Biomedical subjects

G D Tollefson

Publications and source records attributed to G D Tollefson.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1998

A double-blind, controlled comparison of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine versus haloperidol or placebo on anxious and depressive symptoms accompanying schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are a common feature of schizophrenia and may represent a core part of the illness. Where present, it has been associated with greater overall morbidity and mortality. Monotherapy with conventional dopamine antagonists may either worsen or bestow a limited therapeutic benefit. Accordingly the use of adjunctive thymoleptics has been explored. In contrast, olanzapine (OLZ), an atypical antipsychotic agent, offers a distinctive and pleotropic pharmacology suggestive of a broader efficacy profile than conventional neuroleptic agents. METHODS: In a 6-week placebo- and haloperidol (HAL)-controlled trial with 335 randomized subjects with chronic schizophrenia in an acute exacerbation, three fixed dose ranges of OLZ (5, 10, or 15 +/- 2.5 mg) were evaluated versus HAL (10-20 mg) or placebo. RESULTS: Baseline to endpoint change in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale including the anxiety-depression cluster (items 1, 2, 5, 9) was analyzed. Two dose ranges of OLZ (10 +/- 2.5, 15 +/- 2.5) were superior to placebo (p < 05) in improving mood status, whereas HAL was not. CONCLUSION: Contributions from a more selective mesolimbic dopaminergic profile, D1 or D4 activity, the release of dopamine/norepinephrine in the prefrontal cortex, and/or serotonin 5-HT2A,C antagonism may explain the differential benefit seen with OLZ in the treatment of comorbid anxious and depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Depressive signs and symptoms in schizophrenia: a prospective blinded trial of olanzapine and haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Depressive signs and symptoms during the course of schizophrenia are common and have been associated with impaired recovery and a higher risk of self-harm. Novel antipsychotic agents introduce new pharmacological avenues that may differentially affect schizophrenic signs and symptoms, including depression. METHODS: This was a 17-country investigation of 1996 patients with schizophrenia or a related diagnosis randomly assigned to a blinded, comparative trial of the novel antipsychotic agent olanzapine (5-20 mg/d) or the conventional D2 antagonist haloperidol (5-20 mg/d). Patients were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and the Simpson-Angus Rating Scale. The trial consisted of a 6-week and a 46-week masked responder maintenance period. RESULTS: At least moderate depressive signs and symptoms (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score, > or =16) were seen in slightly more than half of this sample. Although both treatments were associated with short-term baseline-to-end point improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, olanzapine-associated improvements were significantly superior to those observed with haloperidol (P=.001). Furthermore, the response rate for the group receiving olanzapine (> or =50% improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale after at least 3 weeks of treatment) was also significantly higher (P=.008). Analysis demonstrated that improvement in positive, negative, and/or extrapyramidal symptoms was associated with mood improvement (indirect effect); however, most of the olanzapine treatment effect on mood was a primary direct effect (57%) that alone was significantly greater than that seen with haloperidol treatment (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Depressive signs and symptoms in schizophrenia are responsive to treatment. The pleotrophic pharmacological features of olanzapine, through 1 or more non-D2-mediated pathways, likely contribute to its superior treatment effect. Better control of the mood disorders accompanying schizophrenia holds the possibility for improved patient outcomes.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Health economic evaluations of antidepressants: a review.

In an era of constrained health care financing, clinicians are increasingly faced with considering the economic consequences in addition to the clinical outcomes associated with initiating a patient on antidepressant therapy. This has increased the demand for health economic studies comparing antidepressant use and associated health care expenditures in clinical practice. These health economics studies have used methods ranging from clinical trials to other types of analyses including prospective naturalistic trials or retrospective studies which may be less familiar to clinicians. Prospective and retrospective health economics studies performed in clinical practice complement the experience gained from clinical trials in assessing antidepressant use and economic outcomes in light of patient and provider behavior within the usual care environment of a complex health care system. Broadly considered, health economic studies of antidepressants have consistently found differences in clinical practice between the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) as well as among the SSRIs. These differences relate to the pattern and duration of antidepressant use as well as total direct health care expenditures. Future health economic research studies in clinical practice should focus on the economic consequences of long-term antidepressant use as well as the impact of antidepressant use on indirect costs such as productivity and absenteeism.

