Quetiapine Group Research Articles

Olanzapine Versus Quetiapine: Corrected QT Changes in Critically Ill Patients.

Olanzapine and quetiapine are frequently administered atypical antipsychotic medications and their effects on the corrected QT (QTc) in the critically ill population remain understudied. The objective of this study was to compare the impact of olanzapine and quetiapine on QTc changes in critically ill patients. This was a single-center, retrospective analysis. Adult patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) from January 2023 through July 2023 were included if they received ≥2 doses of either olanzapine or quetiapine within a 48-hour period and had one QTc evaluated within 48 hours of antipsychotic initiation. The major endpoint was a composite of the incidence of QTc prolongation (defined as QTc > 500 ms or QTc > 60 ms above baseline) following antipsychotic initiation. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify risk factors for QTc prolongation. There was no statistical difference in the major composite endpoint between patients in the olanzapine and quetiapine groups (8/83 [9.6%] vs 19/129 [14.7%]; P = .28). The incidence of QTc > 500 ms (7/244 [2.9%] vs 20/427 [4.7%]; P = .25) and change from baseline >60 ms (5/244 [2.0%] vs 17/427 [4.0%]; P = .26) were not statistically different between the olanzapine and quetiapine groups, respectively. There were no occurrences of Torsades de Pointes or extrapyramidal symptoms in either group. The results of this study suggest olanzapine and quetiapine may have similar impact on QTc prolongation in critically ill patients. These findings could contribute to safer prescribing practices in the ICU.

Clozapine Safety in Pregnancy: A Clinical Study.

Pregnant women with persistent schizophrenia and related disorders may require ongoing antipsychotic treatment, including clozapine. However, the potential risks of using clozapine during pregnancy and the postnatal period remain uncertain. We conducted a nested case-control study using the National Register of Antipsychotic Medication in Pregnancy (NRAMP) database. Our study assessed pregnancy outcomes among Australian women diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorder and treated with clozapine (n = 14) during the first trimester. These women were compared to 2 subgroups: those treated with quetiapine (n = 53) and those not taking any medication (n = 24) during pregnancy. We observed higher rates of miscarriage in the clozapine group compared to the quetiapine and drug-free groups. The clozapine group had a higher early pregnancy body mass index but lower overall pregnancy weight gain than the other groups. The prevalence of gestational diabetes was significantly higher in the clozapine group. The percentage of vaginal delivery was higher in the clozapine group than in the other 2 groups. Neonatal outcomes such as gestational age, and Apgar scores were similar across groups. The birth weight was lower in the clozapine group compared to the other 2 groups. This study suggests that pregnant women taking clozapine and their babies have greater adverse outcomes compared to other groups. Clozapine appears to be associated with a greater risk of miscarriages, maternal gestational diabetes, and lower birth weight. However, the gestational age, Apgar scores, and admission to NICU/SCN were comparable between all groups.

Interleukin-8 is a potential inflammation biomarker in major depressive disorder

BackgroundThe neuroinflammatory hypothesis of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) postulates that dysregulated cytokine production is implicated in the etiopathology of the disorder. This study aimed to determine baseline levels of Interleukin-8 (IL-8), an inflammatory cytokine, in MDD and identify possible changes in response to antidepressant drug therapy. MethodsTwo independent groups of MDD patients who met study criteria were enrolled; one group was treated with Escitalopram and the other with Quetiapine for twelve weeks. There was a healthy control (HC) group. In the Escitalopram group 30 patients completed the baseline visit and in the Quetiapine group 43 patients. Plasma concentrations of IL-8 were measured at baseline, week eight, and week 12 of treatment. IL-8 levels were correlated with depression severity at baseline and week 12. The sample size for IL-8 analysis was 17 study completers in the Escitalopram study, 21 study completers in the Quetiapine study, and 19 HCs. We used the Student's t-test and the Pearson Correlation Coefficient for statistical analyses. ResultsMDD patients exhibited elevated IL-8 levels at baseline compared to healthy controls (p = 0.007). However, IL-8 levels did not show a significant reduction after 12 weeks of treatment and were not significantly correlated with depression severity at either baseline or week 12 of treatment. However, there was a notable downtrend in IL-8 levels after treatment in both groups though not statistically significant. LimitationsStudy limitations include sample size variations and power, and study length. No formal assessment was conducted to rule out Axis II diagnoses. ConclusionsThese findings underscore the relationship between IL-8 and MDD, suggesting that IL-8 may play a role in the pathophysiology of MDD, but its relationship with antidepressant treatment requires a prolonged period of treatment. This study suggests a role for IL-8 in MDD as a pro-inflammatory biomarker, while the lack of immediate normalization post-treatment indicates the need for further exploration of delayed effects of antidepressant therapy on immune markers and IL-8′s relationship with the mechanism of action of specific pharmacotherapies used in MDD.

