Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 10 de 10
Filter
2.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract ; 5(2): 442-447.e1, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27818136

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) is a life-threatening disorder characterized by recurrent angioedema. Icatibant, a subcutaneous bradykinin-B2-receptor antagonist, is an effective on-demand therapy. Data outside the United States suggest that self-administration is tolerated and patient-preferred compared with administration by health care professionals at medical facilities (HCP-administration). OBJECTIVE: A prospective, multicenter study was conducted in the United States to compare icatibant self-administration and HCP-administration. METHODS: Subjects 18 years or older with type I or II HAE were recruited. The first 2 HAE attacks after enrollment were treated at medical facilities. Subjects were instructed by a health care professional on self-administration during icatibant treatment for the second HAE attack. Icatibant was self-administered for all subsequent attacks. For each treated HAE attack, efficacy, safety, and tolerability data were recorded. RESULTS: Nineteen patients with HAE received icatibant for 79 distinct HAE attacks. Mean attack duration was significantly shorter with self-administration (n = 50; 547 ± 510 minutes) than with HCP-administration (n = 29; 968 ± 717 minutes; P = .006). Mean time to treatment was significantly shorter with self-administration (143 ± 226 minutes) than with HCP-administration (361 ± 503 minutes; P < .0001). Shorter times to treatment were associated with shorter time from treatment to symptom resolution (r = 0.35; P = .02). Improvements in visual analog scale score and patient symptom score from pretreatment to 4 hours postinjection were comparable between self-administration and HCP-administration. There were no serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events with self-administration or HCP-administration. CONCLUSIONS: Icatibant self-administration shortened attack duration and time to treatment, with no difference in safety or local tolerability compared with HCP-administration. These findings support icatibant as an effective on-demand option for home-based treatment.


Subject(s)
Angioedemas, Hereditary/drug therapy , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/therapeutic use , Bradykinin B2 Receptor Antagonists/therapeutic use , Bradykinin/analogs & derivatives , Home Care Services , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Angioedemas, Hereditary/epidemiology , Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/administration & dosage , Bradykinin/administration & dosage , Bradykinin/therapeutic use , Bradykinin B2 Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Health Personnel , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Middle Aged , Patient Preference , Prospective Studies , Self Administration , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Treatment Outcome , United States/epidemiology , Visual Analog Scale , Young Adult
3.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 35(5): 605-8, 2015 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26267418

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We sought to test the hypothesis that antidepressants (ADs) may show preferential efficacy and safety among patients with type II bipolar disorder (BD, BD-II) more than patients with type I BD (BD-I). METHODS: Patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, BD-I (n = 21) and BD-II (n = 49) in acute major depressive episodes were treated with ADs plus mood stabilizers to euthymia sustained for 2 months and then randomized openly to continue or discontinue ADs for up to 3 years. Outcomes were episode recurrences and changes in standardized symptom ratings. RESULTS: In follow-up averaging 1.64 years, both subgroups showed improvement in depressive episode frequency with AD continuation, but contrary to the hypothesis, more improvement was seen in BD-I than in BD-II (for type II, mean [standard deviation] decrease in depressive episodes per year, 0.21 [0.26]; for type I, mean (SD) decrease, 0.35 [0.15]). Subjects with BD-II who continued on ADs had slightly more depressive, but fewer manic/hypomanic, episodes than subjects with BD-I. No notable differences were seen in either group in time to a recurrence of mood episodes or total time-in-remission. CONCLUSIONS: The findings do not confirm the hypothesis that long-term AD treatment in patients with BP-II has better outcomes than in patients with BD-I, except somewhat lower risk of manic/hypomanic episodes.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents/administration & dosage , Antimanic Agents/administration & dosage , Bipolar Disorder/drug therapy , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Antimanic Agents/therapeutic use , Bipolar Disorder/physiopathology , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Recurrence , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
4.
J Affect Disord ; 184: 318-21, 2015 Sep 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26142612

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The use of antidepressants in rapid-cycling bipolar disorder has been controversial. We report the first randomized clinical trial with modern antidepressants on this topic. METHODS: As part of the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study, we analyzed, as an a priori secondary outcome, rapid cycling as a predictor of response in 68 patients randomized to continue vs. discontinue antidepressant treatment, after initial response for an acute major depressive episode. Outcomes assessed were percent time well and total number of episodes. All patients received standard mood stabilizers. RESULTS: In those continued on antidepressants (AD), rapid cycling (RC) subjects experienced 268% (3.14/1.17) more total mood episodes/year, and 293% (1.29/0.44) more depressive episodes/year, compared with non-rapid cycling (NRC) subjects (mean difference in depressive episodes per year RC vs. NRC was 0.85 ± 0.37 (SE), df = 28, p = 0.03). In the AD continuation group, RC patients also had 28.8% less time in remission than NRC patients (95% confidence intervals (9.9%, 46.5%), p = 0.004). No such differences between RC and NRC subjects were seen in the AD discontinuation group (Table 1). Analyses within the rapid-cycling subgroup alone were consistent with the above comparisons between RC and NRC subjects, stratified by maintenance antidepressant treatment, though limited by sample size. CONCLUSIONS: In an a priori analysis, despite preselection for good antidepressant response and concurrent mood stabilizer treatment, antidepressant continuation in rapid-cycling was associated with worsened maintenance outcomes, especially for depressive morbidity, vs. antidepressant discontinuation.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Bipolar Disorder/drug therapy , Bipolar Disorder/psychology , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Symptom Assessment
5.
J Affect Disord ; 164: 14-8, 2014 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24856547

