Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis: Efficacy and Safety of Antipsychotics vs Antiepileptics or Lithium for Acute Mania in Children and Adolescents.

IF 9.2 1区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS
Giovanni Vita, Viktor B Nöhles, Giovanni Ostuzzi, Corrado Barbui, Federico Tedeschi, Fabiola H Heuer, Amanda Keller, Melissa P DelBello, Jeffrey A Welge, Thomas J Blom, Robert A Kowatch, Christoph U Correll
{"title":"Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis: Efficacy and Safety of Antipsychotics vs Antiepileptics or Lithium for Acute Mania in Children and Adolescents.","authors":"Giovanni Vita, Viktor B Nöhles, Giovanni Ostuzzi, Corrado Barbui, Federico Tedeschi, Fabiola H Heuer, Amanda Keller, Melissa P DelBello, Jeffrey A Welge, Thomas J Blom, Robert A Kowatch, Christoph U Correll","doi":"10.1016/j.jaac.2024.07.920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and mood stabilizers (MSs) in youth with a bipolar disorder type I (BD-I) manic/mixed episode.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic PubMed/Embase/PsycInfo literature search until December 31, 2023, for randomized trials of SGAs or MSs in patients ≤18 years of age with BD-I manic/mixed episode was conducted. The study included a network meta-analysis comparing treatments regarding mania symptoms and mania response (co-primary outcomes), and secondary efficacy and tolerability outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighteen studies (n = 2844, mean age = 11.74, female participants = 48.0%, mean study duration = 5.4 weeks) comparing 6 SGAs (aripiprazole, asenapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone) and 4 MSs (lithium, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, and valproate) were meta-analyzed. All 6 SGAs outperformed placebo in reducing manic symptomatology, including risperidone (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.18, 95% CI = -0.92, -1.45, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis [CINeMA] = moderate confidence), olanzapine (SMD = -0.77, 95% CI = -0.36, -1.18, low confidence), aripiprazole (SMD = -0.67, 95% CI = -0.33, -1.01, moderate confidence), quetiapine (SMD = -0.60, 95% CI = -0.32, -0.87, high confidence), asenapine (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI = -0.19, -0.89, moderate confidence), and ziprasidone (SMD = -0.43, 95% CI = -0.17, 0.70, low confidence), whereas no mood stabilizer outperformed placebo. Concerning mania response, risperidone (Risk ratio [RR] = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.88, 3.54, low confidence), olanzapine (RR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.33, 3.54, very low confidence), aripiprazole (RR = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.44, 2.92, low confidence), quetiapine (RR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.45n 2.47, moderate confidence), asenapine (RR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.28, 2.55, very low confidence) and lithium (RR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.00, 1.83, p = .049, very low confidence) outperformed placebo, without superiority of other MSs vs placebo. Individually, risperidone was more efficacious in reducing manic symptomatology than all other comparators, except olanzapine and topiramate, yet with low/very low confidence, and was associated with increased prolactin and glucose. Pooled together, SGAs outperformed both placebo and MSs for mania symptom reduction (SMD = -0.68, 95% CI = -0.86, -0.51 and SMD = -0.61, 95% CI = -0.82, -0.40, moderate confidence), and mania response (RR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.53, 2.24 and RR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.33, 2.04, moderate confidence) without differences between MSs and placebo. There were no significant treatment-placebo differences for all-cause discontinuation, whereas lithium, ziprasidone, and oxcarbazepine were associated with more adverse event-related drop-outs than placebo. Most SGAs were associated with more sedation, weight gain, and metabolic issues vs placebo and MSs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SGAs were more efficacious than placebo and MSs in treating acute mania symptoms, however, their use must be carefully weighed against important side effects.</p>","PeriodicalId":17186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2024.07.920","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and mood stabilizers (MSs) in youth with a bipolar disorder type I (BD-I) manic/mixed episode.

Method: A systematic PubMed/Embase/PsycInfo literature search until December 31, 2023, for randomized trials of SGAs or MSs in patients ≤18 years of age with BD-I manic/mixed episode was conducted. The study included a network meta-analysis comparing treatments regarding mania symptoms and mania response (co-primary outcomes), and secondary efficacy and tolerability outcomes.

