Luteinizing hormone secreting adrenal tumour as a cause of precocious puberty

OBJECTIVE: This study examined whether a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (paroxetine) had comparable efficacy but greater tolerability than a tricyclic antidepressant (imipramine) in depressed patients with HIV infection. METHOD: Seventy-five HIV-positive patients (45% of whom had AIDS) were blindly and randomly assigned to receive paroxetine (N = 25), imipramine (N = 25), or placebo (N = 25) in a 12-week trial. The Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and the SAFETEE general inquiry (for safety and tolerability) were administered at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12. RESULTS: Fifty-six (75%) of the 75 patients completed 6 weeks and 34 (45%) completed 12 weeks of the trial. The mean daily doses of both paroxetine (33.9 mg) and imipramine (162.5 mg) were significantly more effective than placebo; they were comparably effective at weeks 6, 8, and 12 according to the intent-to-treat analysis and at week 8 according to the analysis for the subjects who completed the trial (for them, only imipramine was superior to placebo at week 12). There were significantly more dropouts due to side effects from imipramine (48%) than from both paroxetine (20%) and placebo (24%). CONCLUSIONS: Depressed patients with HIV infection responded to imipramine or paroxetine at a higher rate than to placebo irrespective of severity of immunosuppression. Because paroxetine was much better tolerated than imipramine, its overall effectiveness may be greater. However, because of the small study group and the high attrition rate, these findings cannot be generalized and may need replication in a larger study group.     

Moclobemide and imipramine in chronic depression (dysthymia): an international double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. International Collaborative Study Group

An international, multicenter, placebo-controlled study was undertaken to determine the safety and antidepressant efficacy of moclobemide, a new reversible inhibitor of monoamine oxidase A, and imipramine in the treatment of dysthymia (DSM-III-R). A total of 315 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to an 8-week treatment in one of three groups (moclobemide, imipramine and placebo). Patients were male or female outpatients aged between 18 and 65 years meeting DSM-III-R criteria for dysthymia, primary type, with late or early onset. Of the patients in each group 85% completed the 8-week treatment period. The percentage of patients who no longer fulfilled DSM-III-R symptom criteria at treatment endpoint was significantly higher in the moclobemide (60%) and imipramine (49%) treatment groups than in the placebo group (22%). Differences to placebo were also statistically significant both for moclobemide and for imipramine on the other efficacy variables (i.e. Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, final overall efficacy assessment, Clinical Global Impression and symptom check list self-rating). A significant superiority of moclobemide and imipramine over placebo was found in pure dysthymia and in double-depression, as well as in early and late onset subgroups. In early onset cases, moclobemide was significantly more effective than was imipramine on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Anticholinergic symptoms and sleepiness were significantly more frequent side effects on imipramine than on moclobemide or on placebo, and the investigators' final overall assessment of tolerability significantly favoured moclobemide over imipramine. This study demonstrates the efficacy of high dose moclobemide (mean dose 675 mg/day) and high dose imipramine (220 mg/day) against placebo in the treatment of dysthymia. Moclobemide was better tolerated than was imipramine.     