Antidepressive Agents↗

PubMed1997

The acute and long-term effect of olanzapine compared with placebo and haloperidol on serum prolactin concentrations.

Prolactin elevation is both a common and a persistent event with the currently marketed antipsychotics, excluding clozapine. Elevations have been associated with both acute (galactorrhea, amenorrhea) and chronic (predisposition to osteoporosis) treatment-emergent adverse events. One of the defining criteria for an atypical antipsychotic is the relative lack of persistent prolactinemia. A double-blind, placebo- (N = 68) and haloperidol- (Hal: 15 +/- 5 mg/day, N = 69) controlled trial of three dose ranges of olanzapine (Olz-L: 5 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 65; Olz-M: 10 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 64; Olz-H: 15 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 69) in the treatment of schizophrenia afforded the opportunity to assess the temporal course of the influence of olanzapine and haloperidol on serum prolactin concentration. Consistent with its potent D2 antagonism, haloperidol was associated with a statistically significantly higher incidence of treatment-emergent prolactin elevation (72%) than seen with placebo (8%; p < 0.001) at week 2 of therapy. Expectedly, this elevation was also persistent at weeks 4 and 6. In contrast, olanzapine-associated treatment-emergent prolactin elevations were both lower in magnitude and transient. At week 2, 38% of the Olz-H, 24% of the Olz-M, and 13% of the Olz-L treatment groups exhibited a treatment-emergent prolactin elevation, with a mean increase of 0.35, 0.52, and 0.61 nmol/l, respectively; for haloperidol the mean increase was 1.23 nmol/l. For only the Olz-M and the Olz-H treatment groups did the week 2 incidence of treatment-emergent prolactin elevations differ statistically significantly from placebo. Both the incidence of elevations and the mean increase, in prolactin concentration were less than that seen with haloperidol. Furthermore, by treatment week 6, all three olanzapine groups exhibited incidences of treatment-emergent prolactin elevation that were comparable to placebo and were statistically significantly less than observed with haloperidol. Rapid adaptation was observed in the temporal course of prolactin elevations associated with olanzapine based on both the categorical analysis of treatment-emergent high values and the analyses of temporal change in mean concentrations. In contrast to haloperidol, the magnitudes of the treatment-emergent elevations associated with olanzapine were minimal. The rates of elevation were approximately one-half to one-third those observed with haloperidol and were significantly more transient. Olanzapine, even at the highest doses (15 +/- 2.5 mg/day) used, was not associated with persistent elevations of prolactin, consistent with an 'atypical' pharmacologic profile.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Effects of xanomeline, a selective muscarinic receptor agonist, on cognitive function and behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer disease.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the therapeutic effects of selective cholinergic replacement with xanomeline tartrate, an m1 and m4 selective muscarinic receptor (mAChR) agonist in patients with probable Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: A 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial followed by a 1-month, single-blind, placebo washout. SETTING: Outpatients at 17 centers in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 343 men and women at least 60 years of age with mild to moderate AD. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received 75, 150, or 225 mg (low, medium, and high doses) of xanomeline per day or placebo for 6 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog), the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC+), the Alzheimer's Disease Symptomatology Scale (ADSS), and the Nurses' Observational Scale for Geriatric Patients (NOSGER). RESULTS: A significant treatment effect existed for ADAS-Cog (high dose vs placebo; P < or = .05), and CIBIC+ (high dose vs placebo; P < or = .02). Treatment Emergent Signs and Symptoms analysis of the ADSS, which assesses behavioral symptoms in patients with AD, disclosed significant (P < or = .002) dose-dependent reductions in vocal outbursts, suspiciousness, delusions, agitation, and hallucinations. On end-point analysis, NOSGER, which assesses memory, instrumental activities of daily living, self-care, mood, social behavior, and disturbing behavior in the elderly, also showed a significant dose-response relationship (P < or = .02). In the high-dose arm, 52% of patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events; dose-dependent adverse events were predominantly gastrointestinal in nature. Syncope, defined as loss of consciousness and muscle tone, occurred in 12.6% of patients in the high-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: The observed improvements in ADAS-Cog and CIBIC+ following treatment with xanomeline provide the first evidence, from a large-scale, placebo-controlled clinical trial, that a direct-acting muscarinic receptor agonist can improve cognitive function in patients with AD. Furthermore, the dramatic and favorable effects on disturbing behaviors in AD suggest a novel approach for treatment of noncognitive symptoms.

