scholarly journals PATIENT-CENTERED MEDICATION SELECTION FOR THE TREATMENT OF PERIPARTUM CARDIOMYOPATHY

2021 ◽  
Vol 77 (18) ◽  
pp. 2216
Author(s):  
Laith Ali ◽  
Maria Rodrigo ◽  
Patrick Bering
2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Beth DeJongh ◽  
Robert Haight

Objectives: To create easy to understand, antidepressant medication decision making aids and describe the process used to develop the aids for patients diagnosed with depression. Methods: In collaboration with the Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI), antidepressant medication decision making aids were developed to enhance patient and physician communication about medication selection. The final versions of the aids were based on design methods created by Dr. Victor M. Montori (Mayo Clinic) and discussions with patients and providers. Five physicians used prototype aids in their outpatient clinics to assess their usefulness. Results: Six prototype antidepressant medication decision making aids were created to review potential side-effects of antidepressant medications. The side effects included were those patients feel are most bothersome or may contribute to premature discontinuation of antidepressant treatment, including: weight changes, sexual dysfunction, sedation, and other unique side effects. The decision aids underwent several revisions before they were distributed to physicians. Physicians reported patients enjoyed using the decision aids and found them useful. The sexual dysfunction card was considered the most useful while the daily administration schedule card was felt to be the least useful. Conclusions: Physicians found the antidepressant decision making aids helpful and felt they improved their usual interactions with patients. The aids may lead to more patient-centered treatment choices and empower patients to become more directly involved in their treatment. Whether the aids improve patient's medication adherence needs to be addressed in future studies.   Type: Student Project


1999 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 1232-1241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marshall H. Chin ◽  
Linda C. Wang ◽  
Lei Jin ◽  
Robert Mulliken ◽  
James Walter ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-473 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul F.M. Krabbe ◽  
Antoinette D.I. van Asselt ◽  
Anna Selivanova ◽  
Ruslan Jabrayilov ◽  
Karin M. Vermeulen

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-170
Author(s):  
Sagar V. Parikh ◽  
Gabriela K. Khazanov ◽  
Michael E. Thase ◽  
Anthony J. Rothschild ◽  
Boadie W. Dunlop ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundPharmacogenomic testing has emerged to aid medication selection for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) by identifying potential gene-drug interactions (GDI). Many pharmacogenomic tests are available with varying levels of supporting evidence, including direct-to-consumer and physician-ordered tests. We retrospectively evaluated the safety of using a physician-ordered combinatorial pharmacogenomic test (GeneSight) to guide medication selection for patients with MDD in a large, randomized, controlled trial (GUIDED).Materials and MethodsPatients diagnosed with MDD who had an inadequate response to ≥1 psychotropic medication were randomized to treatment as usual (TAU) or combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-guided care (guided-care). All received combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing and medications were categorized by predicted GDI (no, moderate, or significant GDI). Patients and raters were blinded to study arm, and physicians were blinded to test results for patients in TAU, through week 8. Measures included adverse events (AEs, present/absent), worsening suicidal ideation (increase of ≥1 on the corresponding HAM-D17 question), or symptom worsening (HAM-D17 increase of ≥1). These measures were evaluated based on medication changes [add only, drop only, switch (add and drop), any, and none] and study arm, as well as baseline medication GDI.ResultsMost patients had a medication change between baseline and week 8 (938/1,166; 80.5%), including 269 (23.1%) who added only, 80 (6.9%) who dropped only, and 589 (50.5%) who switched medications. In the full cohort, changing medications resulted in an increased relative risk (RR) of experiencing AEs at both week 4 and 8 [RR 2.00 (95% CI 1.41–2.83) and RR 2.25 (95% CI 1.39–3.65), respectively]. This was true regardless of arm, with no significant difference observed between guided-care and TAU, though the RRs for guided-care were lower than for TAU. Medication change was not associated with increased suicidal ideation or symptom worsening, regardless of study arm or type of medication change. Special attention was focused on patients who entered the study taking medications identified by pharmacogenomic testing as likely having significant GDI; those who were only taking medications subject to no or moderate GDI at week 8 were significantly less likely to experience AEs than those who were still taking at least one medication subject to significant GDI (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15–0.99, p=0.048). No other significant differences in risk were observed at week 8.ConclusionThese data indicate that patient safety in the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-guided care arm was no worse than TAU in the GUIDED trial. Moreover, combinatorial pharmacogenomic-guided medication selection may reduce some safety concerns. Collectively, these data demonstrate that combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing can be adopted safely into clinical practice without risking symptom degradation among patients.FundingMyriad Neuroscience/Assurex Health