Milnacipran. A review of its use in depression

Milnacipran is a cyclopropane derivative which acts by inhibiting noradrenaline (norepinephrine) and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake at presynaptic sites; no postsynaptic receptor activity has been demonstrated. It is most commonly administered at a dosage of 50 mg twice daily for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Improvement usually occurs within 2 weeks of treatment initiation, but some patients do respond sooner. Most studies which evaluated milnacipran were of short (4 to 8 weeks) duration and results were not published in full with rigorous peer review. Nonetheless, the drug is significantly more effective than placebo for the treatment of in- or outpatients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder. Limited data suggest that it may prevent relapse and be effective for long term use, although this requires confirmation. Milnacipran 200 mg/day is generally not significantly different from amitriptyline 150 mg/day in terms of onset and efficacy. However, when doses are titrated (not a requirement for milnacipran), milnacipran 50 or 100 mg/day has a slower onset than the tricyclic antidepressant. At a dosage of 100 mg/day for 4 to 12 weeks, milnacipran generally has similar efficacy to imipramine and clomipramine 150 mg/day, although milnacipran 50 to 150 mg/day had a faster onset of activity than imipramine 50 to 150 mg/day in Japanese patients. In a 6-month trial, milnacipran was less effective than clomipramine. Milnacipran 50 or 100 mg twice daily was as effective as fluoxetine 20 mg once daily or fluvoxamine 100 mg twice daily in 4- to 12-week studies. At a dosage of 50 then 100 mg daily it was also as effective as mianserin 30 then 60 mg daily in a 4-week study. However, when administered once daily (in the evening), milnacipran 100 mg/day was not as effective as fluoxetine 20 mg/day after 6 weeks. The drug is generally well tolerated, producing no more adverse events (including anticholinergic events) than placebo, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or mianserin and fewer adverse events than tricyclic antidepressants in clinical trials. However, dysuria has been reported in 7% of male patients receiving milnacipran. CONCLUSIONS: Data from predominantly short term trials suggest that milnacipran generally has similar efficacy to tricyclic antidepressants and SSRIs. Although further published data are required to confirm its efficacy, good tolerability profile and pharmacokinetic profile which suggests a low potential for drug interactions, milnacipran should be considered a promising agent for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder.     

Postoperative Tc-scintimetry in femoral neck fracture. A prospective study of 46 cases

This article presents panic diary results of a dose-response study with imipramine hydrochloride in panic disorder with agoraphobia patients. Analysis of variance revealed significant time effects on panic frequency and severity measures, but group x time interaction effects were present for the severity measures only. Results also provided evidence for a positive dose-response relationship with 20 percent of patients in the placebo group, 31 percent in the low-dose group (0.5 mg/kg/day), 54 percent in the medium-dose group (1.5 mg/kg/day), and 70 percent in the high-dose (3 mg/kg/day) group being free of recurrent or severe panic attacks at posttreatment. Further stratified and logistic regression analyses revealed a direct linear relationship between total plasma tricyclic concentration and response. These findings affirm the dose-dependent nature and the specificity of imipramine's antipanic effects.     

Gauging the effectiveness of extended imipramine treatment for panic disorder with agoraphobia

BACKGROUND: Imipramine has proven efficacy for panic disorder. This study assesses the net effectiveness of systematic, open imipramine treatment in a homogenous sample of panic disorder patients with agoraphobia. METHODS: One hundred and ten consecutive patients with DSM-III-R moderate to severe panic disorder with agoraphobia were treated with a fixed regimen of imipramine 2.25 mg/kg/day for 24 weeks. No instructions or encouragement for self-directed exposure to phobic situations or other coping strategies with panic or fear were given. Assessments were conducted at the end of the 2-week placebo run-in and at weeks 8, 16, and 24 of treatment. RESULTS: Overall, 53% had a marked and stable response. Most measures revealed that substantial improvement continued beyond week 8 of treatment. Treatment success was accompanied with significant improvements in anxiety sensitivity, dysphoric mood, and functional well-being. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide a clinically relevant reference with which to compare the effectiveness of alternative treatments in providing nearly complete symptom remission in patients with primary panic disorder with agoraphobia.     

Short-lasting behavioural effects of thyrotropin-releasing hormone in depressed women: results of placebo-controlled study

The rapid and short-lasting behavioral effects of thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) were investigated in female patients with DSM-III-R major depression syndrome (MDS). Twenty-six depressed patients free of any medication received 0.2 mg of Protirelin (synthetic TRH) intravenously and 16 received placebo. All patients completed the Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale and the Spielberger State and Trait Anxiety Inventory (SSAI and STAI) twice: before and 2 hr after protirelin or placebo administration. The significant improvement in patients' emotional state after TRH injection was observed on STAI (p < .001) and SSAI (p < .01). Protireline was superior to placebo on STAI (p < .005). There was no significant correlation between behavioral effects of Protirelin and changes in thyroid hormones and TSH secretion. The improvement in patients' emotional state was more evident in depressed patients without associated panic attacks than in MDS with panic. These findings suggest that TRH has rapid positive effects on depression and that they depend more on patients' emotional state than on the function of the hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis.     