Results: Eighteen studies (n = 2844, mean age = 11.74, female participants = 48.0%, mean study duration = 5.4 weeks) comparing 6 SGAs (aripiprazole, asenapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone) and 4 MSs (lithium, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, and valproate) were meta-analyzed. All 6 SGAs outperformed placebo in reducing manic symptomatology, including risperidone (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.18, 95% CI = -0.92, -1.45, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis [CINeMA] = moderate confidence), olanzapine (SMD = -0.77, 95% CI = -0.36, -1.18, low confidence), aripiprazole (SMD = -0.67, 95% CI = -0.33, -1.01, moderate confidence), quetiapine (SMD = -0.60, 95% CI = -0.32, -0.87, high confidence), asenapine (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI = -0.19, -0.89, moderate confidence), and ziprasidone (SMD = -0.43, 95% CI = -0.17, 0.70, low confidence), whereas no mood stabilizer outperformed placebo. Concerning mania response, risperidone (Risk ratio [RR] = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.88, 3.54, low confidence), olanzapine (RR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.33, 3.54, very low confidence), aripiprazole (RR = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.44, 2.92, low confidence), quetiapine (RR = 1.89, 95% CI = 1.45n 2.47, moderate confidence), asenapine (RR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.28, 2.55, very low confidence) and lithium (RR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.00, 1.83, p = .049, very low confidence) outperformed placebo, without superiority of other MSs vs placebo. Individually, risperidone was more efficacious in reducing manic symptomatology than all other comparators, except olanzapine and topiramate, yet with low/very low confidence, and was associated with increased prolactin and glucose. Pooled together, SGAs outperformed both placebo and MSs for mania symptom reduction (SMD = -0.68, 95% CI = -0.86, -0.51 and SMD = -0.61, 95% CI = -0.82, -0.40, moderate confidence), and mania response (RR = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.53, 2.24 and RR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.33, 2.04, moderate confidence) without differences between MSs and placebo. There were no significant treatment-placebo differences for all-cause discontinuation, whereas lithium, ziprasidone, and oxcarbazepine were associated with more adverse event-related drop-outs than placebo. Most SGAs were associated with more sedation, weight gain, and metabolic issues vs placebo and MSs.

Conclusion: SGAs were more efficacious than placebo and MSs in treating acute mania symptoms, however, their use must be carefully weighed against important side effects.

系统综述和网络元分析:抗精神病药与抗癫痫药或锂治疗儿童和青少年急性躁狂症的疗效和安全性对比。
目的:比较第二代抗精神病药物(SGAs)和情绪稳定剂(MSs比较第二代抗精神病药(SGAs)和情绪稳定剂(MSs)对躁狂/混合型双相情感障碍(BD-I)青年患者的治疗效果:方法:系统检索PubMed/Embase/PsycInfo文献,检索期至2023年12月31日,检索针对18岁以下BD-I躁狂/混合发作患者的SGAs或MSs随机试验。网络荟萃分析比较了有关躁狂症状和躁狂反应(共同主要结果)以及次要疗效和耐受性结果的治疗方法:18项研究(n=2844,平均年龄=11.74,女性=48.0%,平均研究时间=5.4周)比较了6种SGA(阿立哌唑、阿塞那平、奥氮平、喹硫平、利培酮、齐拉西酮)和4种MS(锂、奥卡西平、托吡酯、丙戊酸钠)。所有六种SGA在减少躁狂症状方面的表现均优于安慰剂,包括利培酮(SMD=-1.18,95%CI=-0.92;-1.45,CINeMA=中等置信度)、奥氮平(SMD=-0.77,95%CI=-0.36;-1.18,低置信度)、阿立哌唑(SMD=-0.67,95%CI=-0.33;-1.01,中等置信度)、喹硫平(SMD=-0.60,95%CI=-0.32,-0.87,高置信度)、阿塞那平(SMD=-0.54,95%CI=-0.19; -0.89,中等置信度)和齐拉西酮(SMD=-0.43,95%CI=-0.17-0.70,低置信度),而没有一种情绪稳定剂的表现优于安慰剂。47,中等置信度)、阿塞那平(RR=1.81,95%CI=1.28-2.55,极低置信度)和锂(RR=1.35,95%CI=1.00;1.83,P值=0.049,极低置信度)的疗效优于安慰剂,其他MSs与安慰剂相比没有优势。单独来看,利培酮在减轻躁狂症状方面的疗效优于除奥氮平和托吡酯以外的所有其他比较药,但可信度较低/非常低,且与催乳素和血糖升高有关。汇总结果显示,SGAs在减少躁狂症状(SMD=-0.68,95%CI=-0.86;-0.51和SMD=-0.61,95%CI=-0.82;-0.40,中等置信度)和躁狂反应(RR=1.85,95%CI=1.53;2.24和RR=1.65,95%CI=1.33-2.04,中等置信度)方面优于安慰剂和MSs,但MSs与安慰剂之间无差异。在全因停药方面,治疗与安慰剂之间没有明显差异,而与安慰剂相比,锂、齐拉西酮和奥卡西平与不良事件相关的停药率更高。与安慰剂和MS相比,大多数SGAs与更多的镇静、体重增加和代谢问题有关:结论:在治疗急性躁狂症状方面,SGAs 比安慰剂和 MSs 更有效,但在使用时必须仔细权衡其重要的副作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
21.00
自引率
1.50%
发文量
1383
审稿时长
53 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (JAACAP) is dedicated to advancing the field of child and adolescent psychiatry through the publication of original research and papers of theoretical, scientific, and clinical significance. Our primary focus is on the mental health of children, adolescents, and families. We welcome unpublished manuscripts that explore various perspectives, ranging from genetic, epidemiological, neurobiological, and psychopathological research, to cognitive, behavioral, psychodynamic, and other psychotherapeutic investigations. We also encourage submissions that delve into parent-child, interpersonal, and family research, as well as clinical and empirical studies conducted in inpatient, outpatient, consultation-liaison, and school-based settings. In addition to publishing research, we aim to promote the well-being of children and families by featuring scholarly papers on topics such as health policy, legislation, advocacy, culture, society, and service provision in relation to mental health. At JAACAP, we strive to foster collaboration and dialogue among researchers, clinicians, and policy-makers in order to enhance our understanding and approach to child and adolescent mental health.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信