems.
Postpartum depression, which can develop anytime in the first 12 months after childbirth, is not uncommon, occurring in approximately 15% of women, according to Dr. Hudepohl. Risk factors include personal or family history of depression, anxiety or depression during pregnancy, and a prior history of postpartum depression.
Postpartum depression increases the risk of maternal suicide by about 70-fold, Dr. Hudepohl reported. She noted that the peaks in suicide attempts in the 1st and 12th month after delivery. Adverse infant outcomes are not a predictor of increase risk of attempts, but fetal or infant death are.
According to one study, about 40% of mothers with postpartum depression have intrusive thoughts that involve harming their child. About 15% fear being alone with their infant. Behaviors such as decreased playfulness, less talking, or other interactions with the child, and inconsistent response to the child are all likely to contribute to impaired maternal-child bonding, Dr. Hudepohl reported.
For women who discontinued antidepressants for pregnancy but have now developed significant postpartum depression, Dr. Hudepohl recommended using “what has worked in the past.” She considered monotherapy preferable if possible, but severe symptoms warrant more aggressive intervention. Dr. Hudepohl pointed out that the risks of antidepressants taken by the breast-feeding mother to the infant remain unclear despite multiple studies attempting to establish and quantify risk.
“Antidepressants are the most researched medication in pregnancy,” she said.
Conversely, the risks of untreated symptoms to the mother are significant, and the potential risks to the infant and family – if variable – are not insignificant.
Overall, “nonpharmacologic treatment is preferred first line for mild symptoms,” Dr. Hudepohl, but she and others consider a risk-benefit ratio growing increasingly in favor of drug therapy when this approach is the best option for bringing moderate to severe symptoms under control.
Whether depression arises during pregnancy or in the postpartum period, “psychotherapy is generally considered first-line treatment,” agreed Nancy Byatt, DO, MS, MBA, professor of psychiatry and of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester.
Dr. Byatt, who has published frequently on this topic, further agreed that risks to the mother and the child increase with uncontrolled depression in the postpartum period. With symptoms of greater intensity, the uncertain risks of medication are outweighed by substantial potential benefits.
“When a pregnant or postpartum individual has moderate to severe illness, treatment with medication is typically recommended, because the benefits are thought to outweigh the risks,” she said, echoing a consensus opinion among experts and organized medicine.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Hudepohl and Dr. Byatt reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.
If moderate to severe postpartum depression poses a risk to child development, that argues in favor of pharmacologic therapy, according to a detailed risk-benefit assessment presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“It is important to consider that there are potential risks of antidepressant drugs, but there are also potential risks from not providing effective treatment,” reported Neha Hudepohl, MD, at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive.
On a website maintained by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the question of whether antidepressants pose a risk to breast-feeding children is answered with a “maybe.” Although many of these drugs can be detected in breast milk, according to the CDC, “most have little or no effect on milk supply or on infant well-being.”
This is enough uncertainty that antidepressants are not first-line intervention when postpartum depression is mild, said Dr. Hudepohl, director of women’s mental health at Prisma Health Upstate, Greenville, S.C. However, she noted that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is among the organizations that recommend drug treatment if symptoms are moderate to severe.
“Depression in the mother affects interactions in feeding practices, sleep routines and patterns, and safety practices,” said Dr. Hudepohl, citing published studies supporting each of these consequences.
For the child, there is some degree of uncertainty about risk from untreated maternal depression as well as from breast mild exposure to antidepressants. Conclusive statements are not offered by ACOG and others.
“Some but not all studies have shown an impact of either antenatal or postnatal depression on speech recognition in infancy of native versus nonnative languages, IQ, and cognitive development, and reduction in left frontal brain electrical activity associated with impaired positive emotions,” Dr. Hudepohl reported.
Sifting through published data, Dr. Hudepohl cited studies associating persistent postpartum depression with a more than fourfold risk of behavioral problems at the age of 3.5 years, lower grades in mathematics at age 16, and a higher prevalence of depression at age 18. Among children who had depressed mothers in infancy, there have also been studies showing a higher reactivity to stressors and higher baseline cortisol levels.
“The good news is that Dr. Hudepohl said. In fact, she cited evidence of a correlation between improvement in maternal symptoms and a reduction in the complications in children, such as behavioral problems.
Postpartum depression, which can develop anytime in the first 12 months after childbirth, is not uncommon, occurring in approximately 15% of women, according to Dr. Hudepohl. Risk factors include personal or family history of depression, anxiety or depression during pregnancy, and a prior history of postpartum depression.
Postpartum depression increases the risk of maternal suicide by about 70-fold, Dr. Hudepohl reported. She noted that the peaks in suicide attempts in the 1st and 12th month after delivery. Adverse infant outcomes are not a predictor of increase risk of attempts, but fetal or infant death are.