Quetiapine Versus Haloperidol in the Management of Hyperactive Delirium: Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundIn the population of patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), most studies compared the use of atypical antipsychotics, such as quetiapine, with the use of traditional haloperidol in patients with delirium of various forms and etiologies. The role of such agents in patients with hyperactive delirium is not fully understood. This study compares the effectiveness of quetiapine with haloperidol in treating the hyperactive form of delirium in terms of their effects on the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98), length of stay in the ICU, and mortality in critically ill patients.MethodsOne hundred adult patients diagnosed with hyperactive delirium were randomly assigned to receive either oral quetiapine (25–50 mg/day) or haloperidol (1–2 mg/day). The response, defined as “a DRS-R-98 severity score reduction from baseline of 50% or more” and a DRS-R-98 severity score of 12 or less without relapse, was the primary outcome.ResultsThe mean age of all patients was 68 ± 6 years. The study population’s overall response rate was 92%. Response rates for the two groups were remarkably equal (p = 0.609). Secondary outcomes were comparable in both groups, such as ICU mortality (p = 0.496), in-hospital mortality (p = 0.321), in-hospital stay (p = 0.310), and the need for mechanical ventilation (p > 0.99). But the quetiapine group showed a statistically reduced mean ICU stay (10.1 ± 2.0 vs. 11.7 ± 2.6 days, p = 0.018) and increased sleeping hours per night (p = 0.001).ConclusionsQuetiapine may be equally as effective as haloperidol in treating the symptoms of hyperactive delirium in critically ill patients, with no mortality benefit.

Effects of preoperative quetiapine on postoperative delirium and sleep quality in elderly orthopaedic patients

Objective: To investigate the effects of preoperative quetiapine on postoperative delirium (POD) and sleep quality in elderly orthopedic patients. Methods: Prospectively, 111 elderly patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade Ⅱ-Ⅲ, scheduled to undergo knee or hip surgery in the Affiliated Huangyan Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University under continuous spinal anesthesia from August 2021 to March 2023, were selected and randomly divided into two groups by random number table: control group (group C, 1 h preoperative placebo) and quetiapine group (group Q, 1 h preoperative quetiapine 12.5 mg). In group C, 54 cases were enrolled, including 25 males and 29 females, with an average age of (73.5±4.9) years. In group Q, 57 cases were enrolled, including 26 males and 31 females, with an average age of (74.8±5.0) years. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of POD evaluated by using confusion assessment method (CAM) at 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery, and the secondary outcome measures included Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) scores at 24 and 48 hours after surgery and satisfaction of pain management within 24 hours after surgery. Results: The incidence of POD at 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery in group Q was 5.4% (3/57), 12.5% (7/57), 14.3% (8/57), respectively, while that in group C was 18.2% (10/54), 21.8% (12/54), 21.8% (12/54), respectively. The incidence of POD at 24 h after surgery in group Q was lower than that in group C (P=0.036). There was no significant difference in the incidence of POD at 48 and 72 h after surgery between two groups (all P>0.05). The PSQI score of patients in group Q at 24 and 48 h after surgery were (3.8±1.2) and (6.9±1.1) scores, respectively, which in group C were (10.5±2.8) and (7.3±1.3) scores, respectively. Compared with group C, the PSQI score of patients in group Q at 24 h after surgery was significantly higher (P<0.001), but there was no significant difference at 48 h after surgery (P=0.068). The satisfaction scores of pain management at 24 h after surgery in group Q was (91±7) scores, which was higher than that in group C of (81±6) scores (P<0.001). Conclusion: Oral intake of low-dose quetiapine 1 h preoperatively can reduce the incidence of POD, improve postoperative sleep quality and enhance postoperative satisfaction of pain management at 24 hours after surgery in elderly orthopedic patients undergoing knee or hip surgery.