A randomized, placebo-controlled dose-comparison trial of haloperidol for psychosis and disruptive behaviors in Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of two doses of haloperidol and placebo in the treatment of psychosis and disruptive behaviors in patients with Alzheimer's disease. METHOD: In a 6-week random-assignment, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (phase A), haloperidol, 2-3 mg/day (standard dose), and haloperidol, 0.50-0.75 mg/day (low dose), were compared in 71 outpatients with Alzheimer's disease. For the subsequent 6-week double-blind crossover phase (phase B), patients taking standard- or low-dose haloperidol were switched to placebo, and patients taking placebo were randomly assigned to standard- or low-dose haloperidol. RESULTS: For the 60 patients who completed phase A, standard-dose haloperidol was efficacious and superior to both low-dose haloperidol and placebo for scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale psychosis factor and on psychomotor agitation. Response rates according to three sets of criteria were greater with the standard dose (55%-60%) than the low dose (25%-35%) and placebo (25%-30%). The advantage of standard dose over low dose was replicated in phase B. In phase A, extrapyramidal signs tended to be greater with the standard dose than in the other two conditions, primarily because of a subgroup (20%) who developed moderate to severe signs. Low-dose haloperidol did not differ from placebo on any measure of efficacy or side effects. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated a favorable therapeutic profile for haloperidol in doses of 2-3 mg/day, although a subgroup developed moderate to severe extrapyramidal signs. A starting dose of 1 mg/day with gradual, upward dose titration is recommended. The narrow therapeutic window observed with haloperidol may also apply to other neuroleptics used in Alzheimer's disease patients with psychosis and disruptive behaviors.     

Transcultural differences in illness behaviour and clinical outcome: an underestimated aspect of general practice?

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic effective in the treatment of schizophrenic patients. After a 2- to 9-day placebo lead-in, 79 inpatients with schizophrenia according to DSM-III-R criteria were placed on an olanzapine dosage of 10 mg/day or 1 mg/day for up to 6 weeks. Blood samples were obtained weekly during this period. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses of Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale rating scale data suggested a minimum effective therapeutic concentration of 9 ng/mL. Using an intent-to treat analysis, 45% of the patients with olanzapine plasma concentrations > or = 9.3 ng/mL responded (> or = 20% decrease in BPRS), whereas only 13% of the patients with concentrations < 9.3 ng/mL responded. Use of olanzapine plasma concentrations of > 9 ng/mL as a predictor for treatment response in acutely ill schizophrenic patients is practicable because this therapeutic marker significantly increases the likelihood of a patient responding to olanzapine.     

Effects of venlafaxine on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of original data from 3744 depressed patients

BACKGROUND: Venlafaxine hydrochloride, a structurally novel antidepressant, is also the first nontricyclic serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. Although venlafaxine has an overall side effect and safety profile that is comparable to other newer antidepressants, it can cause both transient and sustained elevations of supine diastolic blood pressure (SDBP), probably the result of noradrenergic potentiation. METHOD: Presented here is a meta-analysis of original data on blood pressure, using both random effects and a multivariate survival analyses. The sample consisted of 3744 patients with major depression who were studied in controlled clinical trials comparing venlafaxine with imipramine and/or placebo. Patients were treated for 6 weeks of acute phase therapy; some responders received up to 1 year of continuation phase therapy. RESULTS: Venlafaxine and imipramine were associated with small, but statistically significant, increases in SDBP during acute phase therapy. When compared with imipramine and placebo, venlafaxine was also associated with a greater proportion of persistent elevations of SDBP during continuation therapy. The effect of venlafaxine was highly dose dependent, and the incidence of elevated SDBP was statistically and clinically significant only at dosages above 300 mg/day. Venlafaxine did not adversely affect the control of blood pressure for patients with preexisting high blood pressure or elevated baseline values. CONCLUSION: Venlafaxine has a dose-dependent effect on SDBP that is clinically significant at high dosages. Concern about blood pressure effects should not deter first-line use of this effective antidepressant, although more extensive studies of patients with cardiovascular diseases are still necessary.     