According to one study, about 40% of mothers with postpartum depression have intrusive thoughts that involve harming their child. About 15% fear being alone with their infant. Behaviors such as decreased playfulness, less talking, or other interactions with the child, and inconsistent response to the child are all likely to contribute to impaired maternal-child bonding, Dr. Hudepohl reported.
For women who discontinued antidepressants for pregnancy but have now developed significant postpartum depression, Dr. Hudepohl recommended using “what has worked in the past.” She considered monotherapy preferable if possible, but severe symptoms warrant more aggressive intervention. Dr. Hudepohl pointed out that the risks of antidepressants taken by the breast-feeding mother to the infant remain unclear despite multiple studies attempting to establish and quantify risk.
“Antidepressants are the most researched medication in pregnancy,” she said.
Conversely, the risks of untreated symptoms to the mother are significant, and the potential risks to the infant and family – if variable – are not insignificant.
Overall, “nonpharmacologic treatment is preferred first line for mild symptoms,” Dr. Hudepohl, but she and others consider a risk-benefit ratio growing increasingly in favor of drug therapy when this approach is the best option for bringing moderate to severe symptoms under control.
Whether depression arises during pregnancy or in the postpartum period, “psychotherapy is generally considered first-line treatment,” agreed Nancy Byatt, DO, MS, MBA, professor of psychiatry and of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Massachusetts, Worcester.
Dr. Byatt, who has published frequently on this topic, further agreed that risks to the mother and the child increase with uncontrolled depression in the postpartum period. With symptoms of greater intensity, the uncertain risks of medication are outweighed by substantial potential benefits.
“When a pregnant or postpartum individual has moderate to severe illness, treatment with medication is typically recommended, because the benefits are thought to outweigh the risks,” she said, echoing a consensus opinion among experts and organized medicine.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Hudepohl and Dr. Byatt reported no potential financial conflicts of interest.
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE
Long-acting injectable antipsychotics deserve first-line consideration
Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic therapies continue to be largely reserved for patients who already have adherence issues. But most patients, including first-episode patients, should be considering drugs with this mode of delivery for their broad array of advantages, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“Due to the perception that long-acting injectables are for coercive applications, patients are not hearing about the many reasons this option might be preferable,” reported Diana Perkins, MD, MPH, professor, department of psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
According to Dr. Perkins, patients starting treatment for first-episode schizophrenia are particularly unlikely to even hear about injectable therapies even though “these might be the best candidates.”
The advantage of LAI in first-episode patients is that it takes adherence off the table as a risk for treatment failure. Ultimately, many patients educated about LAI in the context of other options, prefer LAI, according to Dr. Perkins, and she provided data to support these assertions.
Of several published articles reporting that patients fail to discuss LAI with patients, one was published last year (J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2020 Jul/Aug;40:346-9). For evidence that patients prefer LAI over pills for antipsychotic treatment, Dr. Perkins cited a study with data from more than 1,400 patients (Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:1093-102).
In this latter analysis, 77% of patients preferred LAI over pills, Dr. Perkins reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive. Moreover, 50% of patients preferred every-3-month injections over monthly injections. For those who preferred LAI, the reasons included the convenience of avoiding daily therapy but also the empowerment derived from feeling healthier from not having to depend on a daily schedule of treatment.
LAI has benefits independent of adherence
“Some patients prefer injectables because the daily pills remind them of their illness even when they are feeling well,” Dr. Perkins said.
By eliminating pills and pill bottles, injections also provide a certain degree of confidentiality, said Dr. Perkins. She said that LAI, which avoids the peaks and troughs inherent in pill taking, provides more consistent drug levels even to the degree that doses can sometimes be lowered and adverse events reduced.
Yet, of all the reasons that patients might want to consider LAI, the most compelling is a lower risk of failure from inadequate adherence to daily pills. The evidence that patients do not take daily pills for chronic diseases, whether schizophrenia or any other illness that requires maintenance regimens for persistent disease control, is extensive and overwhelming, according to Dr. Perkins, who cited multiple studies.
For schizophrenia, with a relapsing and remitting pattern of symptoms, poor adherence is a particular risk. When symptoms abate, the cue and motivation for adherence dissipates.
“Most patients with schizophrenia already have some ambivalence about taking their medication.
When patients forget their daily pills or when the they decide to skip doses when they feel well, they do not necessarily tell their physicians.
Poor adherence often goes unrecognized
“Clinicians are not very good at estimating adherence in their patients,” Dr. Perkins said. While she listed several strategies to help patients adhere to daily pills, she also said that LAI should not be discounted as a means to circumvent this problem altogether.
Importantly, suboptimal adherence by itself places the patient at a high risk for relapse. In one study of partial adherence, delayed doses were associated with increased risk of hospitalization overall, but each increment in further delay led to still more risk (Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55:886-91).