Esketamine Nasal Spray versus Quetiapine for Treatment-Resistant Depression

BackgroundIn treatment-resistant depression, commonly defined as a lack of response to two or more consecutive treatments during the current depressive episode, the percentage of patients with remission is low and the percentage with relapse is high. The efficacy and safety of esketamine nasal spray as compared with extended-release quetiapine augmentation therapy, both in combination with ongoing treatment with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), in patients with treatment-resistant depression are unknown.MethodsIn an open-label, single-blind (with raters unaware of group assignments), multicenter, phase 3b, randomized, active-controlled trial, we assigned patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive flexible doses (according to the summary of product characteristics) of esketamine nasal spray (esketamine group) or extended-release quetiapine (quetiapine group), both in combination with an SSRI or SNRI. The primary end point was remission, defined as a score of 10 or less on the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), at week 8 (scores range from 0 to 60, with higher scores indicating more severe depression). The key secondary end point was no relapse through week 32 after remission at week 8. All patients were included in the analysis; patients who discontinued the trial treatment were considered as having had an unfavorable outcome (i.e., they were grouped with patients who did not have remission or who had a relapse). Analyses of the primary and key secondary end points were adjusted for age and number of treatment failures.ResultsOverall, 336 patients were assigned to the esketamine group and 340 to the quetiapine group. More patients in the esketamine group than in the quetiapine group had remission at week 8 (91 of 336 patients [27.1%] vs. 60 of 340 patients [17.6%]; P=0.003) and had no relapse through week 32 after remission at week 8 (73 of 336 patients [21.7%] vs. 48 of 340 patients [14.1%]). Over 32 weeks of follow-up, the percentage of patients with remission, the percentage of patients with a treatment response, and the change in the MADRS score from baseline favored esketamine nasal spray. The adverse events were consistent with the established safety profiles of the trial treatments.ConclusionsIn patients with treatment-resistant depression, esketamine nasal spray plus an SSRI or SNRI was superior to extended-release quetiapine plus an SSRI or SNRI with respect to remission at week 8. (Funded by Janssen EMEA; ESCAPE-TRD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04338321.)

Antipsychotics Induced Reproductive Toxicity by Stimulating Oxidative Stress: A Comparative in Vivo and in Silico Study.

The pathophysiological mechanism behind the link between antipsychotic drugs and sexual dysfunction is still unknown. The goal of this research is to compare the potential effects of antipsychotics on the male reproductive system. Fifty rats were randomly assigned into the five groups indicated: Control, Haloperidol, Risperidone, Quetiapine and Aripiprazole. Sperm parameters were significantly impaired in all antipsychotics-treated groups. Haloperidol and Risperidone significantly decreased the level of testosterone. All antipsychotics had significantly reduced inhibin B level. A significant reduction was observed in SOD activity in all antipsychotics-treated groups. While GSH levels diminished, MDA levels were rising in the Haloperidol and Risperidone groups. Also, the GSH level was significantly elevated in the Quetiapine and Aripiprazole groups. By causing oxidative stress and altering hormone levels, Haloperidol and Risperidone are damaging to male reproductivity. This study represents useful starting point for exploring further aspects of the underlying mechanisms reproductive toxicity of antipsychotics.

Treatment with the second-generation antipsychotic quetiapine is associated with increased subgenual ACC activation during reward processing in major depressive disorder