An observation on subsurface defects of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene due to rolling contact

A double-blind, randomized, parallel study in 167 hospitalized patients with major depression and melancholia was conducted to determine if rapidly escalated doses of venlafaxine produced an earlier response, compared with rapidly escalated doses of imipramine. The daily dose of venlafaxine was rapidly increased to 375 mg/day over a five-day period, was maintained at this level for 10 days, and then was reduced to 150 mg/day for the remainder of the study. The imipramine dose was rapidly increased to 200 mg/day over five days and was maintained at this level to the end of the study. The primary efficacy variables were time to response and time to sustained response on the HAM-D and MADRS. No differences in the response rates on the HAM-D or MADRS were observed between treatments. However, among patients who demonstrated a response on the HAM-D, there was a significantly faster onset of response (p = 0.036) and sustained response (p = 0.018) in the venlafaxine group. The median time to response on the HAM-D among responders was 14 days with venlafaxine and 21 days with imipramine. However, no differences between treatments were observed among responders on the MADRS (median time to response: 15 days for venlafaxine, 18 days for imipramine). Study events were reported in 69% of venlafaxine-treated patients and 76% of imipramine-treated patients. In severely depressed patients with melancholia, a faster onset of response was observed with venlafaxine on the HAM-D, but not the MADRS, and maximal tolerated doses of venlafaxine and imipramine were comparable for overall efficacy. These results confirm and extend previous observations and suggest that venlafaxine may have an early onset of action and may produce a rapid response in hospitalized patients with severe depression complicated by melancholia.     

Effectiveness, tolerance and safety of simvastatin in comparison with bezafibrate in treatment of hypercholesterolemia

The efficacy, tolerability and safety of simvastatin was compared to that of bezafibrate in a randomized placebo controlled double-blind trial including 64 patients with primary hypercholesterolemia with total cholesterol levels above 240 mg/dl and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol above 195 mg/dl. During a placebo period of four weeks patients were counselled for a diet low in cholesterol (< 300 mg/day) and saturated fat (< 10% of calories). This period was also used for randomization of the individuals into the bezafibrate and simvastatin group, respectively. Patients assigned to bezafibrate treatment took bezafibrate at 600 mg/day throughout the entire 12 weeks of active treatment. Patients assigned to simvastatin took simvastatin at 10 mg/day when LDL-cholesterol was below 195 mg/dl, and at 20 mg/day when LDL-cholesterol was above 195 mg. To compare the lipid lowering effect of both substances total cholesterol, LDL- and high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol were measured as well as triglycerides, very low density lipoprotein (VLDL)-cholesterol and the concentrations of apolipoproteins (apo)-AI, apo-AII and apo-B, respectively. These variables were compared between the two study groups with respect to the percentage change from baseline levels obtained during the placebo period. After a 12 week treatment period mean percent reduction of total cholesterol in the simvastatin group was 24% and that of LDL-cholesterol was 36%, both more pronounced than the respective reductions (14% and 17%) observed in the bezafibrate group. The mean percent increase in HDL-cholesterol was similar in both treatment groups (simvastation by 20% vs. bezafibrate by 17%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Potentiating effect of inhaled acetaldehyde on bronchial responsiveness to methacholine in asthmatic subjects

BACKGROUND: It has recently been reported that acetaldehyde induces bronchoconstriction indirectly via histamine release. However, no study has been performed to assess whether acetaldehyde worsens bronchial responsiveness in asthmatic subjects so this hypothesis was tested. METHODS: Methacholine provocation was performed on three occasions: (1) after pretreatment with oral placebo and inhaled saline (P-S day), (2) after placebo and inhaled acetaldehyde (P-A day), and (3) after a potent histamine H1 receptor antagonist terfenadine and acetaldehyde (T-A day) in a double blind, randomised, crossover fashion. Nine asthmatic subjects inhaled 0.8 mg/ml acetaldehyde or saline for four minutes. After each inhalation a methacholine provocation test was performed. RESULTS: Methacholine concentrations producing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20-MCh) on the P-A day (0.48 mg/ml, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.08) and T-A day (0.41 mg/ml, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.77) were lower than those on the P-S day (0.85 mg/ml, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.54). There was no change in the PC20-MCh between the P-A and T-A days. A correlation was observed between the logarithmic values of PC20-MCh (log PC20-MCh) on the P-S day and the potentiating effect of acetaldehyde on the methacholine responsiveness [(log PC20-MCh on P-A day)-(log PC20-MCh on P-S day)] (rho = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Acetaldehyde induces bronchial hyperresponsiveness in patients with asthma by mechanisms other than histamine release.     

