SENTIA: a systematic online monitoring registry for children and adolescents treated with antipsychotics

Risperidone medication errors in children: an analysis of French poison centres data

OBJECTIVES

To describe clinical consequences of risperidone medication errors in children of less than 13 years and to estimate a clinically relevant toxic dose.

METHODS

All cases of risperidone medication errors managed by French Poison Centres from 2001 to 2012 were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were a delay of at least 2 hours between ingestion and request to the FPC in asymptomatic children, an ingested dose above two-fold the maximal daily dose for children above 5 years or any symptomatic patient at the time of first contact.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty cases met our criteria. Median age was 8 years (range 0.9-12) and 28.1% were aged 5 years or less. Causes of the error were an incorrect dose in treated children (84.2%) or a dose given to a wrong child (15.8%). The median ingested dose was 0.1 mg/kg or 3.3-fold the maximum recommended dose. Overall, 59 children had no symptoms, 95 experienced minor symptoms and six moderate symptoms. Somnolence/sedation was the most common (73.3%). Of the 17 children who developed extrapyramidal disorders, all had minor or moderate symptoms and only five required a symptomatic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Risperidone medication errors in children cause minimal effects. Somnolence and mild to moderate extrapyramidal reactions were the main features of toxicity, and significant cardiac or other neurological features were not observed. No case with severe toxicity was noted. At home surveillance can be proposed for children exposed to a dose ≤0.15 mg/kg.

Enhancing metabolic monitoring for children and adolescents using second-generation antipsychotics

The prevalence of children and adolescents using second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) has increased significantly in recent years. In this population, SGAs are used to treat mood and behavioural disorders although considered 'off-label' or not approved for these indications. Metabolic monitoring is the systematic physical health assessment of antipsychotic users utilized to detect cardiovascular and endocrine side effects and prevent adverse events such as weight gain, hyperglycaemia, hyperlipidemia, and arrhythmias. This practice ensures safe and efficacious SGA use among children and adolescents. Despite widely available, evidence-based metabolic monitoring guidelines, rates of monitoring continue to be suboptimal; this exposes children to the unnecessary risk of developing poor cardiovascular health and long-term disease. In this discursive paper, existing approaches to metabolic monitoring as well as challenges to implementing monitoring guidelines in practice are explored. The strengths and weaknesses of providing metabolic monitoring across outpatient psychiatry, primary care, and collaborative community settings are discussed. We suggest that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to improving metabolic monitoring care for children and adolescents using SGA in all settings. However, we advocate for a pragmatic global approach to enhance safety of children and adolescents taking SGAs through collaboration among healthcare disciplines with a focus on integrating nurses as champions of metabolic monitoring.

Patient, Treatment, and Health Care Utilization Variables Associated with Adherence to Metabolic Monitoring Practices in Children and Adolescents Taking Second-Generation Antipsychotics

OBJECTIVE

Children and adolescents with a range of psychiatric disorders are increasingly being prescribed atypical or second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). While SGAs are effective at treating conduct and behavioural symptoms, they infer significant cardiometabolic risk. This study aims to explore what patient, treatment, and health care utilization variables are associated with adherence to Canadian Alliance for Monitoring Effectiveness and Safety of Antipsychotics in Children (CAMESA) metabolic monitoring guidelines.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review of 294 children and adolescents accessing a large outpatient psychiatry setting within a 2-year study period (2014-2016) was conducted. Baseline and follow-up metabolic monitoring, demographic, treatment, and health care utilization variables were then assessed over a 1-year period of interest.

RESULTS

Metabolic monitoring practices did not adhere to CAMESA guidelines and were very poor over the 1-year observation period. There were significant differences between children (ages 4-12 years, n = 99) and adolescents (ages 13-18 years, n = 195). In adolescents, factors associated with any baseline metabolic monitoring were a higher number of psychiatry visits (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10 to 1.41), longer duration of contact (OR, 14; 95% CI, 2.31 to 82.4), and use of other non-SGA medications (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.17 to 8.94). Among children, having an emergency room visit (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.01 to 11.71) and taking aripiprazole (OR, 7.4; 95% CI, 2.02 to 27.45) increased the odds of receiving baseline metabolic monitoring.