Alzheimer Disease↗

PubMed1997

Olanzapine versus haloperidol: acute phase results of the international double-blind olanzapine trial.

A 6-week acute phase of an international 1-year double-blind study was conducted comparing three dose ranges of olanzapine (5 +/- 2.5 mg/day, 10 +/- 2.5 mg/day, and 15 +/- 2.5 mg/day) with a fixed dose of olanzapine (1.0 mg/day) and with a dose range of haloperidol (15 +/- 5 mg/day) in the treatment of 431 patients with schizophrenia. The purpose was to determine whether olanzapine demonstrated a dose-related ability to decrease overall psychopathology with minimal associated extrapyramidal symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. The high-dose olanzapine group showed statistically significantly greater improvement in overall psychopathology based on mean change in the CGI Severity score and statistically significantly greater improvement in positive psychotic symptoms based on mean change in both the BPRS positive score and the PANSS positive score compared with the 1.0-mg/day olanzapine group. Analyses indicated that an increasing dose-response curve was observed across the range of all olanzapine dose groups. Acute extrapyramidal syndromes were reported less frequently among all olanzapine groups compared with the haloperidol group. Endpoint mean change on both the Simpson-Angus Scale and the Barnes Akathisia Scale reflected improvement for all olanzapine treatment groups compared with worsening for the haloperidol group. Olanzapine was associated with weight gain but did not appear to have any clinically meaningful effect on vital signs. Although olanzapine was associated with some increase in prolactin concentrations, increases were transient, occurred less often, and were of lesser magnitude than those observed with haloperidol.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Double-blind comparison of olanzapine versus risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders.

Olanzapine and risperidone, both second-generation antipsychotic agents, represent two different pharmacologic strategies. Although they share some in vitro properties, they differ by virtue of their chemical structure, spectrum of receptor binding affinities, animal neuropharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and in vivo neuroimaging profile. Based on such differences, it was hypothesized that the two compounds would show distinct safety and/or efficacy characteristics. To test this hypothesis, an international, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, 28-week prospective study was conducted with 339 patients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder. Results of the study indicated that both olanzapine and risperidone were safe and effective in the management of psychotic symptoms. However, olanzapine demonstrated significantly greater efficacy in negative symptoms (Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms summary score), as well as overall response rate (> or = 40% decrease in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score). Furthermore, a statistically significantly greater proportion of the olanzapine-treated than risperidone-treated patients maintained their response at 28 weeks based on Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The incidence of extrapyramidal side effects, hyperprolactinemia, and sexual dysfunction was statistically significantly lower in olanzapine-treated than risperidone-treated patients. In addition, statistically significantly fewer adverse events were reported by olanzapine-treated patients than by their risperidone-treated counterparts. Thus, the differential preclinical profiles of these two drugs were also evident in a controlled, clinical investigation. Olanzapine seemed to have a risk-versus-benefit advantage.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders: results of an international collaborative trial.

OBJECTIVE: This international, multicenter double-blind trial was designed to compare the therapeutic profile of an atypical antipsychotic, olanzapine, with that of a conventional dopamine D2 antagonist, haloperidol. METHOD: A total of 1,996 patients at 174 sites in Europe and North America were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine (N = 1,336) or haloperidol (N = 660) over 6 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis involved the mean change from baseline to endpoint in total scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Secondary analyses included comparisons of the mean change in positive and negative symptoms, comorbid depression, extrapyramidal symptoms, and overall drug safety. RESULTS: Olanzapine demonstrated clinical results superior to those of haloperidol on overall improvement according to the BPRS and on every secondary measure, including depression. Olanzapine was also associated with significantly fewer discontinuations of treatment due to lack of drug efficacy or adverse events. Substantially more olanzapine-treated patients (66.5%) than haloperidol-treated patients (46.8%) completed 6 weeks of therapy. Statistically significant advantages of olanzapine treatment were related to 1) change in negative symptoms, 2) extrapyramidal symptom profile, 3) effect on prolactin levels, and 4) response rate. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine shows a superior and broader spectrum of efficacy in the treatment of schizophrenic psychopathology, with a substantially more favorable safety profile, than haloperidol. It meets several of the criteria for a novel atypical antipsychotic agent.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1997