The effects of risperidone on the five dimensions of schizophrenia derived by factor analysis: combined results of the North American trials

BACKGROUND: In two double-blind trials conducted in North America, 513 patients with chronic schizophrenia received risperidone, haloperidol, or placebo. In the present study, combined data from the two trials were analyzed. METHOD: Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo, fixed doses of risperidone (2, 6, 10, and 16 mg/day) or 20 mg/day of haloperidol for 8 weeks. Factor analysis of scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) produced five dimensions (negative symptoms, positive symptoms, disorganized thought, uncontrolled hostility/excitement, and anxiety/depression), similar to the five dimensions of previous factor-analytic studies of PANSS data. RESULTS: Mean changes (symptom reductions) in PANSS factor scores from baseline to treatment Weeks 6 and 8 were significantly greater in patients receiving 6-16 mg/day of risperidone than in patients receiving placebo or haloperidol. The advantages of risperidone were greatest for negative symptoms, uncontrolled hostility/excitement, and anxiety/depression. Even at the lowest dose, 2 mg/day, risperidone was significantly (p < or = .05) superior to haloperidol in reducing negative symptoms. The differences in outcomes between risperidone and haloperidol on PANSS scores were not related to extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSION: Risperidone produced significantly (p < or = .05) greater improvements than haloperidol on all five dimensions. The large between-group differences on negative symptoms, hostility/excitement, and anxiety/depression suggest that risperidone and other serotonin/dopamine antagonists have qualitatively different effects from those of conventional antipsychotic agents.     

A controlled, prospective, 1-year trial of citalopram in the treatment of panic disorder

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of citalopram in the long-term treatment of adult outpatients with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia. METHOD: Patients in this double-blind, parallel-group trial were assigned to 1 of 3 fixed dosage ranges of citalopram (10 or 15 mg/day, 20 or 30 mg/day, or 40 or 60 mg/day), 1 dosage range of clomipramine (60 or 90 mg/day), or placebo. After the completed 8-week acute treatment period, the eligible patients could continue the treatment for up to 1 year. Of the 475 patients who were randomly assigned for the short-term trial, 279 agreed to continue double-blind treatment at their assigned doses. The primary efficacy measure used was the Clinical Anxiety Scale panic attack item, and the response was defined as no panic attacks (score of 0 or 1). The other key measures used were the Physician's Global Improvement Scale, the Patient's Global Improvement Scale, and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A). RESULTS: In all drug-treated groups, except the group receiving the lowest citalopram dose, the treatment outcome was generally better than with placebo. As determined by a life table analysis of response, the probability of response during the 12 months was significantly greater with all treatment regimens than with placebo (p < .05), with citalopram 20 or 30 mg/day demonstrating the best response. Panic attacks tended to disappear in all patients remaining in the study until the end of follow-up. Analysis of the difference in the number of patients in different treatment groups remaining in the study (perhaps the best measure of long-term efficacy) also demonstrated that the patients treated with citalopram in dosage ranges of 20 or 30 mg/day and 40 or 60 mg/day had better response than placebo-treated patients (p < .0002 and p < .004, respectively). HAM-A and Global Improvement Scale scores also showed that patients treated with active drug showed greater improvement than placebo-treated patients. All treatment groups showed no new or exceptional adverse event clusters. CONCLUSION: Citalopram in the dosage range of 20 to 60 mg/day is effective, well tolerated, and safe in the long-term treatment of patients who have panic disorder.     

