Mortality in association with antipsychotic medication use and clinical outcomes among geriatric psychiatry outpatients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults are particularly vulnerable to the negative consequences of antipsychotic exposure and are disproportionally affected by higher mortality from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Our goal was to determine whether concurrent antipsychotic medication use was associated with increased COVID-19 mortality in older patients with preexisting behavioral health problems. We also report on findings from post-COVID follow-ups. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. PARTICIPANTS: Outpatients at a geriatric psychiatric clinic in New York City. MEASUREMENTS: Demographic and clinical data including medication, diagnosis and Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) scales on outpatients who had COVID-19 between February 28th and October 1st 2020 were extracted from the electronic health records (EHR) from the hospital. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 (mean age 76 years; median age 75 years) and 13 (23.2%) died. We found an increased mortality risk for patients who were prescribed at least one antipsychotic medication at the time of COVID-19 infection (Fisher's exact test P = 0.009, OR = 11.1, 95% confidence interval: 1.4-96.0). This result remains significant after adjusting for age, gender, housing context and dementia (Logistic regression P = 0.035, Beta = 2.4). Furthermore, we found that most patients who survived COVID-19 (88.4%) recovered to pre-COVID baseline in terms of psychiatric symptoms. Comparison of pre- and post-COVID assessments of CGI-S for 33 patients who recovered from COVID-19 were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: We observed a higher COVID-19 mortality associated with concurrent antipsychotics use in older patients receiving behavioral health services. The majority of patients in our geriatric clinic who recovered from COVID-19 appeared to return to their pre-COVID psychiatric function. More precise estimates of the risk associated with antipsychotic treatment in older patients with COVID-19 and other underlying factors will come from larger datasets and meta-analyses.

Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: Definition, Predictors, and Therapy Options.

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) represents a major clinical challenge. The broad definition of TRS requires nonresponse to at least 2 sequential antipsychotic trials of sufficient dose, duration, and adherence. Several demographic, clinical, and neurologic predictors are associated with TRS. Primary (or early) TRS is present from the beginning of therapy, while patients with secondary (or later-onset) TRS initially respond to antipsychotics but become resistant over time, often after relapses. Guidelines worldwide recognize clozapine as the most effective treatment option for TRS, but clozapine is underused due to various barriers. Importantly, studies indicate that response rates are higher when clozapine is initiated earlier in the treatment course. Side effects are common with clozapine, particularly in the first few weeks, but can mostly be managed without discontinuation; they do require proactive assessment, intervention, and reassurance for patients. Furthermore, plasma leucocyte and granulocyte levels must be monitored weekly during the first 18-26 weeks of treatment, and regularly thereafter, according to country regulations. Therapeutic drug monitoring of clozapine trough plasma levels is helpful to guide dosing, with greatest efficacy at plasma clozapine levels ≥350 µg/L, although this level is not universal. Notably, plasma clozapine levels are generally greater at lower doses in nonsmokers, patients with heavy caffeine consumption, in women, in obese people, in those with inflammation (including COVID-19 infection), and in older individuals. Earlier and broader use of clozapine in patients with TRS is an important measure to improve outcomes of patients with this most severe form of the illness.