BackgroundThe second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) quetiapine is an essential option for antidepressant augmentation therapy in major depressive disorder (MDD), yet neurobiological mechanisms behind its antidepressant properties remain unclear. As SGAs interfere with activity in reward-related brain areas, including the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) — a key brain region in antidepressant interventions, this study examined whether quetiapine treatment affects ACC activity during reward processing in MDD patients. MethodsUsing the ACC as region of interest, an independent t-test comparing reward-related BOLD response of 51 quetiapine-taking and 51 antipsychotic-free MDD patients was conducted. Monetary reward outcome feedback was measured in a card-guessing paradigm using pseudorandom blocks. Participants were matched for age, sex, and depression severity and analyses were controlled for confounding variables, including total antidepressant medication load, illness chronicity and acute depression severity. Potential dosage effects were examined in a 3 × 1 ANOVA. Differences in ACC-related functional connectivity were assessed in psycho-physiological interaction (PPI) analyses. ResultsLeft subgenual ACC activity was significantly higher in the quetiapine group compared to antipsychotic-free participants and dependent on high-dose quetiapine intake. Results remained significant after controlling for confounding variables. The PPI analysis did not yield significant group differences in ACC-related functional connectivity. LimitationsCausal interpretation is limited due to cross-sectional findings. ConclusionElevated subgenual ACC activity to rewarding stimuli may represent a neurobiological marker and potential key interface of quetiapine's antidepressant effects in MDD. These results underline ACC activity during reward processing as an investigative avenue for future research and therapeutic interventions to improve MDD treatment outcomes.

Reproductive Safety of Lurasidone and Quetiapine: Update from the National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications.

Background: Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs), also called atypical antipsychotics, are common therapies for women with a spectrum of psychiatric disorders. No systematically ascertained human reproductive safety data are available for lurasidone, and prospective data for quetiapine are limited, making decisions regarding use of these medications during pregnancy complicated. Materials and Methods: The National Pregnancy Registry for Psychiatric Medications is a prospective cohort study designed to collect reproductive safety data relative to SGAs. Pregnant women aged 18-45 years, with psychiatric illness and prenatal psychotropic medication exposure completed three phone interviews during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Cases of presumed malformations are abstracted from medical records for adjudication by a teratologist blinded to medication exposure. Results: Of 2,293 women enrolled at the time of analysis, 134 in the lurasidone group, 264 in the quetiapine group, and 886 controls completed the postpartum interview and were therefore eligible for inclusion. Dropped or lost-to-follow-up participants (13%) and those currently pregnant were excluded. Participants were predominantly White, college-educated, and married (lurasidone = 88.1%, 76.9%, 77.6%; quetiapine = 89.8%, 71.2%, 75.0%; controls = 92.7%, 86.7%, 89.1%). Absolute risks of major malformations were 2.19% (lurasidone), 1.85% (quetiapine), and 1.77% (controls). Odds ratios comparing lurasidone and quetiapine with controls were 1.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.36-4.32) and 1.04 (95% CI = 0.38-2.85), respectively. Conclusions: No specific patterns of malformations were observed in infants exposed to the medications of interest. Lurasidone and quetiapine did not appear to be major teratogens, but further information is needed to refine risk estimates. Food and Drug Administration guidance underscores the importance of pregnancy registries. Clinical trial number: NCT01246765.

Assessing the risks of treatment in Parkinson disease psychosis: An in-depth analysis.

Parkinson disease (PD) psychosis (PDP) is a disabling non-motor symptom. Pharmacologic treatment is limited to pimavanserin, quetiapine, and clozapine, which do not worsen parkinsonism. A Food and Drug Administration black box warning exists for antipsychotics, suggesting increased mortality in elderly patients with dementia. However, the reasons for higher mortality are unknown. Expanding on prior work exploring mortality in treated PDP patients, we conducted a retrospective comparison to understand the links between treatment regimen, clinical characteristics, and negative outcomes. Electronic medical record data extraction included clinically diagnosed PD patients between 4/29/16-4/29/19 and excluded patients with primary psychiatric diagnoses or atypical parkinsonism. Mortality and clinical characteristics during the study period were compared between untreated patients and those receiving pimavanserin, quetiapine, or both agents (combination). Mortality analyses were adjusted for age, sex, levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD), and dementia. The pimavanserin group (n = 34) had lower mortality than the untreated group (n = 66) (odds ratio = 0.171, 95% confidence interval: 0.025-0.676, p = 0.026). The untreated group had similar mortality compared to the quetiapine (n = 147) and combination (n = 68) groups. All treated groups had a higher LEDD compared to the untreated group, but no other differences in demographics, hospitalizations, medical comorbidities, medications, or laboratory values were found between the untreated and treated groups. PDP patients receiving pimavanserin had lower mortality than untreated patients. We found no other clear differences in clinical characteristics to explain the mortality risk. Prospective randomized trials are needed to definitively identify the optimal PDP treatment regimen and associated risks.

