首页> 外文期刊>Journal of psychiatric practice. >Determining Whether a Definitive Causal Relationship Exists Between Aripiprazole and Tardive Dyskinesia and/or Dystonia in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: Part 1
【24h】

Determining Whether a Definitive Causal Relationship Exists Between Aripiprazole and Tardive Dyskinesia and/or Dystonia in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: Part 1

机译:确定大抑郁症患者中阿立哌唑与迟发性运动障碍和/或肌张力障碍之间是否存在确定的因果关系:第1部分

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This series of columns has 2 main goals: (1) to explain the use of class warnings by the US Food and Drug Administration and (2) to increase clinicians' awareness of movement disorders that may occur in patients being treated with antipsychotic medications and why it is appropriate and good practice to refrain from immediately assuming the diagnosis is tardive dyskinesia/dystonia (TD). This first column in the series will focus on the second goal, which will then serve as a case example for the first goal. Clinicians should refrain from jumping to a diagnosis of TD because a host of other causes need to be ruled out first before inferring iatrogenic causation. The causal relationship between chronic treatment with dopamine antagonists and TD is based on pharmacoepidemiology (ie, the prevalence of such movement disorders is higher in individuals receiving chronic treatment with such agents than in a control group). There is nothing pathognomonic about movement disorders, nor is there any test that can currently prove a drug caused a movement disorder in a specific individual. Another goal of this series is to describe the types of research that would be needed to establish whether a specific agent has a meaningful risk of causing TD. In this first column of the series, we present the case of a patient who developed orofacial dyskinesia while being treated with aripiprazole. In this case, the movement disorder was prematurely called TD, which led to a malpractice lawsuit. This case highlights a number of key questions clinicians are likely to encounter in day-to-day practice. We then review data concerning the historical background, incidence, prevalence, and risk factors for 2 movement disorders, TD and spontaneous dyskinesia. Subsequent columns in this series will review: (1) unique aspects of the psychopharmacology of aripiprazole, (2) the limited and inconsistent data in the literature concerning the causal relationship between aripiprazole and TD, (3) the use of class warnings by the US Food and Drug Administration, which are automatically applied to a drug if it belongs to a specific therapeutic or pharmacological class unless the manufacturer provides convincing data that it does not warrant such a class label, and (4) the types of prohibitively expensive studies that would be needed to determine whether a meaningful causal relationship between aripiprazole and TD exists.
机译:本系列专栏有两个主要目标:(1)解释美国食品和药物管理局对类警告的使用;(2)增强临床医生对使用抗精神病药物治疗的患者可能发生的运动障碍的认识,以及为什么最好不要立即假设诊断为迟发性运动障碍/肌张力障碍(TD),这是适当且好的做法。该系列的第一列将重点介绍第二个目标,然后将其作为第一个目标的案例。临床医生应避免跳至TD诊断,因为在推断医源性因果关系之前,必须先排除许多其他原因。用多巴胺拮抗剂长期治疗与TD之间的因果关系是基于药物流行病学的(即,在接受此类药物长期治疗的个体中,此类运动障碍的患病率高于对照组)。没有关于运动障碍的病理学证据,也没有任何测试可以目前证明某种药物引起特定个体的运动障碍。本系列的另一个目标是描述确定特定药物是否具有引起TD的有意义风险的研究类型。在该系列的第一列中,我们介绍了一名患者在接受阿立哌唑治疗的同时发生口面运动障碍的情况。在这种情况下,运动障碍被过早地称为TD,从而导致了渎职诉讼。这个案例突出了临床医生在日常实践中可能会遇到的许多关键问题。然后,我们回顾有关2种运动障碍,TD和自发性运动障碍的历史背景,发生率,患病率和危险因素的数据。本系列文章的后续专栏将回顾:(1)阿立哌唑心理药理学的独特方面,(2)文献中有关阿立哌唑与TD之间因果关系的数据有限且不一致,(3)美国使用类别警告食品药品监督管理局(FDA),如果该药品属于特定的治疗或药理学类别,则将自动应用于该药品,除非制造商提供令人信服的数据表明该药品不属于此类类别标签,并且(4)昂贵的研究类型需要确定阿立哌唑与TD之间是否存在有意义的因果关系。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号