Imperfect adherence to daily pills is very common. In one study evaluating 34,000 veterans with schizophrenia, the proportion with consistently good adherence over the 12 months of study was not quite 40% (J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Oct;67[10]:1542-50). While most of the remaining were intermittently adherent, more than 15% of the populations was consistently poorly adherent.
Simple regimens and adherence closely linked
In general, the simpler the regimen, the greater the adherence, according to Dr. Perkins. For oral therapies, one pill per day is associated with greater adherence than is more than one. LAI, which is even simpler, is consistently associated with a large relative advantage. In one comparative study, 77% were adherent to LAI versus about 30% (P < .001) over a period of 12 months (Ment Health Clin. 2018 Mar 26;8[2]:56-62).
In a large recently published meta-analysis, LAI was associated with objective advantages over oral therapy (Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 May 1;8:[5]387-404). This included a statistically significant lower risk of hospitalizations or relapses for LAI over oral therapy whether the two modes of delivery were compared in randomized controls studies (RR 0.88; P = .033) or cohort studies (RR 0.92; P = .0044).
Overall, clinicians should discard several false assumptions about LAI, including the fact they are not appropriate in first-episode disease and that patients will not elect to take LAI if informed of the choices, according to Dr. Perkins. Rather than just listing LAI among options, Dr. Perkins suggested that clinicians should specifically explain the many advantages.
“When people say I do not like shots, this is not necessarily a no,” she said. If patients understand the potential for a reduced risk of relapse without having to take a daily pill, injections might be preferable whether or not they like shots in particular.
This is not an isolated view among experienced physicians. John M. Kane, MD, chairman of psychiatry, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, Glen Oaks, N.Y., also sees LAI as method of drug delivery that should be considered widely in schizophrenia.
“I am in complete agreement with Dr. Perkins that long-acting injectable formulations of antipsychotic medications should be presented routinely to patients and families as an option for illness management and relapse prevention,” said Dr. Kane, who was a coauthor of the meta-analysis published in Lancet Psychiatry.
“This would include patients early in the course of illness who currently have an unnecessarily high risk of relapse and hospitalization,” he added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Perkins has a financial relationship with Alkermes. Dr. Kane has financial relationships with Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Otsuka, Pfizer, and Wyeth.
Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic therapies continue to be largely reserved for patients who already have adherence issues. But most patients, including first-episode patients, should be considering drugs with this mode of delivery for their broad array of advantages, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“Due to the perception that long-acting injectables are for coercive applications, patients are not hearing about the many reasons this option might be preferable,” reported Diana Perkins, MD, MPH, professor, department of psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
According to Dr. Perkins, patients starting treatment for first-episode schizophrenia are particularly unlikely to even hear about injectable therapies even though “these might be the best candidates.”
The advantage of LAI in first-episode patients is that it takes adherence off the table as a risk for treatment failure. Ultimately, many patients educated about LAI in the context of other options, prefer LAI, according to Dr. Perkins, and she provided data to support these assertions.
Of several published articles reporting that patients fail to discuss LAI with patients, one was published last year (J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2020 Jul/Aug;40:346-9). For evidence that patients prefer LAI over pills for antipsychotic treatment, Dr. Perkins cited a study with data from more than 1,400 patients (Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:1093-102).
In this latter analysis, 77% of patients preferred LAI over pills, Dr. Perkins reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive. Moreover, 50% of patients preferred every-3-month injections over monthly injections. For those who preferred LAI, the reasons included the convenience of avoiding daily therapy but also the empowerment derived from feeling healthier from not having to depend on a daily schedule of treatment.
LAI has benefits independent of adherence
“Some patients prefer injectables because the daily pills remind them of their illness even when they are feeling well,” Dr. Perkins said.
By eliminating pills and pill bottles, injections also provide a certain degree of confidentiality, said Dr. Perkins. She said that LAI, which avoids the peaks and troughs inherent in pill taking, provides more consistent drug levels even to the degree that doses can sometimes be lowered and adverse events reduced.
Yet, of all the reasons that patients might want to consider LAI, the most compelling is a lower risk of failure from inadequate adherence to daily pills. The evidence that patients do not take daily pills for chronic diseases, whether schizophrenia or any other illness that requires maintenance regimens for persistent disease control, is extensive and overwhelming, according to Dr. Perkins, who cited multiple studies.
For schizophrenia, with a relapsing and remitting pattern of symptoms, poor adherence is a particular risk. When symptoms abate, the cue and motivation for adherence dissipates.
“Most patients with schizophrenia already have some ambivalence about taking their medication.
When patients forget their daily pills or when the they decide to skip doses when they feel well, they do not necessarily tell their physicians.
Poor adherence often goes unrecognized
“Clinicians are not very good at estimating adherence in their patients,” Dr. Perkins said. While she listed several strategies to help patients adhere to daily pills, she also said that LAI should not be discounted as a means to circumvent this problem altogether.