CONCLUSION

Findings from this study highlight the need for better metabolic monitoring for children and adolescents taking SGAs. Enhanced focus on opportunities for multidisciplinary collaboration is needed to improve the quality of care offered to this population.

A Review of Methods for Monitoring Adverse Events in Pediatric Psychopharmacology Clinical Trials

Pediatric psychotropic prescription rates are rising, emphasizing the need for careful monitoring of drug safety in this population. Currently, no standardized assessments are used in clinical trials for adverse event (AE) elicitation focused on long-term drug treatment in pediatric patients. Despite a lack of standardized AE elicitation methods in psychiatric clinical trials, it is clear that psychiatric medications have developmentally dependent AEs that differ from those observed in adults. In this review, we discuss the use of general inquiry elicitation, drug-specific checklists, and systematic elicitation scales for AE reporting in pediatric psychopharmacology trials. The checklists evaluated include the Barkley Side Effect Rating Scales (SERS), the Pittsburg side effect rating scale, and the Systematic Monitoring of Adverse events Related to TreatmentS (SMARTS) checklist. The systematic assessment scales discussed include the Systematic Assessment for Treatment of Emergent Events (SAFTEE) and the Safety Monitoring Uniform Report Form (SMURF). We review the advantages and disadvantages of each method and discuss the need for optimal assessment of AEs. AE instruments that are created and utilized for pediatric psychiatric trials must begin to incorporate symptoms that are relevant to this population and account for the nature of the disorders to better characterize treatment-emergent AEs and monitor long-term safety.

Hepatic Safety of Atypical Antipsychotics: Current Evidence and Future Directions

The newer atypical antipsychotic agents (AAPs) represent an attractive therapeutic option for a wide range of psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar mania, because of the reduced risk of disabling extrapyramidal symptoms. However, their growing use has raised questions about their tolerability over the endocrine, metabolic, and cardiovascular axes. Indeed, atypical antipsychotic drugs are associated, to differing extents, with mild elevation of aminotransferases related to weight gain, AAP-induced metabolic syndrome, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Although the hepatic safety of new AAPs seems improved over that of chlorpromazine, they can occasionally cause idiosyncratic liver injury with varying phenotypes and, rarely, lead to acute liver failure. However, AAPs are a group of heterogeneous, chemically unrelated compounds with distinct pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties and substantially different safety profiles, which precludes the notion of a class effect for hepatotoxicity risk and highlights the need for an individualized therapeutic approach. We discuss the current evidence on the hepatotoxicity potential of AAPs, the emerging underlying mechanisms, and the limitations inherent to this group of drugs for both establishing a proper causality assessment and developing strategies for risk management.

Atypical antipsychotics for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths

BACKGROUND

This is an update of the original Cochrane Review, last published in 2012 (Loy 2012). Children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders may present to health services, where they may be treated with atypical antipsychotics. There is increasing usage of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of disruptive behaviour disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect and safety of atypical antipsychotics, compared to placebo, for treating disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths. The aim was to evaluate each drug separately rather than the class effect, on the grounds that each atypical antipsychotic has different pharmacologic binding profile (Stahl 2013) and that this is clinically more useful.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2017, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of atypical antipsychotics versus placebo in children and youths aged up to and including 18 years, with a diagnosis of disruptive behaviour disorders, including comorbid ADHD. The primary outcomes were aggression, conduct problems and adverse events (i.e. weight gain/changes and metabolic parameters). The secondary outcomes were general functioning, noncompliance, other adverse events, social functioning, family functioning, parent satisfaction and school functioning.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors (JL and KS) independently collected, evaluated and extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence. We performed meta-analyses for each of our primary outcomes, except for metabolic parameters, due to inadequate outcome data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 trials (spanning 2000 to 2014), involving a total of 896 children and youths aged five to 18 years. Bar two trials, all came from an outpatient setting. Eight trials assessed risperidone, one assessed quetiapine and one assessed ziprasidone. Nine trials assessed acute efficacy (over four to 10 weeks); one of which combined treatment with stimulant medication and parent training. One trial was a six-month maintenance trial assessing symptom recurrence.The quality of the evidence ranged from low to moderate. Nine studies had some degree of pharmaceutical support/funding. Primary outcomesUsing the mean difference (MD), we combined data from three studies (238 participants) in a meta-analysis of aggression, as assessed using the Aberrant Behaviour Checklist (ABC) ‒ Irritability subscale. We found that youths treated with risperidone show reduced aggression compared to youths treated with placebo (MD -6.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.79 to -4.19; low-quality evidence). Using the standardised mean difference (SMD), we pooled data from two risperidone trials (190 participants), which used different scales: the Overt Aggression Scale ‒ Modified (OAS-M) Scale and the Antisocial Behaviour Scale (ABS); as the ABS had two subscales that could not be combined (reactive and proactive aggression), we performed two separate analyses. When we combined the ABS Reactive subscale and the OAS-M, the SMD was -1.30 in favour of risperidone (95% CI -2.21 to -0.40, moderate-quality evidence). When we combined the ABS Proactive subscale and OAS-M, the SMD was -1.12 (95% CI -2.30 to 0.06, moderate-quality evidence), suggesting uncertainty about the estimate of effect, as the confidence intervals overlapped the null value. In summary, there was some evidence that aggression could be reduced by risperidone. Data were lacking on other atypical antipsychotics, like quetiapine and ziprasidone, with regard to their effects on aggression.We pooled data from two risperidone trials (225 participants) in a meta-analysis of conduct problems, as assessed using the Nisonger Child Behaviour Rating Form ‒ Conduct Problem subscale (NCBRF-CP). This yielded a final mean score that was 8.61 points lower in the risperidone group compared to the placebo group (95% CI -11.49 to -5.74; moderate-quality evidence).We investigated the effect on weight by performing two meta-analyses. We wanted to distinguish between the effects of antipsychotic medication only and the combined effect with stimulants, since the latter can have a counteracting effect on weight gain due to appetite suppression. Pooling two trials with risperidone only (138 participants), we found that participants on risperidone gained 2.37 kilograms (kg) more (95% CI 0.26 to 4.49; moderate-quality evidence) than those on placebo. When we added a trial where all participants received a combination of risperidone and stimulants, we found that those on the combined treatment gained 2.14 kg more (95% CI 1.04 to 3.23; 3 studies; 305 participants; low-quality evidence) than those on placebo. Secondary outcomesOut of the 10 included trials, three examined general functioning, social functioning and parent satisfaction. No trials examined family or school functioning. Data on non-compliance/attrition rate and other adverse events were available from all 10 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that in the short term risperidone may reduce aggression and conduct problems in children and youths with disruptive behaviour disorders There is also evidence that this intervention is associated with significant weight gain.For aggression, the difference in scores of 6.49 points on the ABC ‒ Irritability subscale (range 0 to 45) may be clinically significant. It is challenging to interpret the clinical significance of the differential findings on two different ABS subscales as it may be difficult to distinguish between reactive and proactive aggression in clinical practice. For conduct problems, the difference in scores of 8.61 points on the NCBRF-CP (range 0 to 48) is likely to be clinically significant. Weight gain remains a concern.Caution is required in interpreting the results due to the limitations of current evidence and the small number of high-quality trials. There is a lack of evidence to support the use of quetiapine, ziprasidone or any other atypical antipsychotic for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths and no evidence for children under five years of age. It is uncertain to what degree the efficacy found in clinical trials will translate into real-life clinical practice. Given the effectiveness of parent-training interventions in the management of these disorders, and the somewhat equivocal evidence on the efficacy of medication, it is important not to use medication alone. This is consistent with current clinical guidelines.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Prolonged Corrected QT Interval Among Children and Adolescents Treated With Antipsychotic Medications: A Long-Term Follow-Up in a Real-World Population