Cross-reactivity between Ficus benjamina (weeping fig) and natural rubber latex

The efficacy of hydroxyzine and buspirone, controlled by placebo, was investigated in a double-blind, parallel group, multicentre study conducted in France and the UK. A total of 244 patients with generalised anxiety disorder in primary care was allocated randomly to treatments with hydroxyzine (12.5 mg morning and mid-day, 25 mg evening), buspirone (5 mg morning and mid-day, 10 mg evening) or placebo (three capsules/day) for 4 weeks, preceded by a 1-week single-blind placebo run-in and followed by 1-week single-blind placebo administration. Rating scales were applied on days -7,0,7,14, 12,28 and 35. Seventy percent of the patients were female, the average age was 41 +/- 11 years, and the mean Hamilton Anxiety Score at day 0 was 26.5 +/- 4.2. Only 31 of the 244 patients dropped out, but equally in the three groups. Intention-to-treat LOCF analyses on the primary variable showed a significant difference only between hydroxyzine and placebo with respect to improvement on the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (10.75 versus 7.23 points, respectively). Secondary variables such as CGI and self-ratings (HAD scale) showed both hydroxyzine and buspirone to be more efficacious than placebo. Thus, hydroxyzine is a useful treatment for GAD.     

A case of traumatic pseudoaneurysm of the middle meningeal artery treated with endovascular surgery

Thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) has been found in the gastrointestinal tract, where it mainly exerts an inhibitory action. We used oral TRH, a stable and powerful formulation, to explore the glucoregulatory response of oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) on obese patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). Seven obese patients with IGT and eight controls were investigated. Three tests were performed on three separate days. On day 1, An oral TRH test: a 40 mg TRH tablet, was given. Blood samples for blood glucose (BG), proinsulin (PI), insulin (INS), C-peptide (CP), thyroxine (T4), triiodothyronine (T3), and thyrotropin (TSH) were collected every 30 minutes for 3 hours. On day 2, an OGTT with 75 g glucose was performed. On day 3, an oral TRH test was administered 30 minutes before the OGTT, and blood was collected every 30 minutes for 3 hours. Oral-TRH had no effect on basal BG and on pancreatic hormone secretion. Oral TRH, coupled with OGTT in both controls and obese patients, led to a significant inhibition of BG (p < 0.01), of CP (p < 0.001), and of INS (p < 0.001) during the first hour of administration, and afterward, there was only a very slight increase, compared with levels after only OGTT treatment. After OGTT, PI peaked at 90 minutes (9.4+/-3 ng/mL) in controls and at 60 minutes (12.7+/-2.5 ng/mL) in obese patients. TRH application prior to OGTT inhibited PI secretion for 90 minutes in controls, whereas in obese patients PI levels were decreased, not inhibited, during the OGTT. The mechanism of the inhibitory TRH action on OGTT-induced increase of BG and pancreatic hormone secretion is not clear. It could be due to inhibition of gastric motility, and on a paracrine effect that enhances secretion of somatostatin that then suppresses INS, CP, and possibly PI levels. The partial escape of PI from the TRH blockade in obese patients with IGT might indicate a diminished functioning capability of beta-cells and that TRH cannot affect the INS processing within the beta-cells in these patients.     

Sociocultural influences and care of dying children in Japan and the United States