Importantly, suboptimal adherence by itself places the patient at a high risk for relapse. In one study of partial adherence, delayed doses were associated with increased risk of hospitalization overall, but each increment in further delay led to still more risk (Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55:886-91).
Imperfect adherence to daily pills is very common. In one study evaluating 34,000 veterans with schizophrenia, the proportion with consistently good adherence over the 12 months of study was not quite 40% (J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Oct;67[10]:1542-50). While most of the remaining were intermittently adherent, more than 15% of the populations was consistently poorly adherent.
Simple regimens and adherence closely linked
In general, the simpler the regimen, the greater the adherence, according to Dr. Perkins. For oral therapies, one pill per day is associated with greater adherence than is more than one. LAI, which is even simpler, is consistently associated with a large relative advantage. In one comparative study, 77% were adherent to LAI versus about 30% (P < .001) over a period of 12 months (Ment Health Clin. 2018 Mar 26;8[2]:56-62).
In a large recently published meta-analysis, LAI was associated with objective advantages over oral therapy (Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 May 1;8:[5]387-404). This included a statistically significant lower risk of hospitalizations or relapses for LAI over oral therapy whether the two modes of delivery were compared in randomized controls studies (RR 0.88; P = .033) or cohort studies (RR 0.92; P = .0044).
Overall, clinicians should discard several false assumptions about LAI, including the fact they are not appropriate in first-episode disease and that patients will not elect to take LAI if informed of the choices, according to Dr. Perkins. Rather than just listing LAI among options, Dr. Perkins suggested that clinicians should specifically explain the many advantages.
“When people say I do not like shots, this is not necessarily a no,” she said. If patients understand the potential for a reduced risk of relapse without having to take a daily pill, injections might be preferable whether or not they like shots in particular.
This is not an isolated view among experienced physicians. John M. Kane, MD, chairman of psychiatry, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, Glen Oaks, N.Y., also sees LAI as method of drug delivery that should be considered widely in schizophrenia.
“I am in complete agreement with Dr. Perkins that long-acting injectable formulations of antipsychotic medications should be presented routinely to patients and families as an option for illness management and relapse prevention,” said Dr. Kane, who was a coauthor of the meta-analysis published in Lancet Psychiatry.
“This would include patients early in the course of illness who currently have an unnecessarily high risk of relapse and hospitalization,” he added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Perkins has a financial relationship with Alkermes. Dr. Kane has financial relationships with Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Otsuka, Pfizer, and Wyeth.
Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic therapies continue to be largely reserved for patients who already have adherence issues. But most patients, including first-episode patients, should be considering drugs with this mode of delivery for their broad array of advantages, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
“Due to the perception that long-acting injectables are for coercive applications, patients are not hearing about the many reasons this option might be preferable,” reported Diana Perkins, MD, MPH, professor, department of psychiatry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
According to Dr. Perkins, patients starting treatment for first-episode schizophrenia are particularly unlikely to even hear about injectable therapies even though “these might be the best candidates.”
The advantage of LAI in first-episode patients is that it takes adherence off the table as a risk for treatment failure. Ultimately, many patients educated about LAI in the context of other options, prefer LAI, according to Dr. Perkins, and she provided data to support these assertions.
Of several published articles reporting that patients fail to discuss LAI with patients, one was published last year (J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2020 Jul/Aug;40:346-9). For evidence that patients prefer LAI over pills for antipsychotic treatment, Dr. Perkins cited a study with data from more than 1,400 patients (Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:1093-102).
In this latter analysis, 77% of patients preferred LAI over pills, Dr. Perkins reported at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive. Moreover, 50% of patients preferred every-3-month injections over monthly injections. For those who preferred LAI, the reasons included the convenience of avoiding daily therapy but also the empowerment derived from feeling healthier from not having to depend on a daily schedule of treatment.
LAI has benefits independent of adherence
“Some patients prefer injectables because the daily pills remind them of their illness even when they are feeling well,” Dr. Perkins said.
By eliminating pills and pill bottles, injections also provide a certain degree of confidentiality, said Dr. Perkins. She said that LAI, which avoids the peaks and troughs inherent in pill taking, provides more consistent drug levels even to the degree that doses can sometimes be lowered and adverse events reduced.
Yet, of all the reasons that patients might want to consider LAI, the most compelling is a lower risk of failure from inadequate adherence to daily pills. The evidence that patients do not take daily pills for chronic diseases, whether schizophrenia or any other illness that requires maintenance regimens for persistent disease control, is extensive and overwhelming, according to Dr. Perkins, who cited multiple studies.
For schizophrenia, with a relapsing and remitting pattern of symptoms, poor adherence is a particular risk. When symptoms abate, the cue and motivation for adherence dissipates.
