Inflammatory processes linked to major depression and schizophrenic disorders and the effects of polypharmacy in psychiatry: evidence from a longitudinal study of 279 patients under therapy

Polypharmacy in psychiatry and weight gain: longitudinal study of 832 patients hospitalized for depression or schizophrenia, along with data of 3180 students from Europe, the U.S., South America, and China

Epidemiologic data indicate that overweight and obesity are on the rise worldwide. Psychiatric patients are particularly vulnerable in this respect as they have an increased prevalence of overweight and obesity, and often experience rapid, highly undesirable weight gain under psychotropic drug treatment. Current treatment strategies in psychiatry are oriented towards polypharmacy, so that the information on drug-induced weight gain from earlier monotherapy studies is of very limited validity. We have analyzed the longitudinal data of 832 inpatients with ICD-10 diagnoses of either F2 (schizophrenia; n = 282) or F3 (major depression; n = 550) with the goal of ranking treatment regimens in terms of weight gain, side effects, and response to treatment. The patient data were complemented by the data of 3180 students aged 18-22 years, with which we aimed to identify factors that enable the early detection and prevention of obesity and mental health problems. After 3 weeks of treatment, 47.7% of F2 patients and 54.9% of F3 patients showed a weight gain of 2 kg and more. Major predictive factors were "starting weight" (r = 0.115), "concurrent medications" (r = 0.176), and "increased appetite"(r = 0.275). Between 11 and 30% of the observed variance in weight gain could be explained by these factors, complemented by sex and age. The comparison between monotherapy (n = 409) and polypharmacy (n = 399) revealed significant drawbacks for polypharmacy: higher weight gain (p = 0.0005), more severe side effects (p = 0.0011), and lower response rates (F2: p = 0.0008); F3: p = 0.0101). The data of 3180 students made it clear that overweight and obesity often begin early in life among those affected, and are interconnected with personality traits, while increasing the risk of developing psychosomatic disturbances, mental health problems, or somatic illnesses. Although the available data did not readily lead to a comprehensive, clinically applicable model of unwanted weight gain, our results have nevertheless demonstrated that there are ways to successfully counteract such weight gain at early stages of treatment.

Analysis of genetic diversity in patients with major psychiatric disorders versus healthy controls: A molecular-genetic study of 1698 subjects genotyped for 100 candidate genes (549 SNPs)

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed the extent to which irregularities in genetic diversity separate psychiatric patients from healthy controls.

METHODS

Genetic diversity was quantified through multidimensional "gene vectors" assembled from 4 to 8 polymorphic SNPs located within each of 100 candidate genes. The number of different genotypic patterns observed per gene was called the gene's "diversity index".

RESULTS

The diversity indices were found to be only weakly correlated with their constituent number of SNPs (20.5 % explained variance), thus suggesting that genetic diversity is an intrinsic gene property that has evolved over the course of evolution. Significant deviations from "normal" diversity values were found for (1) major depression; (2) Alzheimer's disease; and (3) schizoaffective disorders. Almost one third of the genes were correlated with each other, with correlations ranging from 0.0303 to 0.7245. The central finding of this study was the discovery of "singular genes" characterized by distinctive genotypic patterns that appeared exclusively in patients but not in healthy controls. Neural Nets yielded nonlinear classifiers that correctly identified up to 90 % of patients. Overlaps between diagnostic subgroups on the genotype level suggested that (1) diagnoses-crossing vulnerabilities are likely involved in the pathogenesis of major psychiatric disorders; (2) clinically defined diagnoses may not constitute etiological entities.

CONCLUSION

Detailed analyses of the variation of genotypic patterns in genes along with the correlation between genes lead to nonlinear classifiers that enable very robust separation between psychiatric patients and healthy controls on the genotype level.

Polypharmacy Among Patients With Major Depressive Disorder and Co-occurring Substance Use Disorders in a Psychiatric Hospital Setting: Prevalence and Risk Factors

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is common among patients admitted to a psychiatric hospital who frequently present with comorbid conditions such as substance use disorders (up to 50%). Polypharmacy (ie, being prescribed 3 or more medications) may be relatively common in dual-diagnosis patients. This study sought to examine prevalence and risk factors associated with psychotropic polypharmacy in hospitalized patients with MDD and co-occurring SUDs.

