How can we improve antidepressant adherence in the management of depression? A targeted review and 10 clinical recommendations.

Adherence to antidepressants is crucial for optimal treatment outcomes when treating depressive disorders. However, poor adherence is common among patients prescribed antidepressants. This targeted review summarizes the main factors associated with poor adherence, interventions that promote antidepressant adherence, pharmacological aspects related to antidepressant adherence, and formulates 10 clinical recommendations to optimize antidepressant adherence. Patient-related factors associated with antidepressant non-adherence include younger age, psychiatric and medical comorbidities, cognitive impairment, and substance use disorders. Prescriber behavior-related factors include neglecting medical and family histories, selecting poorly tolerated antidepressants, or complex antidepressant regimens. Multi-disciplinary interventions targeting both patient and prescriber, aimed at improving antidepressant adherence, include psychoeducation and providing the patient with clear behavioral interventions to prevent/minimize poor adherence. Regarding antidepressant choice, agents with individually tailored tolerability profile should be chosen. Ten clinical recommendations include four points focusing on the patient (therapeutic alliance, adequate history taking, measurement of depressive symptoms, and adverse effects improved access to clinical care), three focusing on prescribing practice (psychoeducation, individually tailored antidepressant choice, simplified regimen), two focusing on mental health services (improved access to mental health care, incentivized adherence promotion and monitoring), and one relating to adherence measurement (adherence measurement with scales and/or therapeutic drug monitoring)

Balancing risks and benefits of cannabis use: umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and observational studies

Objective: To systematically assess credibility and certainty of associations between cannabis, cannabinoids, and cannabis based medicines and human health, from observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Design: Umbrella review. Data Sources: PubMed, PsychInfo, Embase, up to 9 February 2022. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies and RCTs that have reported on the efficacy and safety of cannabis, cannabinoids, or cannabis based medicines were included. Credibility was graded according to convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or not significant (observational evidence), and by GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) (RCTs). Quality was assessed with AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2). Sensitivity analyses were conducted. Results: 101 meta-analyses were included (observational=50, RCTs=51) (AMSTAR 2 high 33, moderate 31, low 32, or critically low 5). From RCTs supported by high to moderate certainty, cannabis based medicines increased adverse events related to the central nervous system (equivalent odds ratio 2.84 (95% confidence interval 2.16 to 3.73)), psychological effects (3.07 (1.79 to 5.26)), and vision (3.00 (1.79 to 5.03)) in people with mixed conditions (GRADE=high), improved nausea/vomit, pain, spasticity, but increased psychiatric, gastrointestinal adverse event, and somnolence among others (GRADE=moderate). Cannabidiol improved 50% reduction of seizures (0.59 (0.38 to 0.92)) and seizure events (0.59 (0.36 to 0.96)) (GRADE=high), but increased pneumonia, gastrointestinal adverse events, and somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For chronic pain, cannabis based medicines or cannabinoids reduced pain by 30% (0.59 (0.37 to 0.93), GRADE=high), across different conditions (n=7), but increased psychological distress. For epilepsy, cannabidiol increased risk of diarrhoea (2.25 (1.33 to 3.81)), had no effect on sleep disruption (GRADE=high), reduced seizures across different populations and measures (n=7), improved global impression (n=2), quality of life, and increased risk of somnolence (GRADE=moderate). In the general population, cannabis worsened positive psychotic symptoms (5.21 (3.36 to 8.01)) and total psychiatric symptoms (7.49 (5.31 to 10.42)) (GRADE=high), negative psychotic symptoms, and cognition (n=11) (GRADE=moderate). In healthy people, cannabinoids improved pain threshold (0.74 (0.59 to 0.91)), unpleasantness (0.60 (0.41 to 0.88)) (GRADE=high). For inflammatory bowel disease, cannabinoids improved quality of life (0.34 (0.22 to 0.53) (GRADE=high). For multiple sclerosis, cannabinoids improved spasticity, pain, but increased risk of dizziness, dry mouth, nausea, somnolence (GRADE=moderate). For cancer, cannabinoids improved sleep disruption, but had gastrointestinal adverse events (n=2) (GRADE=moderate). Cannabis based medicines, cannabis, and cannabinoids resulted in poor tolerability across various conditions (GRADE=moderate). Evidence was convincing from observational studies (main and sensitivity analyses); in pregnant women, small for gestational age (1.61 (1.41 to 1.83)), low birth weight (1.43 (1.27 to 1.62)); in drivers, car crash (1.27 (1.21 to 1.34)); and in the general population, psychosis (1.71 (1.47 to 2.00)). Harmful effects were noted for additional neonatal outcomes, outcomes related to car crash, outcomes in the general population including psychotic symptoms, suicide attempt, depression, and mania, and impaired cognition in healthy cannabis users (all suggestive to highly suggestive). Conclusions: Convincing or converging evidence supports avoidance of cannabis during adolescence and early adulthood, in people prone to or with mental health disorders, in pregnancy and before and while driving. Cannabidiol is effective in people with epilepsy. Cannabis based medicines are effective in people with multiple sclerosis, chronic pain, inflammatory bowel disease, and in palliative medicine, but not without adverse events

Sulla separazione di uranio da soluzioni acquose molto diluite

The recovery of uranium from dilute solutions and sea water is discussed from the scientific, technoogic and economic points of view

Bonding and fluxional behavior of N,N'-di-p-tolylformamidino and 1,3-di-p-tolyltriazenido complexes of palladium(II)and platinum(II)

The fluxionality of M(PPh3)2Cl(ArNXNAr) and trans-Pt(PPh3)2H(ArNNNAr) (M = Pd(II), Pt(II); Ar = p-MeC6H4; X = CH, N), is discussed on the basis of 1H NMR, x-ray, and ir studies. The stereochem. non-rigid process is proposed to occur via a pseudo-pentacoordinate intermediate having both N atoms facing the metal through 2 electron lone pairs. A different mechanism via a -bonding component in the M-(N ligand) bond is also discussed

Gadolinium complexes as contrast agents for liver NMR imaging

NMR imaging of liver using Gd(III)-phytate complex as contrast agent was evaluated in rats. The 31P NMR spectrum of Gd(III)-phytate complex is presented and discussed as well as the spin-lattice relaxation times. Rat liver images obtained at 10, 15, and 20 min after i.v. injection of Gd(III)-phytate (10 mg/kg) showed marked contrast enhancement attributable to the Gd(III) complex