Lurasidone versus Quetiapine for Cognitive Impairments in Young Patients with Bipolar Depression: A Randomized, Controlled Study

The clinical efficacy of lurasidone and quetiapine, two commonly prescribed atypical antipsychotics for bipolar depression, has been inadequately studied in young patients. In this randomized and controlled study, we aimed to compare the effects of these two drugs on cognitive function, emotional status, and metabolic profiles in children and adolescents with bipolar depression. We recruited young participants (aged 10-17 years old) with a DSM-5 diagnosis of bipolar disorder during a depressive episode, who were then randomly assigned to two groups and treated with flexible doses of lurasidone (60 to 120 mg/day) or quetiapine (300 to 600 mg/day) for consecutive 8 weeks, respectively. All the participants were clinically evaluated on cognitive function using the THINC-it instrument at baseline and week 8, and emotional status was assessed at baseline and the end of week 2, 4, and 8. Additionally, the changes in weight and serum metabolic profiles (triglyceride, cholesterol, and fasting blood glucose) during the trial were also analyzed. In results, a total of 71 patients were randomly assigned to the lurasidone group (n = 35) or the quetiapine group (n = 36), of which 31 patients completed the whole treatment course. After an 8-week follow-up, participants in the lurasidone group showed better performance in the Symbol Check Reaction and Accuracy Tests, when compared to those in the quetiapine group. No inter-group difference was observed in the depression scores, response rate, or remission rate throughout the trial. In addition, there was no significant difference in serum metabolic profiles between the lurasidone group and the quetiapine group, including triglyceride level, cholesterol level, and fasting blood glucose level. However, the quetiapine group presented a more apparent change in body weight than the lurasidone group. In conclusion, the present study provided preliminary evidence that quetiapine and lurasidone had an equivalent anti-depressive effect, and lurasidone appeared to be superior to quetiapine in improving the cognitive function of young patients with bipolar depression.

Quetiapine as an adjunct to enhance engagement in prolonged exposure therapy for PTSD in veterans: A randomized, pilot trial

Despite established efficacy, there is low engagement in prolonged exposure (PE) therapy for PTSD among combat veterans. In preparation for a full-scale randomized trial, we sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of quetiapine to enhance patient engagement in PE therapy. Open-label, randomized pilot trial of quetiapine monotherapy vs. Treatment as Usual (TAU) medications in 20 military veterans with combat related PTSD who were seeking care from the San Antonio Polytrauma Rehabilitation Center at the South Texas Veterans Healthcare System (STVHCS). Participants were randomized to receive either Quetiapine ( n = 10) monotherapy or pharmacological TAU ( n = 10) in patients who were receiving PE as a standard of care therapy. We collected information on (1) the number of potentially eligible veterans approached, the number screened, and the number randomized, (2) adverse events reported, (3) number of participants continuing PE treatment at least until session #4 (i.e., after first exposure session) and the total number of sessions of PE completed by the participants, and (4) change in PTSD severity and sleep quality measured by the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5) and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Data were analyzed for 18 intent-to-treat participants with mean (SD) age, 53.5 (13.4) years; and baseline PCL-5 score, 57.6 (7.6). More veterans in the quetiapine group ( n = 9; 100%) received at least the first exposure session of PE therapy compared to TAU (( n = 3; (37.5%), p = .006] and completed PE therapy ( n = 8; (88.9%) vs ( n = 3; (37.5%), p = .03). Both PCL-5 ( p = .03) and PSQI ( p = .02) scores decreased significantly more for participants in the quetiapine than the TAU group. Preliminary findings support the feasibility, safety, and possible efficacy of quetiapine as an adjunct to enhancing engagement in PE therapy. A full-scale randomized trial is required to determine the true efficacy of quetiapine to enhance engagement in PE treatment.

Association Between Sexual Dysfunction and Dose of Atypical Antipsychotics: Essential to Learn the Basics.