Negative symptoms: a path analytic approach to a double-blind, placebo- and haloperidol-controlled clinical trial with olanzapine.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated whether primary negative symptoms of schizophrenia are enduring or treatment-responsive. METHODS: Previously, a double-blind, random-assignment trial of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine (in low, medium, and high dose ranges), placebo, or haloperidol (10-20 mg/day) for 335 schizophrenic inpatients was conducted for up to 52 weeks. Changes in the treatment groups from baseline to endpoint in summary scores on the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) and several secondary measures were compared. This article describes a path analysis to determine to what extent the total treatment effect on negative symptoms was direct or indirect (i.e., mediated by differential effects on positive symptoms, extrapyramidal symptoms, or mood). RESULTS: Significantly greater improvement was achieved with high-dose olanzapine than with placebo or haloperidol. Olanzapine had a significantly greater direct effect than placebo on all SANS dimensions except anhedonia-asociality. Olanzapine also demonstrated a significantly greater direct effect than haloperidol on negative symptoms, especially on the dimensions of affective flattening and avolition-apathy. Olanzapine's superior effects were replicated in a subgroup with SANS-defined prominent negative symptoms (N = 116) and a subgroup with a BPRS-defined cross-sectional proxy for the deficit state (N = 117). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the negative symptoms of schizophrenia are directly responsive to treatment. The significantly greater direct and indirect effects of olanzapine than of haloperidol on negative symptoms are likely related to olanzapine's pleotrophic pharmacology, which includes dopaminergic, serotonergic, muscarinic, and adrenergic activities. The results contribute to the hypothesis that negative symptoms may be under the influence of several neurotransmitters within one or more neuroanatomic circuits.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1997

Blind, controlled, long-term study of the comparative incidence of treatment-emergent tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine or haloperidol.

OBJECTIVE: Tardive dyskinesia is a serious and common complication of neuroleptic treatment. Olanzapine is a novel antipsychotic agent exhibiting regional mesolimbic dopaminergic selectivity and a broad-based pharmacology encompassing serotonin, dopamine, muscarinic, and adrenergic receptor binding affinities. The authors' goal was to compare the incidence of tardive dyskinesia among patients receiving olanzapine and those receiving the conventional dopamine 2 antagonist haloperidol. METHOD: Data were analyzed from three actively controlled and blind long-term responder studies of subjects meeting DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder treated with olanzapine (N = 707, up to 20 mg/day, 237 median days of exposure) or haloperidol (N = 197, up to 20 mg/day, 203 median days of exposure) who did not have evidence of tardive dyskinesia at baseline. All of the subjects had a chronic disease course (mean greater than 10 years), and there were no significant between-treatment group differences in demographic or disease characteristics. The Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale and research diagnostic criteria for tardive dyskinesia were used to define the comparative incidence rates of long-term treatment-emergent tardive dyskinesia. RESULTS: The incidence of newly emergent tardive dyskinesia at any visit after baseline, at the final visit, and at the final two clinical assessments was statistically significantly lower among olanzapine-treated patients than among haloperidol-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support an atypical extrapyramidal symptom profile and the potential of a significantly lower risk of tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine than with haloperidol among patients requiring maintenance antipsychotic treatment.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Standard olanzapine versus placebo and ineffective-dose olanzapine in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Two studies compared the efficacy of standard-dose oral olanzapine (5 to 15 mg a day) with placebo and with ineffective-dose olanzapine (1 mg a day) in maintenance therapy of schizophrenia. METHODS: The studies were 46-week double-blind extensions of multicenter studies that assessed the efficacy of olanzapine in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. Subjects were 120 adults who met DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia with an acute exacerbation and who had a minimum score of 24 on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, who had responded to acute therapy (defined as at least a 40 percent reduction in the BPRS score from baseline or a score of 18 or less during up to six weeks of treatment), and who were outpatients at their last acute-phase visit. Relapse was defined as hospitalization for psychopathology. Relapse risk was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and life table analysis. Patients who relapsed were discontinued from the studies. RESULTS: In the first study (N = 58), patients in the standard-dose olanzapine group experienced a significantly lower relapse risk (p = .002) over one year than patients treated with placebo. The estimated one-year risk of relapse with olanzapine was 28.6 percent, compared with 69.9 percent with placebo. Results were similar in the second study (N = 62); patients treated with standard-dose olanzapine had a significantly reduced risk of relapse (p = .018) over one year compared with patients treated with ineffective-dose olanzapine. The estimated one-year risks of relapse were 19.6 percent for standard-dose olanzapine and 45.5 percent for ineffective-dose olanzapine. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine is superior to placebo and ineffective-dose olanzapine in the maintenance therapy of schizophrenia.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1997