Clozapine treatment: Ensuring ongoing monitoring during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) has led mental health systems to uncertainty regarding safe continuation of clozapine monitoring protocols. Clozapine is without doubt the only antipsychotic available with repeatedly proven efficacy in treatment resistant schizophrenia.1 Replacing clozapine with an alternative antipsychotic in patients stabilized with clozapine can potentially lead to higher risk of relapse or exacerbation of severity of illness.1 Clozapine, as already known, has a number of side effects, some of which can be serious, thus patients receiving clozapine require ongoing scheduled monitoring. Side effects of clozapine include neutropenia or agranulocytosis, myocarditis, fever, hypersalivation, weight gain and constipation. These side effects can be detected and treated when recognized on time decreasing the possibility of serious consequences making the implementation of an ongoing treatment monitoring protocol for patients on clozapine mandatory.2 Since it was advised for all mental health providers in most countries worldwide to limit non-urgent hospital visits and procedures to reduce the risk of contamination a challenge arose for patients' ability to access health care facilities for their routine clozapine monitoring. Nevertheless, the majority of Mental Health Care Authorities decided to ensure access for all patients on clozapine to their routine monitoring protocol.3,4 To date, no data exist on any potential relationship between antipsychotic use and the risk of contamination with SARS-CoV-2 or the development of severe symptoms of the infection. The literature suggests that patients receiving antipsychotics, especially clozapine, have an increased risk of developing pneumonia, leading to the assumption that patients receiving clozapine are at higher risk to develop COVID-19. 1 Balancing the importance of monitoring continuation against the increased risk for COVID-19, an International Consensus Statement was recently published addressing a monitoring protocol with reduced visits. The Consensus suggested reduced hematologic monitoring frequency of every 3 months with a prescription of 90 days clozapine supply (if safe). The above applies to patients receiving clozapine for at least one year without neutropenia. Τhe risk of neutropenia after 12 months of clozapine treatment falls significantly.4 Based on the above it is suggested to all clozapine clinics to implement a guidance monitoring protocol for all patients on clozapine to ensure safety during the pandemic. Besides hematological monitoring that requires physical contact with healthcare workers it is significant to implement a telemedicine appointment in frequent intervals to monitor symptoms of infection, symptoms of cardiovascular diseases and constipation. Patient should also be advised to regularly monitor one's blood pressure and pulses and ideally be educated on how by a member of the staff. If a patient is detected with any symptoms related to the above an emergency appointment for evaluation should be planned. Overall, since both the consequences and the duration of the pandemic are unknown, mental health services must work jointly to implement a clozapine monitoring plan to ensure safe continuation in such a vulnerable population.

Observational study of haloperidol in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Haloperidol, a widely used antipsychotic, has been suggested as potentially useful for patients with COVID-19 on the grounds of its in-vitro antiviral effects against SARS-CoV-2, possibly through sigma-1 receptor antagonist effect. METHODS: We examined the associations of haloperidol use with intubation or death and time to discharge home among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19 at Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) Greater Paris University hospitals. Study baseline was defined as the date of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of intubation or death and the secondary endpoint was discharge home among survivors in time-to-event analyses. In the primary analyses, we compared these two outcomes between patients receiving and not receiving haloperidol using univariate Cox regression models in matched analytic samples based on patient characteristics and other psychotropic medications. Sensitivity analyses included propensity score analyses with inverse probability weighting and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: Of 15,121 adult inpatients with a positive COVID-19 PT-PCR test, 39 patients (0.03%) received haloperidol within the first 48 hours of admission. Over a mean follow-up of 13.8 days (SD = 17.9), 2,024 patients (13.4%) had a primary end-point event and 10,179 patients (77.6%) were discharged home at the time of study end on May 1st. The primary endpoint occurred in 9 patients (23.1%) who received haloperidol and 2,015 patients (13.4%) who did not. The secondary endpoint of discharge home occurred in 16 patients (61.5%) who received haloperidol and 9,907 patients (85.8%) who did not. There were no significant associations between haloperidol use and the primary (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.39 to 1.62, p = 0.531) and secondary (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.74 to 2.28, p = 0.355) endpoints. Results were similar in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Findings from this multicenter observational study suggest that haloperidol use prescribed at a mean dose of 4.5 mg per day (SD = 5.2) for a mean duration of 8.4 days (SD = 7.2) may not be associated with risk of intubation or death, or with time to discharge home, among adult patients hospitalized for COVID-19.