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mixed depression (MxD) is one subtype of depressive experiences within the depressive spectrum. MxD definition is debated among experts. Koukopoulos׳ proposed diagnostic criteria focused primarily on psychic agitation, marked irritability, and intense mood lability as markers of a mixed depressive episode. The present study validates Koukopoulos׳ criteria as diagnostic for MxD. METHODS: A sample of 435 patients from the International Mood Network (IMN), multi-center, international network of sites, and the Centro LucioBini of Rome was analyzed. Koukopoulos׳ criteria were assessed in all patients. RESULTS: The most prevalent MxD criteria were "absence of psychomotor retardation" (84%), "mood lability or marked reactivity" (78%), and "psychic agitation or inner tension" (75%). Multivariable predictors of a MxD (+) diagnosis were: higher current CGI (OR=1.23, 95% CI 1.23, 2.84), lower rates of previous bipolar type I diagnosis (OR=0.54, 95% CI -3.28, -0.13), mixed symptoms on the index episode (OR=10.02, 95% CI 2.32, 24.12), rapid cycling course (OR=2.6 95% CI 1.45, 3.56), past substance abuse (OR=3.02, 95% CI 2.01, 5.67) and lower education status (OR=0.44, 95% CI -3.23, -0.98). This model showed a sensitivity of 76.4%, specificity of 86.3%, negative predictive value of 75%, and positive predictive value of 86%. LIMITATIONS: An external validation of these criteria in an independent sample is warranted. CONCLUSION: A broad definition of mixed depression was internally validated with multiple diagnostic validators and was sensitively and specifically predicted. Contrary to DSM-5, Koukopoulos׳ broad criteria include agitation, irritability and mood lability as core features.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Adult , Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Female , Humans , Irritable Mood , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Psychological , ROC Curve
6.
J Med Screen ; 20(3): 118-24, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24080916

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Although efficacious treatments for mood disorders are available in primary care, under-diagnosis is associated with under-treatment and poorer outcomes. This study compares the accuracy of self-administered screening tests with routine general practitioner (GP) assessment for detection of current mood disorder. METHODS: 197 consecutive patients attending primary care centres in Santiago, Chile enrolled in this cross-sectional study, filling out the Patients Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression and the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) for bipolar disorder, after routine GP assessment. Diagnostic accuracy of these self-administered tools was compared with GP assessment, with gold standard diagnosis established by a structured diagnostic interview with trained clinicians (SCID-I). RESULTS: The sample was 75% female, with a mean age of 48.5 (SD 16.8); 37% had a current mood disorder (positive SCID-I result for depression or bipolar disorder). Sensitivity of the screening instruments (SI) was substantially higher than GP assessment (SI: 0.8, [95% CI 0.71, 0.81], versus GP: 0.2, [95% CI 0.12, 0.25]: p-value < 0.0001), without sacrifice in specificity (SI: 0.9, [95% CI 0.86, 0.96], versus GP: 0.9, [95% CI 0.88, 0.97]: p-value = 0.7). This led to improvement in both positive predictive value (SI: 0.8, [95% CI 0.82, 0.90], versus GP: 0.6, [95% CI 0.50, 0.64]: p-value < 0.001) and negative predictive value (SI: 0.9, [95% CI 0.78, 0.91] versus GP: 0.7, [95% CI 0.56, 0.72]: p-value < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Self-administered screening tools are more accurate than GP assessment in detecting current mood disorder in low-income primary care. Such screening tests may improve detection of current mood disorder if implemented in primary care settings.