Depression is a common cause of sexual dysfunction, but also antidepressant medication is often associated with sexual side effects. This article includes two related studies. The first double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in men with lifelong rapid ejaculation and aimed to assess putative differences between the major selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, and sertraline) with regard to their ejaculation-delaying effect. Sixty men with an intravaginal ejaculation latency time (IELT) of 1 minute or less were randomly assigned to receive fluoxetine 20 mg/day, fluvoxamine 100 mg/day, paroxetine 20 mg/day, sertraline 50 mg/day, or placebo for 6 weeks. During the 1-month baseline and 6-week treatment periods, the men measured their IELT at home using a stopwatch. The trial was completed by 51 men. During the 6-week treatment period, the geometric mean IELT in the placebo group was constant at approximately 20 seconds. Analysis of variance revealed a between-groups difference in the evolution of IELT delay (p = 0.0004); in the paroxetine, fluoxetine, and sertraline groups there was a gradual increase to about 110 seconds, whereas in the fluvoxamine group, IELT was increased to only approximately 40 seconds. The paroxetine, fluoxetine, and sertraline groups differed significantly (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.017, respectively) from placebo but the fluvoxamine group did not (p = 0.38). Compared with baseline, paroxetine exerted the strongest delay in ejaculation, followed by fluoxetine and sertraline. There was no clinically relevant delay in ejaculation with fluvoxamine. In men with lifelong rapid ejaculation, paroxetine delayed ejaculation most strongly, whereas fluvoxamine delayed ejaculation the least. The second double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out in men with lifelong rapid ejaculation (IELT < or = 1 minute) and in men with lifelong less-rapid ejaculation (IELT > 1 minute) to investigate whether data about SSRI-induced delayed ejaculation in men with rapid ejaculation may be extrapolated to men with less-rapid ejaculation. After measurement of IELT at home (using a stopwatch) during a 1-month baseline assessment, 32 men with an IELT of 1 minute or less (group 1) or more than 1 minute (group 2) were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine 20 mg/day or placebo for 6 weeks in a double-blind manner. Patients continued to measure their IELTs at home during the 6 weeks of the study. At baseline, 24 patients consistently had IELTs of one minute or less (group 1), and eight patients had IELTs of more than 1 minute (group 2). The geometric mean IELT was 14 seconds in group 1 and 83 seconds in group 2. Twelve patients in group 1 and five in group 2 were randomized to the paroxetine 20 mg/day. The percentage increase in the geometric mean IELT compared with baseline in patients treated with paroxetine was 420% (95% confidence interval [CI], 216-758%) in group 1 and 480% (95% CI, 177-1,118%) in group 2 (p = 0.81). After 6 weeks of treatment with paroxetine, the geometric mean IELT was 92 seconds in group 1 and 602 seconds in group 2 (p < 0.001). Therefore, the paroxetine-induced percentage increase in IELT seems to be independent of the baseline IELT. This suggests that ejaculation-delaying side effects of some SSRIs investigated in men with lifelong rapid ejaculation may be generalized to men with less-rapid ejaculation.     

Sub-band deletion of 7q36.3 in a patient with ring chromosome 7: association with holoprosencephaly

MK-462 is a potent, selective 5HT1D receptor agonist which may be useful in treating acute migraine. We conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled inpatient study to assess the preliminary efficacy and safety of oral doses of MK-462 20 mg (n = 8) and 40 mg (n = 36) vs placebo (n = 21), administered to 65 male and post-menopausal female migraine patients aged 22-51 with moderate or severe migraine headache. Headache severity and functional disability were measured at 0.5, 1, 1.5, and 2 h post-dose. The 20 mg dose was well tolerated and 4/8 patients obtained relief in headache severity at the 2 h time point. The 40 mg dose was well tolerated and was significantly (p < 0.05) superior to placebo at the 1.5 and 2 h time points (with 27/36 or 75% obtaining relief at 2 h compared to 7/21 or 33% for placebo). Adverse events occurred in 50% of patients on 20 mg MK-462, 72% of those on 40 mg MK-462, and in 52% of placebo-treated subjects. The most common adverse events associated with MK-462 were drowsiness (20 mg 12%; 40 mg 44%; placebo 24%), dry mouth (40 mg 36%; placebo 19%), and lightheadedness/dizziness (40 mg 17%; placebo 10%). Based on these preliminary results, MK-462 appears worthy of continued study for the treatment of acute migraine.     