“Most patients with schizophrenia already have some ambivalence about taking their medication.
When patients forget their daily pills or when the they decide to skip doses when they feel well, they do not necessarily tell their physicians.
Poor adherence often goes unrecognized
“Clinicians are not very good at estimating adherence in their patients,” Dr. Perkins said. While she listed several strategies to help patients adhere to daily pills, she also said that LAI should not be discounted as a means to circumvent this problem altogether.
Importantly, suboptimal adherence by itself places the patient at a high risk for relapse. In one study of partial adherence, delayed doses were associated with increased risk of hospitalization overall, but each increment in further delay led to still more risk (Psychiatr Serv. 2004;55:886-91).
Imperfect adherence to daily pills is very common. In one study evaluating 34,000 veterans with schizophrenia, the proportion with consistently good adherence over the 12 months of study was not quite 40% (J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Oct;67[10]:1542-50). While most of the remaining were intermittently adherent, more than 15% of the populations was consistently poorly adherent.
Simple regimens and adherence closely linked
In general, the simpler the regimen, the greater the adherence, according to Dr. Perkins. For oral therapies, one pill per day is associated with greater adherence than is more than one. LAI, which is even simpler, is consistently associated with a large relative advantage. In one comparative study, 77% were adherent to LAI versus about 30% (P < .001) over a period of 12 months (Ment Health Clin. 2018 Mar 26;8[2]:56-62).
In a large recently published meta-analysis, LAI was associated with objective advantages over oral therapy (Lancet Psychiatry. 2021 May 1;8:[5]387-404). This included a statistically significant lower risk of hospitalizations or relapses for LAI over oral therapy whether the two modes of delivery were compared in randomized controls studies (RR 0.88; P = .033) or cohort studies (RR 0.92; P = .0044).
Overall, clinicians should discard several false assumptions about LAI, including the fact they are not appropriate in first-episode disease and that patients will not elect to take LAI if informed of the choices, according to Dr. Perkins. Rather than just listing LAI among options, Dr. Perkins suggested that clinicians should specifically explain the many advantages.
“When people say I do not like shots, this is not necessarily a no,” she said. If patients understand the potential for a reduced risk of relapse without having to take a daily pill, injections might be preferable whether or not they like shots in particular.
This is not an isolated view among experienced physicians. John M. Kane, MD, chairman of psychiatry, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, Glen Oaks, N.Y., also sees LAI as method of drug delivery that should be considered widely in schizophrenia.
“I am in complete agreement with Dr. Perkins that long-acting injectable formulations of antipsychotic medications should be presented routinely to patients and families as an option for illness management and relapse prevention,” said Dr. Kane, who was a coauthor of the meta-analysis published in Lancet Psychiatry.
“This would include patients early in the course of illness who currently have an unnecessarily high risk of relapse and hospitalization,” he added.
MedscapeLive and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Perkins has a financial relationship with Alkermes. Dr. Kane has financial relationships with Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Janssen, Lilly, Otsuka, Pfizer, and Wyeth.
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE
Emerging drugs for schizophrenia targeting negative symptoms
Late-stage trials of new antipsychotic drugs are showing promise in the control of negative symptoms, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The progress in these trials deserves attention, because control of negative symptoms is “a major unmet need in schizophrenia,” according to Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, director of the schizophrenia program at the University of Cincinnati.
The novel mechanisms of the agents in development are credited with the promise. Not least, several antipsychotic agents with activity against both positive and negative symptoms “are completely devoid of dopamine receptor blockade,” Dr. Nasrallah said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive!
The xanomeline portion of the investigational treatment xanomeline-trospium is one example. Xanomeline is a muscarinic receptor agonist with no activity on dopamine D2 receptors. The role of trospium, a muscarinic receptor antagonist, is to reduce peripheral cholinergic side effects.
Xanomeline-trospium: Negative vs. positive symptoms
In a recently published placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial, the reductions relative to placebo after 5 weeks on the negative subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) tool (–3.9 vs. –1.3; P < .001) was about as robust as that achieved on the positive subscale (–5.6 vs. –3.2; P < .001).
These subscales were secondary endpoints. Relative to placebo, xanomeline-trospium was also effective on the primary endpoint of the PANSS total score (–17.9 vs. –5.9; P < .001).
The presence of trospium did not eliminate cholinergic side effects, which included constipation, dry mouth, and nausea, but the therapy strengthens the evidence that newer agents with novel mechanisms of action, including those without dopamine blockade, can achieve meaningful clinical effects.
SEP-363856, another example of an experimental agent without direct dopamine blockade, was also recently tested in placebo-controlled, double-blind study.
“This is the first agonist of the TAAR1 [trace amine-associated receptor 1] and 5-HT1A [serotonin 5–hydroxytryptamine type 1A receptor] to reach clinical trials,” said Dr. Nasrallah, calling this an interesting agent for its range of clinical activity, which appears to include antianxiety effects.