METHODS

An electronic chart review was conducted with 1315 individuals admitted to a psychiatric hospital; 505 (38.4%) were identified as having co-occurring MDD + SUD. We examined psychotropic polypharmacy and clinical severity to explore risk for concerning drug interactions.

RESULTS

Potentially problematic polypharmacy patterns were identified among those with MDD + SUD and were related to negative clinical outcomes, particularly in terms of increased sedation potential for individuals with an opioid use disorder (OUD). Groups at the highest risk for polypharmacy included patients who were female, older in age, lower in functioning, and presenting with a co-occurring OUD. Having an OUD was associated with particularly risky polypharmacy combinations, while having a cannabis use disorder was associated with the least polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Results highlight a high prevalence of polypharmacy among a group that has an elevated risk for negative outcomes. There is a continued need to improve identification of complex patient presentations and adjust medications in a hospital setting to improve treatment outcomes and reduce future mortality.

Detailing the effects of polypharmacy in psychiatry: longitudinal study of 320 patients hospitalized for depression or schizophrenia

Current treatment standards in psychiatry are oriented towards polypharmacy, that is, patients receive combinations of several antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, hypnotics, antihistamines, and anticholinergics, along with other somatic treatments. In tandem with the beneficial effects of psychopharmacological drug treatment, patients experience significant adverse reactions which appear to have become more frequent and more severe with the rise of ubiquitous polypharmacy. In this study, we aimed to assess today's acute inpatient treatment of depressive and schizophrenic disorders with focus on therapeutic strategies, medications, adverse side effects, time course of recovery, and efficacy of treatments. Of particular interest was the weighing of the benefits and drawbacks of polypharmacy regimens. We recruited a total of 320 patients hospitalized at three residential mental health treatment centers with a diagnosis of either schizophrenic (ICD-10: "F2x.x"; n = 94; "F2 patients") or depressive disorders (ICD-10: "F3x.x"; n = 226; "F3 patients"). The study protocol included (1) assessment of previous history by means of the SADS Syndrome Check List SSCL-16 (lifetime version); (2) repeated measurements over 5 weeks assessing the time course of improvement by the Hamilton Depression Scale HAM-D and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale PANSS, along with medications and adverse side effects through the Medication and Side Effects Inventory MEDIS; and (3) the collection of blood samples from which DNA and serum were extracted. Polypharmacy was by far the most common treatment regimen (85%) in this study. On average, patients received 4.50 ± 2.68 medications, consisting of 3.30 ± 1.84 psychotropic drugs, plus 0.79 ± 1.13 medications that alleviate adverse side effects, plus 0.41 ± 0.89 other somatic medications. The treating psychiatrists appeared to be the main determining factor in this context, while «previous history» and «severity at baseline» played a minor role, if at all. Adverse drug reactions were found to be an inherent component of polypharmacy and tended to have a 2-3 times higher incidence compared to monotherapy. Severe adverse reactions could not be attributed to a particular drug or drug combination. Rather, the empirical data suggested that severe side effects can be triggered by virtually all combinations of drugs, provided patients have a respective vulnerability. In terms of efficacy, there were no advantages of polypharmacy over monotherapy. The results of this study underlined the fact that polypharmacy regimens are not equally suited for every patient. Specifically, such regimens appeared to have a negative impact on treatment outcome and to obfuscate the "natural" time course of recovery through a multitude of interfering factors. Evidence clearly speaks against starting just every therapeutic intervention in psychiatry with a combination of psychopharmaceuticals. We think that it is time for psychiatry to reconsider its treatment strategies, which are far too one-sidedly fixated on psychopharmacology and pay far too little attention to alternative approaches, especially in mild cases where psychotherapy without concurrent medication should still be an option. Also, regular exercises and sports can definitely be an effective therapeutic means in a considerable number of cases. General practitioners (GPs) are particularly in demand here.