Author(s):  
Jim Pheils ◽  
Megan J Ehret

Abstract Purpose Current literature on the safety and efficacy of intermediate- and long-acting formulations of methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is evaluated. Summary Methylphenidate has been an established treatment for ADHD, but due to its relatively short half-life, numerous intermediate- and long-acting products have been developed. While these extended-release products provide efficacy similar to that of immediate-acting products, the pharmacokinetics and adverse effects can vary. Intermediate-acting methylphenidate products have effects that can last as long as 8 hours, but clinically patients have still required twice-daily dosing. Long-acting products have helped to address these challenges, with recently developed products including controlled-release and bimodal-delivery systems and a patch formulation. Many of these products can be opened and sprinkled on applesauce for ease of administration. Conclusion Knowledge of the various formulations of methylphenidate and dexmethylphenidate is crucial for appropriate medication selection for control of ADHD symptoms. Knowledge of differences between release mechanisms and the pharmacokinetic properties are essential for appropriate use of these products.


2011 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles DeBattista ◽  
Gustavo Kinrys ◽  
Daniel Hoffman ◽  
Corey Goldstein ◽  
John Zajecka ◽  
...  

CNS Spectrums ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 202-203
Author(s):  
John F. Greden ◽  
Anthony J. Rosthschild ◽  
Michael Thase ◽  
Boadie W. Dunlop ◽  
DMH Charles DeBattista ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disease burden worldwide, with lifetime prevalence in the United States of 17%. Here we present the results of the first prospective, large-scale, patient- and rater-blind, randomized controlled trial evaluating the clinical importance of achieving congruence between combinatorial pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing and medication selection for MDD.Methods1,167 outpatients diagnosed with MDD and an inadequate response to ≥1 psychotropic medications were enrolled and randomized 1:1 to a Treatment as Usual (TAU) arm or PGx-guided care arm. Combinatorial PGx testing categorized medications in three groups based on the level of gene-drug interactions: use as directed, use with caution, or use with increased caution and more frequent monitoring. Patient assessments were performed at weeks 0 (baseline), 4, 8, 12 and 24. Patients, site raters, and central raters were blinded in both arms until after week 8. In the guided-care arm, physicians had access to the combinatorial PGx test result to guide medication selection. Primary outcomes utilized the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) and included symptom improvement (percent change in HAM-D17 from baseline), response (50% decrease in HAM-D17 from baseline), and remission (HAM-D17<7) at the fully blinded week 8 time point. The durability of patient outcomes was assessed at week 24. Medications were considered congruent with PGx test results if they were in the ‘use as directed’ or ‘use with caution’ report categories while medications in the ‘use with increased caution and more frequent monitoring’ were considered incongruent. Patients who started on incongruent medications were analyzed separately according to whether they changed to congruent medications by week8.ResultsAt week 8, symptom improvement for individuals in the guided-care arm was not significantly different than TAU (27.2% versus 24.4%, p=0.11). However, individuals in the guided-care arm were more likely than those in TAU to achieve remission (15% versus 10%; p<0.01) and response (26% versus 20%; p=0.01). Remission rates, response rates, and symptom reductions continued to improve in the guided-treatment arm until the 24week time point. Congruent prescribing increased to 91% in the guided-care arm by week 8. Among patients who were taking one or more incongruent medication at baseline, those who changed to congruent medications by week 8 demonstrated significantly greater symptom improvement (p<0.01), response (p=0.04), and remission rates (p<0.01) compared to those who persisted on incongruent medications.ConclusionsCombinatorial PGx testing improves short- and long-term response and remission rates for MDD compared to standard of care. In addition, prescribing congruency with PGx-guided medication recommendations is important for achieving symptom improvement, response, and remission for MDD patients.Funding Acknowledgements: This study was supported by Assurex Health, Inc.


1995 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. S40-S51 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Knesper

Research describing wide prevalence variation of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and comorbid depression is explained in light of subsyndromal depressions, the use of standardized diagnostic instruments and procedures, and the subcortical and cortical components of mood. There appear to be several "depressions" of AD. Against this backdrop, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of antidepressant use in AD are reviewed and methodologic problems identified. Evidence for efficacy in controlled trials is weak, but open-label trials are, as expected, more encouraging. The potential efficacy of new agents for the depressions of AD receive comment. A heuristic model makes use of the conclusions developed, the stage of illness, and a preliminary classification scheme for the depressions of AD; this model provides a rational basis for thinking about medication selection for AD depressions. Clinical decisions are illustrated. ( J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1995; 8(suppl 1):S40-S51).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document