SEP-363856: Negative vs. positive symptoms
It also appears to include activity against negative symptoms. While the primary endpoint of total PANSS score favored SEP-363856 over placebo at the end of 4 weeks (–17.2 points vs. –9.7; P = .001), the reductions in the subscales for negative (–3.1 vs. –1.6) and positive (–5.5 vs. 3.9) symptoms were also substantial even if statistical differences were not calculated.
The rates of side effects on SEP-3638656 were low, according to Dr. Nasrallah. The most common complaints, such as somnolence, agitation, and nausea, were observed in fewer than 10% of patients.
Roluperidone, another agent with no direct dopamine blockade, has reached phase 3 trials. The activity of this agent is attributed to antagonist activity on the serotonin 5-HT2A and sigma2 receptors. In a multinational, phase 2b study cited by Dr. Nasrallah, both of two study doses of roluperidone were superior to placebo for the negative symptom dimensions of expressive deficit and experiential deficit. Patients enrolled in the trial were required to have baseline PANSS negative symptom subscale scores of 20 points or greater.
Pimavanserin, an inverse agonist of 5-HT2A receptors, is already approved for the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson’s disease, but it is now attracting interest for its potential efficacy against negative symptoms in schizophrenia, according to Dr. Nasrallah, who cited a poster presented last November at the Psych Congress 2020.
The poster provided results of ADVANCE, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study that associated pimavanserin with significant improvement across several types of negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah said. The drug was well tolerated with a side-effect profile “similar to placebo.”
Traditional antipsychotic therapies are generally associated with limited effect against negative symptoms, but it has never been proven that the interaction of treatments on the dopaminergic system is the reason. Indeed, in his list of therapies being pursued for potential benefit against negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah cited a clinical study with cariprazine, an agent with multiple effects on dopamine and serotonin signaling.
“Cariprazine is a partial agonist at D2, D3, and 5-HT1A receptors and an antagonist at 5-HT2c and 5-HT7 receptors, but it has the highest affinity to the D3 receptor,” Dr. Nasrallah reported.
Cariprazine is already approved for schizophrenia, acute mania, and bipolar depression, but the authors of a recent review claim evidence of activity against negative symptoms. Furthermore, they speculate that this activity might be mediated by agonism of the D3 receptor.
Despite the evidence that these agents might control negative symptoms, the relative roles will be defined by clinical experience, not just clinical trials, Dr. Nasrallah said. However, he did indicate that there appears to be meaningful progress in this area.
Potential progress in this area is important, because “negative symptoms are a largely unaddressed treatment target in people with schizophrenia,” reported Christoph U. Correll, MD, professor of psychiatry, Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y. These symptoms deserve attention for their “important potential to improve interpersonal, educational, and work function.”
Dr. Correll agreed that the newer drugs with mechanisms other than postsynaptic dopamine blockade could be a very important advance in the treatment of schizophrenia.
“Promising new medications with potential efficacy for negative symptoms, either based on their pharmacological profile and/or emerging data, include cariprazine, lumateperone, ulotaront [SEP-363856], and xanomeline plus trospium,” he said. Efficacy for negative symptoms, if proven, will address an “elusive goal.”
MedscapeLive! and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Nasrallah reported financial relationships with Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Alkermes, Avanir, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Indivior, Janssen, Neurocrine, and Teva. Dr. Correll listed financial relationships with more than 25 pharmaceutical companies, including several developing medications with potential activity against negative symptoms.
Late-stage trials of new antipsychotic drugs are showing promise in the control of negative symptoms, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The progress in these trials deserves attention, because control of negative symptoms is “a major unmet need in schizophrenia,” according to Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, director of the schizophrenia program at the University of Cincinnati.
The novel mechanisms of the agents in development are credited with the promise. Not least, several antipsychotic agents with activity against both positive and negative symptoms “are completely devoid of dopamine receptor blockade,” Dr. Nasrallah said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive!
The xanomeline portion of the investigational treatment xanomeline-trospium is one example. Xanomeline is a muscarinic receptor agonist with no activity on dopamine D2 receptors. The role of trospium, a muscarinic receptor antagonist, is to reduce peripheral cholinergic side effects.
Xanomeline-trospium: Negative vs. positive symptoms
In a recently published placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial, the reductions relative to placebo after 5 weeks on the negative subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) tool (–3.9 vs. –1.3; P < .001) was about as robust as that achieved on the positive subscale (–5.6 vs. –3.2; P < .001).
These subscales were secondary endpoints. Relative to placebo, xanomeline-trospium was also effective on the primary endpoint of the PANSS total score (–17.9 vs. –5.9; P < .001).