PURPOSE

This study aimed to describe the prevalence of corrected QT (QTc) interval disorders and the possible predisposing factors in children and adolescents treated with antipsychotic (AP) medications in a real-world population with a long-term follow-up.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the SafEty of NeurolepTics in Infancy and Adolescence (SENTIA) registry (https://sentia.es). The SENTIA includes patients younger than 18 years who are currently taking or initiating treatment with AP medications and have agreed to participate in the registry. The SENTIA's follow-up includes an electrocardiogram (ECG) assessment before starting treatment and at 1, 3, and 6 months after treatment initiation or after any changes in the patient's AP medication treatment. Thereafter, all participants undergo an ECG every 6 months. A QTc interval more than 450 milliseconds, increases in QTc interval of 60 milliseconds or more, or QTc dispersion more than 100 milliseconds were considered abnormal.

RESULTS

Since January 1, 2011, 101 patients have been enrolled in SENTIA and have had at least 1 ECG assessment. The mean age at inclusion was 11.5 years; 75% of the patients were men. The mean follow-up time was 20.0 ± 15.1 months. The most frequently prescribed AP medications were risperidone (52.2%) and aripiprazole (45.5%). Seven patients (6.9%) had abnormal changes in QTc. No patient had a QTc interval more than 500 milliseconds. All patients were asymptomatic. The QTc changes were observed at different times of exposure, with a range of 1 to 39 months after beginning AP treatment. Concomitant use of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder drugs seemed a possible factor associated with QTc disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients should undergo a baseline ECG assessment before starting AP medication treatment, particularly patients with concomitant use of attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder drugs or a family/personal history of heart disease.

Therapeutic drug monitoring as a measure of proactive pharmacovigilance in child and adolescent psychiatry

INTRODUCTION

Off-label or unlicensed use of psychotropic drugs is common rather than the exception in child and adolescent psychiatry. This use exposes patients to an unknown additional risk of ineffective or even harmful treatment. In addition, treatment with psychotropic drugs during a period of life when the patient undergoes marked developmental hormonal and neurobiological changes often requires different dosing regimes in later life and may result in adverse drug reactions, which are either not seen in adults at all or not in the same frequency. Areas covered: Given these critical safety issues, efficient pharmacovigilance methods as part of routine practice are essential for the improvement of patient care. The purpose of this article is to introduce methods to increase the safety of psychotropic drug use in youngsters. In particular, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) as a routine measure of proactive pharmacovigilance is discussed. Expert opinion: Given the special features of psychopharmacological therapy in children and adolescents in day-to-day clinical practise, proactive surveillance by using a close standardized 'patient monitoring' and long-term follow-up with TDM is very important. This approach could minimize the risk of exposing paediatric patients to ineffective treatments of uncertain or unknown risks.

Unmet needs in paediatric psychopharmacology: Present scenario and future perspectives

Paediatric psychopharmacology holds great promise in two equally important areas of enormous biomedical and social impact, namely the treatment of behavioural abnormalities in children and adolescents, and the prevention of psychiatric disorders with adolescent- or adult-onset. Yet, in striking contrast, pharmacological treatment options presently available in child and adolescent psychiatry are dramatically limited. The most important currently unmet needs in paediatric psychopharmacology are: the frequent off-label prescription of medications to children and adolescents based exclusively on data from randomized controlled studies involving adult patients; the frequent lack of age-specific dose, long-term efficacy and tolerability/safety data; the lack of effective medications for many paediatric psychiatric disorders, most critically autism spectrum disorder; the scarcity and limitations of randomized placebo-controlled trials in paediatric psychopharmacology; the unexplored potential for the prevention of psychiatric disorders with adolescent- and adult-onset; the current lack of biomarkers to predict treatment response and severe adverse effects; the need for better preclinical data to foster the successful development of novel drug therapies; and the effective dissemination of evidence-based treatments to the general public, to better inform patients and families of the benefits and risks of pharmacological interventions during development. Priorities and strategies are proposed to overcome some of these limitations, including the European Child and Adolescent Clinical Psychopharmacology Network, as an overarching Pan-European infrastructure aimed at reliably carrying out much needed psychopharmacological trials in children and adolescents, in order to fill the identified gaps and improve overall outcomes.