Subject(s)
Mass Screening/methods , Mood Disorders/diagnosis , Adult , Bipolar Disorder/diagnosis , Bipolar Disorder/epidemiology , Chile/epidemiology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Depression/diagnosis , Depression/epidemiology , Female , General Practitioners , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mood Disorders/epidemiology , Poverty , Primary Health Care , Surveys and Questionnaires
7.
PLoS One ; 7(4): e34757, 2012.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22545088

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of ziprasidone vs. placebo for the depressive mixed state in patients with bipolar disorder type II or major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: 73 patients were randomized in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to ziprasidone (40-160 mg/d) or placebo for 6 weeks. They met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode (MDE), while also meeting 2 or 3 (but not more nor less) DSM-IV manic criteria. They did not meet DSM-IV criteria for a mixed or manic episode. Baseline psychotropic drugs were continued unchanged. The primary endpoint measured was Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores over time. The mean dose of ziprasidone was 129.7±45.3 mg/day and 126.1±47.1 mg/day for placebo. RESULTS: The primary outcome analysis indicated efficacy of ziprasidone versus placebo (p = 0.0038). Efficacy was more pronounced in type II bipolar disorder than in MDD (p = 0.036). Overall ziprasidone was well tolerated, without notable worsening of weight or extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant benefit with ziprasidone versus placebo in this first RCT of any medication for the provisional diagnostic concept of the depressive mixed state. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00490542.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Bipolar Disorder/drug therapy , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Piperazines/therapeutic use , Thiazoles/therapeutic use , Acute Disease , Adult , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Piperazines/adverse effects , Thiazoles/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
8.
J Affect Disord ; 141(2-3): 116-9, 2012 Dec 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22386476

ABSTRACT

Some see current views of mental illness, such as depression, as merely contemporary social constructions, with madness seen as a modernist break from medieval and ancient concepts. In contrast to these assumptions, here we describe one of the earliest texts on melancholia and mania, by Ibn Imran, an Arab physician of the 10th century.


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder/history , Manuscripts, Medical as Topic/history , History, Medieval , Iraq , Tunisia
9.
J Affect Disord ; 136(3): 1059-61, 2012 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22173265

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Mixed depression reflects the occurrence of a major depressive episode with subsyndromal manic symptoms. Not recognized in DSM-IV, it is included in the proposed changes for DSM-5. Observational and cross-sectional studies have suggested that mixed depression is present in up to one-half of major depressive episodes, whether in MDD or bipolar disorder. Based on observational studies, antidepressants appear to be less effective, and neuroleptics more effective, in mixed than pure depression (major depressive episodes with no manic symptoms). In this report, we examine the specific manic symptoms that are most present in mixed depression, especially as they correlate with prospectively assessed treatment response. METHODS: In 72 patients treated in a randomized clinical trial (ziprasidone versus placebo), we assessed the phenomenology of manic symptom type at study entry and their influence as predictors of treatment response. RESULTS: The most common symptom presentation was a clinical triad of flight of ideas (60%), distractibility (58%), and irritable mood (55%). Irritable mood was the major predictor of treatment response. DSM-based diagnostic distinctions between MDD and bipolar disorder (type II) did not predict treatment response. CONCLUSION: In this prospective study, mixed depression seems to be most commonly associated with irritable mood, flight of ideas, and distractibility, with irritability being an important predictor of treatment outcome with neuroleptic agents. If these data are correct, in the presence of mixed depression, the DSM-based dichotomy between MDD and bipolar disorder does not appear to influence treatment response.


Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Acute Disease , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use , Bipolar Disorder/drug therapy , Depression , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Irritable Mood , Male , Middle Aged , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Young Adult
10.
J Affect Disord ; 132(3): 445-9, 2011 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21440943

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To assess the sensitivity and specificity of two self-report instruments for detection of bipolarity in a sample of Argentinean patients. METHOD: Spanish versions of the MDQ and the BSDS were administered over four months at 11 sites in Argentina. Diagnoses were made using DSM-IV criteria and the MINI. The study sample consisted of patients diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder (BD) Types I, II, or NOS. BDNOS diagnoses were made using extended guidelines for bipolar spectrum symptoms. Unipolar patients were used as a control group. Of 493 patients screened, 354 completed evaluation by MDQ and MINI, and 363 by BSDS and MINI. RESULTS: Specificity of MDQ was 0.97 and BSDS was 0.81. MDQ sensitivity was 0.70 for bipolar type I (BD-I), 0.52 for bipolar II (BD-II) and 0.31 for bipolar not otherwise specified (BDNOS). BSDS sensitivities were 0.75, 0.70 and 0.51 respectively. LIMITATIONS: This study was performed in specialized outpatient settings and thus its results are not necessarily representative for other clinical settings. There was not a systematic evaluation of comorbid psychiatric disease or test-retest reliability. CONCLUSION: The local versions of the MDQ and the BSDS showed a sensitivity and specificity comparable to previous research. Our results indicate that in this sample, MDQ was more specific for BD and BSDS was more sensitive to detect BD-II and NOS. Since BD-I is more readily recognized than bipolar spectrum disorders, enhanced sensitivity of BSDS for soft bipolarity may be an advantage.


Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder/diagnosis , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Argentina , Bipolar Disorder/ethnology , Bipolar Disorder/psychology , Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Mood Disorders , Outpatients , Psychometrics/instrumentation , Sensitivity and Specificity , Weights and Measures
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...