Search

Taro Kishi,1 Ikuo Nomura,1 Kenji Sakuma,1 Tsuyoshi Kitajima,1 Kazuo Mishima,2 Nakao Iwata11Department of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan; 2Department of Neuropsychiatry, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, JapanObjective: This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials, investigating the efficacy and tolerability/safety of melatonin receptor agonists, such as ramelteon and melatonin, for patients with bipolar disorder.Methods: We carried out a literature search through PubMed and the Cochrane Library from the date of inception to January 6, 2019. The risk ratio (RR), number needed to treat (NNT), and standardized mean difference (SMD) ±95% CI were calculated. The primary outcome was all-cause discontinuation.Results: We identified three ramelteon (n=746) and two melatonin (n=53) studies. One of these two melatonin studies reported only data on all-cause discontinuation, whereas the other study did not report data relevant for a meta-analysis. We found no significant differences between the treatment and placebo groups regarding all-cause discontinuation, neither individually (p: ramelteon=0.86, melatonin=1.00) nor pooled together (p=0.85). Although we found no significant differences between ramelteon and placebo regarding the relapse due to mania/hypomania or mixed episode; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores; depression scales scores; Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire – Short Form scores; and the incidence of individual adverse events, such as headaches, insomnia, somnolence, anxiety, and dizziness, ramelteon was associated with a lower incidence of relapse due to depression than placebo (RR=0.67, 95% CI=0.48–0.94, p=0.02, NNT=14).Conclusion: Ramelteon might prevent relapse due to depression in patients with bipolar disorder. However, because of the small number of studies included in the present systematic review and meta-analysis, further studies comparing ramelteon and placebo with larger samples of patients with bipolar disorder are warranted. We also did not evaluate the efficacy and safety of melatonin for patients with bipolar disorder in detail.Keywords: ramelteon, melatonin, bipolar disorder, relapse, systematic review, meta-analysis

Taro Kishi,1 Kazuto Oya,1 Yuki Matsui,1,2 Ikuo Nomura,1 Kenji Sakuma,1 Makoto Okuya,1 Yuki Matsuda,3 ,Kiyoshi Fujita,4 Toshihiko Funahashi,2 Reiji Yoshimura,5 Nakao Iwata1 1Department of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi 470-1192, Japan; 2Department of Psychiatry, Jindai Hospital, Toyota, Aichi 470-0361, Japan; 3Department of Psychiatry, Jikei University School of Medicine, Minato-ku, Tokyo105-8461, Japan; 4Department of Psychiatry, Okehazama hospital, Toyoake, Aichi 470-1168, Japan; 5Department of Psychiatry, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Yahatanishi-ku, Kitakyushu, Fukuoka 807-8555, Japan Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of brexpiprazole 4 mg/day (B4) and 2 mg/day (B2) for treating acute schizophrenia. Patients and methods: We performed three categorical meta-analyses (B4 vs placebo, B2 vs placebo, and B4 vs B2) of double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials (DBRCTs) that reported improvements in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores, response rate, Clinical Global Impression–Improvement and Severity (CGI-I and CGI-S) scores, discontinuation rate, and incidence of individual adverse events. Results: We identified three DBRCTs with 1,444 patients. Both B4 and B2 were superior to placebo for PANSS total score (B4: standardized mean difference [SMD] =-0.30, 95% CI =-0.43, -0.17; B2: SMD =-0.30, 95% CI =-0.46, -0.13), PANSS negative score, response rate, CGI-S score, and CGI-I score. B2, but not B4, was superior to placebo for the PANSS positive score. However, there was considerable heterogeneity in the meta-analysis for B4’s PANSS positive score, which disappeared after excluding a 2018 Japanese study from the meta-analysis that included more patients on a high-dose antipsychotic prior to their participation. A meta-analysis that excluded the data from the abovementioned patients showed B4 to be superior to the placebo in terms of the PANSS positive score (SMD =-0.22, 95% CI =-0.40, -0.03). B2, but not B4, was associated with a lower incidence of all-cause discontinuation compared with placebo. Both B4 and B2 were superior to placebo for discontinuation due to adverse events and schizophrenia, but both were associated with a higher incidence of weight gain compared with placebo. B4 was also associated with a higher risk of extrapyramidal symptoms than B2. Conclusion: Both B4 and B2 benefitted patients with schizophrenia, particularly those who were not previously on high-dose antipsychotics. Both the regimens were well-tolerated, but carried a risk of weight gain and extrapyramidal symptoms, although the latter risk was higher for B4 than B2. Keywords: schizophrenia, brexpiprazole 2 mg/day, brexpiprazole 4 mg/day, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale score, response rate, safety outcomes, systematic review, meta-analysis

Probability curves predicting oral food challenge test ( OFC) results based on specific IgE levels are widely used to prevent serious allergic reactions. Although several confounding factors are known to affect probability curves, the main factors that affect OFC outcomes are currently unclear. We hypothesized that an increased total IgE level would reduce allergic reactivity. Medical records of 337 and 266 patients who underwent OFCs for 3.5 g boiled hen's egg white and 3.1 ml raw cow's milk, respectively, were examined retrospectively. We subdivided the patients into three groups based on total IgE levels and age by percentile (<25th, 25-75th, and >75th percentiles), and logistic regression analyses were performed on each group. Patients with higher total IgE levels were significantly less responsive. In addition, age did not significantly affect the OFC results. Therefore, total IgE levels should be taken into account when predicting OFC results based on food-specific IgE levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]