The presence of trospium did not eliminate cholinergic side effects, which included constipation, dry mouth, and nausea, but the therapy strengthens the evidence that newer agents with novel mechanisms of action, including those without dopamine blockade, can achieve meaningful clinical effects.
SEP-363856, another example of an experimental agent without direct dopamine blockade, was also recently tested in placebo-controlled, double-blind study.
“This is the first agonist of the TAAR1 [trace amine-associated receptor 1] and 5-HT1A [serotonin 5–hydroxytryptamine type 1A receptor] to reach clinical trials,” said Dr. Nasrallah, calling this an interesting agent for its range of clinical activity, which appears to include antianxiety effects.
SEP-363856: Negative vs. positive symptoms
It also appears to include activity against negative symptoms. While the primary endpoint of total PANSS score favored SEP-363856 over placebo at the end of 4 weeks (–17.2 points vs. –9.7; P = .001), the reductions in the subscales for negative (–3.1 vs. –1.6) and positive (–5.5 vs. 3.9) symptoms were also substantial even if statistical differences were not calculated.
The rates of side effects on SEP-3638656 were low, according to Dr. Nasrallah. The most common complaints, such as somnolence, agitation, and nausea, were observed in fewer than 10% of patients.
Roluperidone, another agent with no direct dopamine blockade, has reached phase 3 trials. The activity of this agent is attributed to antagonist activity on the serotonin 5-HT2A and sigma2 receptors. In a multinational, phase 2b study cited by Dr. Nasrallah, both of two study doses of roluperidone were superior to placebo for the negative symptom dimensions of expressive deficit and experiential deficit. Patients enrolled in the trial were required to have baseline PANSS negative symptom subscale scores of 20 points or greater.
Pimavanserin, an inverse agonist of 5-HT2A receptors, is already approved for the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson’s disease, but it is now attracting interest for its potential efficacy against negative symptoms in schizophrenia, according to Dr. Nasrallah, who cited a poster presented last November at the Psych Congress 2020.
The poster provided results of ADVANCE, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study that associated pimavanserin with significant improvement across several types of negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah said. The drug was well tolerated with a side-effect profile “similar to placebo.”
Traditional antipsychotic therapies are generally associated with limited effect against negative symptoms, but it has never been proven that the interaction of treatments on the dopaminergic system is the reason. Indeed, in his list of therapies being pursued for potential benefit against negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah cited a clinical study with cariprazine, an agent with multiple effects on dopamine and serotonin signaling.
“Cariprazine is a partial agonist at D2, D3, and 5-HT1A receptors and an antagonist at 5-HT2c and 5-HT7 receptors, but it has the highest affinity to the D3 receptor,” Dr. Nasrallah reported.
Cariprazine is already approved for schizophrenia, acute mania, and bipolar depression, but the authors of a recent review claim evidence of activity against negative symptoms. Furthermore, they speculate that this activity might be mediated by agonism of the D3 receptor.
Despite the evidence that these agents might control negative symptoms, the relative roles will be defined by clinical experience, not just clinical trials, Dr. Nasrallah said. However, he did indicate that there appears to be meaningful progress in this area.
Potential progress in this area is important, because “negative symptoms are a largely unaddressed treatment target in people with schizophrenia,” reported Christoph U. Correll, MD, professor of psychiatry, Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y. These symptoms deserve attention for their “important potential to improve interpersonal, educational, and work function.”
Dr. Correll agreed that the newer drugs with mechanisms other than postsynaptic dopamine blockade could be a very important advance in the treatment of schizophrenia.
“Promising new medications with potential efficacy for negative symptoms, either based on their pharmacological profile and/or emerging data, include cariprazine, lumateperone, ulotaront [SEP-363856], and xanomeline plus trospium,” he said. Efficacy for negative symptoms, if proven, will address an “elusive goal.”
MedscapeLive! and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Nasrallah reported financial relationships with Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Alkermes, Avanir, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Indivior, Janssen, Neurocrine, and Teva. Dr. Correll listed financial relationships with more than 25 pharmaceutical companies, including several developing medications with potential activity against negative symptoms.
Late-stage trials of new antipsychotic drugs are showing promise in the control of negative symptoms, according to an overview presented by Current Psychiatry and the American Academy of Clinical Psychiatrists.
The progress in these trials deserves attention, because control of negative symptoms is “a major unmet need in schizophrenia,” according to Henry A. Nasrallah, MD, director of the schizophrenia program at the University of Cincinnati.
The novel mechanisms of the agents in development are credited with the promise. Not least, several antipsychotic agents with activity against both positive and negative symptoms “are completely devoid of dopamine receptor blockade,” Dr. Nasrallah said at the virtual meeting, presented by MedscapeLive!
The xanomeline portion of the investigational treatment xanomeline-trospium is one example. Xanomeline is a muscarinic receptor agonist with no activity on dopamine D2 receptors. The role of trospium, a muscarinic receptor antagonist, is to reduce peripheral cholinergic side effects.