There is paucity of data on sexual dysfunction associated with atypical antipsychotics in Indian population. We estimated the prevalence of sexual dysfunction and assessed dose dependency, if any, in patients on monotherapy of atypical antipsychotics. This cross-sectional study analyzed the data from patients with F20 to F29 (International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision, ICD-10) receiving monotherapy of risperidone (group1), olanzapine (group2), or quetiapine (group3) for at least 4weeks. The sexual function of participants was assessed using Arizona sexual experiences (ASEX) scale. Chlorpromazine (CPZ) equivalent dose and doses in terms of dose years were calculated. Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Pearson correlation were used for analysis. Of the 154 subjects, 65.58% were males, with 44%, 48%, and 8% receiving risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine, respectively. The mean duration of treatment was 20.9weeks. Lower ASEX scores were reported with quetiapine. The differences in mean ASEX scores between groups1 and 2 were statistically significant for sex drive (P=.016), sexual arousal (P=.025), and overall score (P=.037). Sexual dysfunction was more frequent with risperidone (48.5%) than with olanzapine (28.4%) and quetiapine (0%). In group1, the duration of therapy positively correlated with the mean scores of sexual desire (P=.003) and arousal (P=.033), but this was not the case for group2 (receiving olanzapine). The mean CPZ equivalent doses were comparable between the groups (P=.064); those receiving <200mg CPZ dose equivalents showed greater sexual impairment. We conclude that the occurrence of atypical antipsychotic-induced sexual dysfunction is not dose dependent. Olanzapine has a better safety profile in terms of sexual dysfunction, whereas the data reflecting the experience with quetiapine are insufficient.

Comparison of effectiveness between Haloperidol and Quetiapine in acute manic episode.

This study was conducted to compare the response rate of Quetiapine and Haloperidol in patients with acute manic episodes. A total of 120 patients with acute episode of mania with baseline Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) of more than 20 were included and randomly allocated to either Quetiapine (Group A) or Haloperidol (Group B). Each patient was assessed at baseline. YMRS was administered at the start and at follow-up visit after six weeks. Comparison of response rate (>50% reduction in YMRS) was not statistically significant between the two groups (70% vs. 71.7%; p=0.410) after six weeks in acute manic episode. Quetiapine and Haloperidol emerged as equally effective pharmacological strategies for the treatment of bipolar mania. Quetiapine may be used as an alternative to conventional antipsychotics; Haloperidol can be used as replacement of Quetiapine as well, as it is of low cost.

Impaired central set point of thyroid homeostasis during quetiapine treatment in the acute phase of schizophrenia

AimTo evaluate the impact of quetiapine treatment on central set point of thyroid homeostasis in patients with acute phase schizophrenia. MethodsDuring Jan. 2016 to Dec. 2018, we conducted a retrospective cohort study in “the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University”. All patients admitted for treatment of schizophrenia being euthyroid at admission and reevaluated for thyroid function during hospitalization were recruited and followed until discharge. Patients treated with mood stabilizers during hospitalization were excluded. Quetiapine use was the exposure measure. The primary outcomes were the parameters of central set point of thyroid homeostasis measured by “thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) index” and “thyroid feedback quantile-based index (TFQI)”. Multiple regression models were used to estimate the association between quetiapine exposure and outcomes. ResultsA total of 1302 patients were enrolled in this study. Quetiapine exposure was associated with a more significant decline in the TSH index and TFQI, and the adjusted β and 95% confidence interval (CI) were −0.12 (−0.22, −0.01) and −0.10 (−0.15, −0.05), respectively. A dose-response association between quetiapine exposure and decline in TSH index and TFQI was observed (P < 0.05). Sensitivity analyses restricting to patients under mono-atypical antipsychotic therapy, or selecting patients in the non-quetiapine group matched to quetiapine group yielded similar results. ConclusionQuetiapine was associated with TSH index and TFQI reduction in a dose-response pattern, suggesting that impaired central set point may be involved in the mechanism by which quetiapine affects hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis in acute phase schizophrenia patients.

