Suppr超能文献

确定阿立哌唑与重度抑郁症患者迟发性运动障碍和/或肌张力障碍之间是否存在明确的因果关系,第2部分:临床前和早期人体概念验证研究

Determining Whether a Definitive Causal Relationship Exists Between Aripiprazole and Tardive Dyskinesia and/or Dystonia in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder, Part 2: Preclinical and Early Phase Human Proof of Concept Studies.

作者信息

Macaluso Matthew, Flynn Alexandra, Preskorn Sheldon

机构信息

MACALUSO and PRESKORN: Department of Psychiatry, University of Kansas School of Medicine-Wichita, Wichita, KS FLYNN: Robert J. Dole VA Medical Center, Wichita, KS.

出版信息

J Psychiatr Pract. 2016 Jan;22(1):42-9. doi: 10.1097/PRA.0000000000000124.

Abstract

This series of columns has 3 main goals: (1) to explain class warnings as used by the United States Food and Drug Administration, (2) to increase awareness of movement disorders that may occur in patients treated with antipsychotic medications, and (3) to understand why clinicians should refrain from immediately assuming a diagnosis of tardive dyskinesia/dystonia (TD) in patients treated with antipsychotics. The first column in this series began with the case of a 76-year-old man with major depressive disorder who developed orofacial dyskinesias while being treated with aripiprazole as an antidepressant augmentation strategy. It was alleged that a higher than intended dose of aripiprazole (ie, 20 mg/d for 2 wk followed by 10 mg/d for 4 wk instead of the intended dose of 2 mg/d) was the cause of the dyskinetic movements in this man, and the authors were asked to review the case and give their opinion. The principal basis for this theory of causation was the class warning about TD in the package insert for aripiprazole. The rationale for concluding aripiprazole caused TD in the 76-year-old man led to this series of columns about aripiprazole, its potential--if any--to cause TD, and the presence of a class warning about TD in its package insert. The central point is to illustrate why class warnings exist and their implications for practice. The first column in this series focused on the historical background, incidence, prevalence, risk factors, and clinical presentations of tardive and spontaneous dyskinesias and concluded with a discussion of diagnostic considerations explaining why clinicians should avoid making a diagnosis of TD until a thorough differential diagnosis has been considered. This second column in the series reviews the pharmacology of aripiprazole and the preclinical and phase I translational human studies that suggest aripiprazole should have a low to nonexistent risk of causing TD compared with other antipsychotics. The third column in the series will review the systematic clinical trial data and "real-world" data on TD and the use of aripiprazole as adjunctive treatment with antidepressants for major depressive disorder to see whether these data support the conclusion of a low to nonexistent relationship between aripiprazole treatment and the development of TD. The fourth and final column in the series will consider the type of study that would need to be performed to avoid a specific class warning, focusing on the TD class warning as an example and discussing why such studies are rarely done.

摘要

本系列专栏有3个主要目标:(1)解释美国食品药品监督管理局使用的类别警示;(2)提高对接受抗精神病药物治疗的患者可能出现的运动障碍的认识;(3)理解临床医生为何应避免在接受抗精神病药物治疗的患者中立即诊断为迟发性运动障碍/肌张力障碍(TD)。本系列的第一篇专栏文章始于一个病例,一名76岁患有重度抑郁症的男性,在使用阿立哌唑作为抗抑郁增效策略进行治疗时出现了口面部运动障碍。据称,该男性运动障碍的原因是阿立哌唑剂量高于预期(即20mg/d,持续2周,随后10mg/d,持续4周,而不是预期的2mg/d),作者被要求审查该病例并发表意见。这一因果关系理论的主要依据是阿立哌唑药品说明书中关于TD的类别警示。认定阿立哌唑导致该76岁男性发生TD的理由引发了本系列关于阿立哌唑的专栏文章,探讨其导致TD的可能性(如果有的话)以及药品说明书中存在的关于TD的类别警示。核心要点是说明类别警示为何存在及其对临床实践的影响。本系列的第一篇专栏文章聚焦于迟发性和自发性运动障碍的历史背景、发病率、患病率、危险因素及临床表现,并在结尾讨论了诊断考量因素,解释了临床医生在进行全面鉴别诊断之前为何应避免诊断为TD。本系列的第二篇专栏文章回顾了阿立哌唑的药理学以及临床前和I期转化人体研究,这些研究表明与其他抗精神病药物相比,阿立哌唑导致TD的风险较低或不存在。本系列的第三篇专栏文章将回顾关于TD以及使用阿立哌唑作为重度抑郁症抗抑郁辅助治疗的系统临床试验数据和“真实世界”数据,以查看这些数据是否支持阿立哌唑治疗与TD发生之间存在低关联或无关联的结论。本系列的第四篇也是最后一篇专栏文章将考虑为避免特定类别警示需要进行的研究类型,以TD类别警示为例进行重点讨论,并探讨为何此类研究很少开展。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验