Xanomeline-trospium: Negative vs. positive symptoms
In a recently published placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 2 trial, the reductions relative to placebo after 5 weeks on the negative subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) tool (–3.9 vs. –1.3; P < .001) was about as robust as that achieved on the positive subscale (–5.6 vs. –3.2; P < .001).
These subscales were secondary endpoints. Relative to placebo, xanomeline-trospium was also effective on the primary endpoint of the PANSS total score (–17.9 vs. –5.9; P < .001).
The presence of trospium did not eliminate cholinergic side effects, which included constipation, dry mouth, and nausea, but the therapy strengthens the evidence that newer agents with novel mechanisms of action, including those without dopamine blockade, can achieve meaningful clinical effects.
SEP-363856, another example of an experimental agent without direct dopamine blockade, was also recently tested in placebo-controlled, double-blind study.
“This is the first agonist of the TAAR1 [trace amine-associated receptor 1] and 5-HT1A [serotonin 5–hydroxytryptamine type 1A receptor] to reach clinical trials,” said Dr. Nasrallah, calling this an interesting agent for its range of clinical activity, which appears to include antianxiety effects.
SEP-363856: Negative vs. positive symptoms
It also appears to include activity against negative symptoms. While the primary endpoint of total PANSS score favored SEP-363856 over placebo at the end of 4 weeks (–17.2 points vs. –9.7; P = .001), the reductions in the subscales for negative (–3.1 vs. –1.6) and positive (–5.5 vs. 3.9) symptoms were also substantial even if statistical differences were not calculated.
The rates of side effects on SEP-3638656 were low, according to Dr. Nasrallah. The most common complaints, such as somnolence, agitation, and nausea, were observed in fewer than 10% of patients.
Roluperidone, another agent with no direct dopamine blockade, has reached phase 3 trials. The activity of this agent is attributed to antagonist activity on the serotonin 5-HT2A and sigma2 receptors. In a multinational, phase 2b study cited by Dr. Nasrallah, both of two study doses of roluperidone were superior to placebo for the negative symptom dimensions of expressive deficit and experiential deficit. Patients enrolled in the trial were required to have baseline PANSS negative symptom subscale scores of 20 points or greater.
Pimavanserin, an inverse agonist of 5-HT2A receptors, is already approved for the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson’s disease, but it is now attracting interest for its potential efficacy against negative symptoms in schizophrenia, according to Dr. Nasrallah, who cited a poster presented last November at the Psych Congress 2020.
The poster provided results of ADVANCE, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study that associated pimavanserin with significant improvement across several types of negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah said. The drug was well tolerated with a side-effect profile “similar to placebo.”
Traditional antipsychotic therapies are generally associated with limited effect against negative symptoms, but it has never been proven that the interaction of treatments on the dopaminergic system is the reason. Indeed, in his list of therapies being pursued for potential benefit against negative symptoms, Dr. Nasrallah cited a clinical study with cariprazine, an agent with multiple effects on dopamine and serotonin signaling.
“Cariprazine is a partial agonist at D2, D3, and 5-HT1A receptors and an antagonist at 5-HT2c and 5-HT7 receptors, but it has the highest affinity to the D3 receptor,” Dr. Nasrallah reported.
Cariprazine is already approved for schizophrenia, acute mania, and bipolar depression, but the authors of a recent review claim evidence of activity against negative symptoms. Furthermore, they speculate that this activity might be mediated by agonism of the D3 receptor.
Despite the evidence that these agents might control negative symptoms, the relative roles will be defined by clinical experience, not just clinical trials, Dr. Nasrallah said. However, he did indicate that there appears to be meaningful progress in this area.
Potential progress in this area is important, because “negative symptoms are a largely unaddressed treatment target in people with schizophrenia,” reported Christoph U. Correll, MD, professor of psychiatry, Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y. These symptoms deserve attention for their “important potential to improve interpersonal, educational, and work function.”
Dr. Correll agreed that the newer drugs with mechanisms other than postsynaptic dopamine blockade could be a very important advance in the treatment of schizophrenia.
“Promising new medications with potential efficacy for negative symptoms, either based on their pharmacological profile and/or emerging data, include cariprazine, lumateperone, ulotaront [SEP-363856], and xanomeline plus trospium,” he said. Efficacy for negative symptoms, if proven, will address an “elusive goal.”
MedscapeLive! and this news organization are owned by the same parent company. Dr. Nasrallah reported financial relationships with Acadia Pharmaceuticals, Alkermes, Avanir, Intra-Cellular Therapies, Indivior, Janssen, Neurocrine, and Teva. Dr. Correll listed financial relationships with more than 25 pharmaceutical companies, including several developing medications with potential activity against negative symptoms.
FROM CP/AACP PSYCHIATRY UPDATE