Comparison of the Effect of Olanzapine, Haloperidol and Quetiapine on the Resolution of Individual Delirium Symptoms in ICU Patients: A Double-blind, Clinical Trial Study

Introduction: Considering that haloperidol is a first-generation antipsychotic drug known as the primary treatment for delirium, it causes extrapyramidal side effects, and olanzapine and quetiapine are second-generation antipsychotic drugs without extrapyramidal side effects. In this study, we compared the effects of olanzapine and quetiapine with haloperidol on the resolution of individual delirium symptoms.&#x0D; Materials and Methods: In a double-blind clinical trial study, 90 patients admitted to the ICU in three groups received haloperidol at a dose of 2.5 mg/day, while in the second group, patients received olanzapine at an amount of 2.5- 10.5mg/day. In the third group, they received quetiapine at a dose of 12.5 to 75 mg daily. Then, patients' sedation levels were measured according to RASS criteria, and their disease severity was evaluated according to APACHE II criteria.&#x0D; Results: During 15 work shifts in the first, second, third, seventh, and tenth days, sedation scores in all three groups decreased significantly (p-v &lt;0.05), and all three drugs were effective in subsiding patients' agitation in 10 days. In the evening and night of the first day, the sedation score in the quetiapine group was higher than the other two groups; however, after the treatment period and in the work shifts of the seventh and tenth days, the patients in the quetiapine group had the lowest sedation score on the RASS scale. Also, after starting drug treatment in the three groups, the mean severity of the disease was significantly different in the three groups (p-v &lt;0.05), so that on the third and seventh day, the olanzapine group had the lowest and the haloperidol group had the highest disease severity. But on the tenth day, the severity of the disease was lowest in the patients in the quetiapine group.&#x0D; Conclusion: As a result of this study, it was found that quetiapine, olanzapine, and haloperidol had the most significant effect in improving the sedation level of patients with delirium according to RASS criteria, respectively, and the use of atypical antipsychotic drugs had more favorable outcomes than typical ones in controlling patients' delirium.

A head-to-head randomised controlled trial of aripiprazole versus quetiapine as augmenting agents in treatment-resistant depression

Introduction: Almost 30%–50% of the patients with major depressive disorder can be categorised as treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The use of augmenting agents such as aripiprazole (ARI) and quetiapine (QP) to the existing antidepressant (AD) therapy could be a suitable alternative for treating TRD. The superiority of anyone over others is not established in short-term studies. Hence, the present study was performed to compare the safety and efficacy of ARI and QP for the treatment of TRD. Materials and Methods: In the present study, a total of 50 patients with TRD who showed insufficient response to at least two ADs for 12 weeks were enrolled. The participants were assigned randomly in a double-blind trial to receive ARI (10 mg/day; n = 25) or QP (300 mg/day; n = 25) in addition to their standard AD therapy for 12 weeks. Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale were used to measure treatment efficacy. The safety was evaluated by recording treatment-caused adverse effects (AEF). Results: A significant decrease in MADRS score was observed with ARI groups than in the QP group (‒7.5; ‒4.6, P < 0.001). The CGI scores in the ARI group also exhibit significant improvement compared with the QP group. There was a non-significant change in CGI score recorded in both groups. The AEF was observed in 11% of patients with more incidences in the QP groups. The incidences of AEFs resulting in discontinuation of therapy were found low in both groups (ARI: 1.6%; QP: 3.2%). Conclusion: The findings of this study conclude that TRD patients can be more benefitted by ARI augmentation therapy than QP.

Comparison of Haloperidol and Quetiapine for Treatment of Delirium in Critical Illness: A Prospective Randomised Double-blind Placebo-controlled Trial