Monitoring the effects of therapeutic interventions in depression through self-assessments

The treatment of major psychiatric disorders is an arduous and thorny path for the patients concerned, characterized by polypharmacy, massive adverse side effects, modest prospects of success, and constantly declining response rates. The more important is the early detection of psychiatric disorders prior to the development of clinically relevant symptoms, so that people can benefit from early interventions. A well-proven approach to monitoring mental health relies on voice analysis. This method has been successfully used with psychiatric patients to 'objectively' document the progress of improvement or the onset of relapse. The studies with psychiatric patients over 2-4 weeks demonstrated that daily voice assessments have a notable therapeutic effect in themselves. Therefore, daily voice assessments appear to be a lowthreshold form of therapeutic means that may be realized through self-assessments. To evaluate performance and reliability of this approach, we have carried out a longitudinal study on 82 university students in 3 different countries with daily assessments over 2 weeks. The sample included 41 males (mean age 24.2±3.83 years) and 41 females (mean age 21.6±2.05 years). Unlike other research in the field, this study was not concerned with the classification of individuals in terms of diagnostic categories. The focus lay on the monitoring aspect and the extent to which the effects of therapeutic interventions or of behavioural changes are visible in the results of self-assessment voice analyses. The test persons showed an over-proportionally good adherence to the daily voice analysis scheme. The accumulated data were of generally high quality: sufficiently high signal levels, a very limited number of movement artifacts, and little to no interfering background noise. The method was sufficiently sensitive to detect: i) habituation effects when test persons became used to the daily procedure; and ii) short-term fluctuations that exceeded prespecified thresholds and reached significance. Results are directly interpretable and provide information about what is going well, what is going less well, and where there is a need for action. The proposed self-assessment approach was found to be well-suited to serve as a health-monitoring tool for subjects with an elevated vulnerability to psychiatric disorders or to stress-induced mental health problems. Daily voice assessments are in fact a low-threshold form of therapeutic means that can be realized through selfassessments, that requires only little effort, can be carried out in the test person's own home, and has the potential to strengthen resilience and to induce positive behavioural changes.

Fecal Metabolomics and Network Pharmacology Reveal the Correlations between Constipation and Depression

Constipation and depression are tightly related and often co-occur and coexist in clinic. Yet, the relationships and the underlying mechanisms are still unclear. Fecal metabolomics and network pharmacology were, for the first time, applied to investigate the potential correlations from multiple levels including classic behaviors, metabolomics, and gene targets. The behavioral indicators were analyzed, providing behavioral correlations at a macrolevel. Besides, fecal samples were analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy to screen the shared and the unique metabolites and pathways, revealing correlations from a metabolic perspective. Finally, the disease targets and the functional pathways were obtained via network pharmacology, demonstrating correlations at the molecular level. The correlations between constipation and depression were demonstrated and supported by four-level evidence: (1) general behaviors, (2) gastrointestinal functions, (3) fecal metabolites and pathways, and (4) common gene targets and functional pathways. Especially, the correlations of behaviors and common metabolites showed that metabolites, including choline, betaine, and glycine, were significantly associated with constipation and depression. Besides, inflammation and immune abnormalities and energy metabolism were significantly involved in the mechanisms. The current findings prove the correlations between constipation and depression, and provide a basis for deeply understanding the comorbidities of constipation and depression.

How Shared Is Shared Decision Making? Reaching the Full Potential of Patient-Clinician Collaboration in Mental Health

Shared decision making in mental health is a priority for stakeholders, but faces significant implementation barriers, particularly in settings intended to serve people with serious mental illnesses (SMI). As a result, current levels of shared decision making are low. We highlight these barriers and propose that a novel paradigm, collaborative decision making, will offer conceptual and practical solutions at the systemic and patient/clinician level. Collaborative decision making is tailored for populations like people with SMI and other groups who experience chronic and complex symptoms, along with power imbalances within health systems. Advancing from shared decision making to collaborative decision making clarifies the mission of the model: to facilitate an empowering and recovery-oriented decision-making process that assigns equal power and responsibility to patients and clinicians; to improve alignment of treatment decisions with patient values and priorities; to increase patient trust and confidence in clinicians and the treatment process; and, in the end, to improve treatment engagement, satisfaction, and outcomes. The primary purpose of collaborative decision making is to increase values-aligned care, therefore prioritizing inclusion of patient values, including cultural values and quality of life-related outcomes. Given the broad and constantly changing context of treatment and care for many people with SMI (and also other groups), this model is dynamic and continuously evolving, ready for use across diverse contexts. Implementation of collaborative decision making includes increasing patient knowledge but also patient power, comfort, and confidence. It is one tool to reshape patient-clinician and patient-system relationships and to increase access to value-aligned care for people with SMI and other groups.