Extrapyramidal symptoms and tolerability of olanzapine versus haloperidol in the acute treatment of schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: A relative lack of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS, i.e., the syndromes of dystonia, parkinsonism, akathisia, dyskinesia) is one criterion used to determine whether an antipsychotic is "atypical." The extrapyramidal symptom profiles of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine and the conventional antipsychotic haloperidol were compared in a population of 2606 patients from three well-controlled prospective clinical trials. METHOD: Extrapyramidal symptom data were analyzed for 1796 patients treated with olanzapine (5 to 20 mg/day) and 810 patients treated with haloperidol (5 to 20 mg/day) for up to 6 weeks of therapy. Patients were monitored weekly by three methods of extrapyramidal symptom assessment: (1) detection of extrapyramidal adverse events (signs and symptoms) by casual observation, nonprobing inquiry, and spontaneous report; (2) objective rating scale scores: and (3) use of concomitant anticholinergic medications. Emergence of EPS was assessed by (1) analysis of the incidence of extrapyramidal syndrome categories based on adverse events, (2) the incidence of extrapyramidal syndromes based on categorical analysis of rating scale scores, (3) analysis of mean maximum change in rating scale scores, and (4) categorical analysis of anticholinergic medication use. Outcome of EPS was assessed by (1) analysis of mean change in rating scale scores at endpoint and (2) mean anticholinergic use at endpoint. RESULTS: Olanzapine was statistically significantly (p = .014, p < .001) superior to haloperidol in all four analyses related to emergence of EPS and in the two analyses related to outcome. Furthermore, during acute treatment, statistically significantly fewer patients treated with olanzapine (0.3%) discontinued the study because of any extrapyramidal adverse event than patients treated with haloperidol (2.7%, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Olanzapine exhibited a statistically significantly lower extrapyramidal symptom profile than the conventional antipsychotic haloperidol at comparably effective antipsychotic doses. The lower extrapyramidal symptom profile with olanzapine was evident despite statistically significantly more frequent use of anticholinergic drugs among haloperidol-treated patients. Fewer olanzapine-treated than haloperidol-treated patients discontinued because of EPS, suggesting that olanzapine should contribute to better compliance with longer term maintenance treatment, with minimal anticholinergic-associated events.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Efficacy of olanzapine: an overview of pivotal clinical trials.

Olanzapine is a new "atypical" antipsychotic agent that belongs chemically to the thienobenzodiazepine class. Its relatively greater binding affinity for 5-HT2 compared to D2 receptors makes it similar to the atypical agent clozapine, a serotonin/dopamine antagonist. Four double-blind pivotal studies, which compare olanzapine to placebo and/or haloperidol, are presented. The results suggest that olanzapine is as effective as haloperidol for positive symptoms and more effective than haloperidol for the treatment of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1997

Safety of olanzapine.

Clinical safety data for treatment of acute schizophrenia with olanzapine, a new atypical antipsychotic agent, are summarized. The primary clinical trial safety database included 2500 patients treated with olanzapine, 810 with haloperidol, and 236 with placebo. The overall discontinuation rate from olanzapine treatment was low. Significant adverse events included somnolence, weight gain, and asymptomatic treatment-emergent transaminase elevation. Minimal parkinsonism and akathisia with rare dystonia were noted. No hematotoxicity was noted. The incidence of seizures and sexual dysfunction was rare.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1997

Fluoxetine and concomitant centrally acting medication use during clinical trials of depression: the absence of an effect related to agitation and suicidal behavior.