Brief Psychotic Disorder During the National Lockdown in Italy: An Emerging Clinical Phenomenon of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychosis remains to be established. Here we report 6 cases (3 male and 3 female) of first-episode psychosis (FEP) admitted to our hospital in the second month of national lockdown. All patients underwent routine laboratory tests and a standardized assessment of psychopathology. Hospitalization was required due to the severity of behavioral abnormalities in the context of a full-blown psychosis (the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] = 75.8 ± 14.6). Blood tests, toxicological urine screening, and brain imaging were unremarkable, with the exception of a mild cortical atrophy in the eldest patient (male, 73 years). All patients were negative for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) throughout their stay, but 3 presented the somatic delusion of being infected. Of note, all 6 cases had religious/spiritual delusions and hallucinatory contents. Despite a generally advanced age (53.3 ± 15.6), all patients had a negative psychiatric history. Rapid discharge (length of stay = 13.8 ± 6.9) with remission of symptoms (BPRS = 27.5 ± 3.1) and satisfactory insight were possible after relatively low-dose antipsychotic treatment (Olanzapine-equivalents = 10.1 ± 5.1 mg). Brief psychotic disorder/acute and transient psychotic disorder diagnoses were confirmed during follow-up visits in all 6 cases. The youngest patient (female, 23 years) also satisfied the available criteria for brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms. Although research on larger populations is necessary, our preliminary observation suggests that intense psychosocial stress associated with a novel, potentially fatal disease and national lockdown restrictions might be a trigger for FEP.

COVID-19 quarantine-related psychotic symptoms. / Síntomas psicóticos en relación con cuarentena por COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Three cases are presented that are characterised by an acute psychopathological decompensation during the state of alarm in Spain due to the COVID-19 epidemic, as an example of the mental morbidity that can be generated as a result of the confinement and social isolation measures. CASE REPORT: Three cases are presented, all of them with a diagnosis of "brief psychotic episode" (F23). In these selected cases, the social restrictions implemented as a result of COVID-19 have played a very relevant role as an external stressor of psychotic symptoms in the patients. The response to antipsychotic treatment was rapid and very favourable. There could be specific psychological vulnerability factors related to the epidemic, which are still being studied today. CONCLUSIONS: Our cases are just a sample of the new paradigm that psychiatry is facing, requiring an early and effective approach to the upturn in mental illness that is foreseeable in the coming months.

Brief psychotic disorder associated with quarantine and mild COVID-19.

A 30-year-old man with no significant previous or family psychiatric history became severely anxious about his health after a positive COVID-19 test. Physical symptoms of COVID-19 were mild, with no evidence of hypoxia or pneumonia, throughout his illness. He was admitted to a quarantine facility. He remained highly anxious, and 1 week later, he developed paranoid delusions and auditory hallucinations (his first psychotic episode). He was treated with lorazepam 1 mg four times a day, mirtazapine 30 mg nocte and risperidone 1 mg two times a day. His psychotic symptoms lasted 1 week. He stopped psychiatric medication after 4 weeks and had remained well when reviewed 3 months later. A Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fifth edition diagnosis of brief psychotic disorder with marked stressor (brief reactive psychosis) was made. Anxiety about his health and social isolation appeared the main aetiological factors but an inflammatory component cannot be excluded. The case highlights that first episode psychosis can be associated with mild COVID-19.

A Rational Use of Clozapine Based on Adverse Drug Reactions, Pharmacokinetics, and Clinical Pharmacopsychology.

Using Richardson and Davidson's model and the sciences of pharmacokinetics and clinical pharmacopsychology, this article reviewed the: (1) poor life expectancy associated with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), which may be improved in patients who adhere to clozapine; (2) findings that clozapine is the best treatment for TRS (according to efficacy, effectiveness and well-being); and (3) potential for clozapine to cause vulnerabilities, including potentially lethal adverse drug reactions such as agranulocytosis, pneumonia, and myocarditis. Rational use requires: (1) modification of the clozapine package insert worldwide to include lower doses for Asians and to avoid the lethality associated with pneumonia, (2) the use of clozapine levels for personalizing dosing, and (3) the use of slow and personalized titration. This may make clozapine as safe as possible and contribute to increased life expectancy and well-being. In the absence of data on COVID-19 in clozapine patients, clozapine possibly impairs immunological mechanisms and may increase pneumonia risk in infected patients. Psychiatrists should call their clozapine patients and families and explain to them that if the patient develops fever or flu-like symptoms, the psychiatrist should be called and should consider halving the clozapine dose. If the patient is hospitalized with pneumonia, the treating physician needs to assess for symptoms of clozapine intoxication since halving the dose may not be enough for all patients; consider decreasing it to one-third or even stopping it. Once the signs of inflammation and fever have disappeared, the clozapine dose can be slowly increased to the prior dosage level.