Rivastigmine. A review of its use in Alzheimer's disease

Rivastigmine (SDZ ENA 713) is a carbamylating, long-acting reversible and noncompetitive carbamate acetylcholinesterase inhibitor that is indicated as an oral treatment for patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. The drug has been evaluated for this use in 3 well designed, adequately powered, phase II/III, 26-week clinical trials that included a total of 1479 rivastigmine and 647 placebo recipients. Most of these patients had concomitant disorders that were being treated with numerous other drugs. Individual and pooled results of these trials indicate that rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day usually produces cognitive, global and functional changes that indicate significantly less deterioration than was observed with placebo in patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Individual results of the 2 pivotal trials and pooled analysis also show that, compared with placebo recipients, significantly more rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day recipients respond to therapy. Indeed, after 26 weeks of therapy in the 2 pivotal trials, significantly more rivastigmine 6 to 12 mg/day than placebo recipients achieved clinically meaningful improvements as defined by 3 separate response criteria. The lower dosage range of 1 to 4 mg/day was not as effective as 6 to 12 mg/day, as measured using these criteria and other efficacy parameters. Rivastigmine causes adverse events that are generally those expected from an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor. They are usually mild to moderate, of short duration and responsive to dosage reduction. Unpublished data from 3989 patients indicate that rivastigmine and placebo were associated with similar incidences of serious adverse events and changes in laboratory parameters, ECG and cardiorespiratory vital signs. The most common events were gastrointestinal, central and peripheral nervous system and whole body adverse events. However, compared with placebo, rivastigmine more commonly caused adverse events resulting in treatment withdrawal. These events were most frequently gastrointestinal and were more common in women. CONCLUSION: Rivastigmine is a useful option for the treatment of patients with mild to moderately severe Alzheimer's disease. Although only short term (6- month) comparisons with placebo are available, given the lack of established treatment options it should be considered for first-line use in this population.     

Leptin levels in protracted critical illness: effects of growth hormone-secretagogues and thyrotropin-releasing hormone

Prolonged critical illness is characterized by feeding-resistant wasting of protein, whereas reesterification, instead of oxidation of fatty acids, allows fat stores to accrue and associate with a low-activity status of the somatotropic and thyrotropic axis, which seems to be partly of hypothalamic origin. To further unravel this paradoxical metabolic condition, and in search of potential therapeutic strategies, we measured serum concentrations of leptin; studied the relationship with body mass index, insulin, cortisol, thyroid hormones, and somatomedins; and documented the effects of hypothalamic releasing factors, in particular, GH-secretagogues and TRH. Twenty adults, critically ill for several weeks and supported with normocaloric, continuously administered parenteral and/or enteral feeding, were studied for 45 h. They had been randomized to receive one of three combinations of peptide infusions, in random order: TRH (one day) and placebo (other day); TRH + GH-releasing peptide (GHRP)-2 and GHRP-2; TRH + GHRH + GHRP-2 and GHRH + GHRP-2. Peptide infusions were started after a 1-microgram/kg bolus at 0900 h and infused (1 microgram/kg.h) until 0600 h the next morning. Serum concentrations of leptin, insulin, cortisol, T4, T3, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF-binding protein-3 and the acid-labile subunit (ALS) were measured at 0900 h, 2100 h, and 0600 h on each of the 2 study days. Baseline leptin levels (mean +/- SEM: 12.4 +/- 2.1 micrograms/L) were independent of body mass index (25 +/- 1 kg/m2), insulin (18.6 +/- 2.9 microIU/mL), cortisol (504 +/- 43 mmol/L), and thyroid hormones (T4: 63 +/- 5 nmol/L, T3: 0.72 +/- 0.08 nmol/L) but correlated positively with circulating levels of IGF-I [86 +/- 6 micrograms/L, determination coefficient (R2) = 0.25] and ALS (7.2 +/- 0.6 mg/L, R2 = 0.32). Infusion of placebo or TRH had no effect on leptin. In contrast, GH-secretagogues elevated leptin levels within 12 h. Infusion of GHRP-2 alone induced a maximal leptin increase of +87% after 24 h, whereas GHRH + GHRP-2 elevated leptin by up to +157% after 24 h. The increase in leptin within 12 h was related (R2 = 0.58) to the substantial rise in insulin. After 45 h, and having reached a plateau, leptin was related to the increased IGF-I (R2 = 0.37). In conclusion, circulating leptin levels during protracted critical illness were linked to the activity state of the GH/IGF-I axis. Stimulating the GH/IGF-I axis with GH-secretagogues increased leptin levels within 12 h. Because leptin may stimulate oxidation of fatty acids, and because GH, IGF-I, and insulin have a protein-sparing effect, GH-secretagogue administration may be expected to result in increased utilization of fat as preferential substrate and to restore protein content in vital tissues and, consequently, has potential as a strategy to reverse the paradoxical metabolic condition of protracted critical illness.