Concomitant use of psychoactive medications is a common practice in most clinical trials of antidepressant medications. However, the relative therapeutic impact of such use on trial results has not been the subject of much attention. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine whether concomitant use of psychoactive medications confounded the efficacy or safety results of a series of fluoxetine trials. Data were evaluated from 25 randomized, double-blind clinical trials comparing fluoxetine with placebo or a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) in 4,016 patients with major depression. We compared incidence rates of concomitant use of anxiolytics, sedatives, and antipsychotics between treatments. In addition, we compared the change in total score for the 21-Item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD21): incidence rates of any worsening, emergence, or improvement in psychomotor agitation; and incidence of suicidal acts and any worsening, emergence, or improvement in suicidal ideation between treatment groups among patients taking/not taking a sedative. Anxiolytic and antipsychotic drug use was uncommon (8.3% and 0.9% overall use, respectively) and did not substantially increase over time. Sedative drugs were used most often (29.6% overall), but only 29.8% of the fluoxetine-treated patients took one or more doses. Regarding efficacy, fluoxetine was superior to placebo in decreasing HAMD21 total scores among patients taking/not taking sedatives. Effects on safety were assessed by examining agitation and suicidal ideation. Use of sedatives did not affect the change in the HAMD agitation score; scores were similar in patients receiving fluoxetine, placebo, and TCAs. In all treatment groups, anxiolytic use tended to increase as the HAMD anxiety score increased. Fluoxetine was superior to placebo in treating suicidal ideation, and the concomitant use of sedatives did not influence this effect. Overall, concomitant use of psychotropic medications in the fluoxetine depression clinical trials was uncommon. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that the clinical efficacy and safety of fluoxetine were not confounded by the concomitant use of medications.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1996

Is there a relationship between baseline and treatment-associated changes in [3H]-IMI platelet binding and clinical response in major depression?

A peripheral model for the central 5-HT neuron is the characterization of platelet imipramine binding. We studied an outpatient major depressive cohort who fulfilled Research Diagnostic Criteria for agitation. After a 1-week placebo lead-in, subjects were blindly randomized to either imipramine (IMI) or fluoxetine (FLU) during an 8-week, double-blind study period. Thirty-three subjects (15 IMI, 18 FLU) provided both baseline and endpoint samples for the platelet [3H]-IMI assay. Depression efficacy was comparable across the two treatments, whereas FLU was significantly more effective in reducing secondary anxiolysis (p = .023). Discontinuations due to an adverse event were significantly more frequent with IMI than FLU (p < .01). Baseline affinity (KD) was mildly predictive of change in the HAMD (r = -.22; p = .07). Whereas baseline to endpoint density (Bmax) changes (delta) were similar for IMI (183 +/- 329 fmol/mg) and FLU (196 +/- 402 fmol/mg), a statistically significant treatment difference in delta KD emerged (IMI -0.005 +/- 0.010 pmol/ml versus FLU 0.008 +/- 0.013 at p = 004). Moreover, the changes in KD and HAMD17 trended to a positive correlation among only the FLU-treated subjects (4 = 0.406, p = .095). The clinical effects of 5-HT-based selective antidepressant may be reflected by dynamic changes in the platelet 5-HT uptake apparatus. These data suggest that the baseline confirmational status of the [3H]-IMI:5-HT transporter may reflect a "capacity" for a treatment response.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1996

Cognitive function in schizophrenic patients.

Cognitive impairment is a relatively frequent aspect of schizophrenia. Deficits are most prominent in tasks involving attention, memory, and executive function. Although some research suggests that deterioration is progressive, these deficits appear to be relatively stable over time. Imaging and biochemical studies show that schizophrenia is characterized by a number of morphological, hemodynamic, and neurochemical abnormalities within systems integrating the cortex, temporal lobes, and various limbic structures. Neurochemical assays suggest that the neurotransmitters serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate play a significant role in the disease-associated decrement. Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia impedes psychosocial performance and eventual reintegration into society and is therefore an especially relevant target in the development of new therapeutic modalities. Atypical agents, such as clozapine and olanzapine, hold special promise in this area.

Antipsychotic Agents↗

PubMed1995

Fluoxetine.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic↗