Introduction: Delirium is associated with an increased chance of death, prolonged hospitalisation, higher healthcare costs, and possibly long-term brain damage in survivors. Antipsychotics, both conventional and atypical, are the cornerstone of pharmacologic treatment for delirium in adults. Aim: To find out whether typical and atypical antipsychotic medication would result in a shorter duration of delirium than placebo and would improve other outcomes. Materials and Methods: This is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted on patients with delirium in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India from February 2021 to February 2022. Out of 45, 15 received enteral haloperidol (maximum dose 30 mg daily), 15 received quetiapine (maximum dose 300 mg daily) and 15 were controls receiving placebo through Ryle’s tube. Delirium was detected with the use of Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU), and side effects of the drugs were noted. Dose of a trial drug or placebo was placed halved or doubled at 12-hour intervals using these parameters. The primary end point was the number of days alive without delirium during the 14 day intervention period. Secondary end points included time to freedom from mechanical ventilation, time to ICU, hospital discharge and 30 day and 90 day survival. Results: Out of 45 patients screened, 25 were males and 20 were females with no comparable differences. The mean number of days alive without delirium or coma was 9.45 in the haloperidol group, 8.64 in the quetiapine group, and 8.57 in the placebo group (p-value=0.63) for overall effect across trial groups. The use of haloperidol or quetiapine as compared with placebo, had no significant effect on the primary end point. There were no significant between-group differences in respect to the secondary end points . Conclusion: The use of enteral haloperidol or quetiapine, as compared with placebo, did not significantly alter the duration of delirium in the critically-ill patients admitted in ICU.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial of Lithium Versus Quetiapine for the Treatment of Acute Mania in Youth with Early Course Bipolar Disorder.

Objective: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of manic or mixed episodes in youths with early course bipolar I disorder. Methods: Six-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of adolescents with acute manic/mixed episode. Target dose of quetiapine dose was adjusted to a target dose of 400-600 mg and target serum level for lithium was 1.0-1.2 mEq/L. Primary outcome measure was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Secondary outcomes were treatment response (50% or more decrease from baseline in YMRS score) and remission (YMRS score ≤12, Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R] total score ≤28 and Clinical Global Impression Bipolar Severity Scale [CGI-BP-S] overall score of ≤3, respectively). Results: A total of 109 patients were randomized (quetiapine = 58 and lithium = 51). Participants in the quetiapine treatment group showed a significantly greater reduction in YMRS score than those in the lithium group (-11.0 vs. -13.2; p < 0.001; effect size 0.39). Response rate was 72% in the quetiapine group and 49% in the lithium group (p = 0.012); no differences in remission rates between groups were observed. Most frequent side effects for lithium were headaches (60.8%), nausea (39.2%), somnolence (27.5%), and tremor (27.5%); for quetiapine somnolence (63.8%), headaches (55.2%), tremor (36.2%), and dizziness (36.2%) were evidenced. Participants receiving quetiapine experienced more somnolence (p < 0.001), dizziness (p < 0.05), and weight gain (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Treatment with both lithium and quetiapine led to clinical improvement. Most study participants in this study experienced a clinical response; however, less than half of the participants in this study achieved symptomatic remission. The head-to-head comparison of both treatment groups showed quetiapine was associated with a statistically significant greater rate of response and overall symptom reduction compared with lithium. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT00893581.

Dose-response association of acute-phase quetiapine treatment with risk of new-onset hypothyroidism in schizophrenia patients.

To assess association between quetiapine treatment and risk of new-onset hypothyroidism in schizophrenia patients. We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary hospital in China between January 2016 and December 2018. Schizophrenia patients with normal thyroid tests at admission were included. Hypothyroidism, which was defined as thyroid-stimulating hormone >4.20 mU/L and free thyroxine <12.00 pmol/L, or on L-thyroxine prescriptions, was the outcome measure, and quetiapine treatment between admission and subsequent thyroid test was the exposure measure of this study. Adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were used to assess the independent association of quetiapine treatment with risk of new-onset hypothyroidism. The dose-response association was further analysed by 3 quetiapine doses: low (≤<=0.2g/d), medium (0.2-0.6g/d), and high (>0.6g/d). A total of 2022 eligible patients were included in the final analysis. Sixty patients (15.0%) in the quetiapine group developed hypothyroidism, while 56 patients (3.5%) in the nonquetiapine group developed hypothyroidism. Relative risk (95% confidence interval) of developing hypothyroidism for quetiapine use was 4.01 (2.86-5.64) after adjusting for several potential confounding factors. A strong dose-response association between quetiapine use and risk of developing hypothyroidism was observed: adjusted relative risks (95% confidence intervals) were 1.00 (0.25-2.59), 4.22 (2.80-6.25) and 5.62 (3.66-8.38), respectively, for low-, medium- and high-dose quetiapine, as compared with no quetiapine. Acute phase quetiapine treatment for schizophrenia patients was strongly associated with increased risk of developing new-onset hypothyroidism, with a clear dose-response association.