Predictors and correlates for weight changes in patients co-treated with olanzapine and weight mitigating agents; a post-hoc analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study focuses on exploring the relationship between changes in appetite or eating behaviors and subsequent weight change for adult patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder treated with olanzapine and adjunctive potential weight mitigating pharmacotherapy. The aim is not to compare different weight mitigating agents, but to evaluate patients' characteristics and changes in their eating behaviors during treatment. Identification of patient subgroups with different degrees of susceptibility to the effect of weight mitigating agents during olanzapine treatment may aid clinicians in treatment decisions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were obtained from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 16-week clinical trials. Included were 158 patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder and a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m²who had received olanzapine treatment in combination with nizatidine (n = 68), sibutramine (n = 42), or amantadine (n = 48). Individual patients were analyzed for categorical weight loss ≥ 2 kg and weight gain ≥ 1 kg. Variables that were evaluated as potential predictors of weight outcomes included baseline patient characteristics, factors of the Eating Inventory, individual items of the Eating Behavior Assessment, and the Visual Analog Scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Predictors/correlates of weight loss ≥ 2 kg included: high baseline BMI, low baseline interest in food, and a decrease from baseline to endpoint in appetite, hunger, or cravings for carbohydrates. Reduced cognitive restraint, increase in hunger, and increased overeating were associated with a higher probability of weight gain ≥ 1 kg.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The association between weight gain and lack of cognitive restraint in the presence of increased appetite suggests potential benefit of psychoeducational counseling in conjunction with adjunctive pharmacotherapeutic agents in limiting weight gain during antipsychotic drug therapy.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>This analysis was not a clinical trial and did not involve any medical intervention.</p

Potential impact of prickly pear cactus flour and Salix babylonica extract on cecal fermentation and methane production in horses

The cecal gas (GP) and methane (CH4) production and cecal fermentation kinetics when corn grain (CG) was replaced with prickly cactus (PC) in a horse’s diet at different levels of Salix babylonica (SB) extract was investigated. Three total mixed rations where CG was replaced with PC at three levels (/kg): 0 g (Control), 75 g (PC75) or 150 g (PC150) were prepared and SB extract added at four levels: 0, 0.6, 1.2 and 1.8 mL/g dry matter (DM) of substrates. No ration type 9 SB extract dose interaction was observed (P [0.05) for GP kinetics and CH4 production. Increasing the level of PC in the ration quadratically increased (P \0.01) the asymptotic GP and decreased (P\0.01) the rate and lag time of GP. Increasing the level of PC in the ration, increased GP values (P\0.05). Increasing the level of SB extract linearly decreased (P = 0.001) the lag time of GP of all diets without affecting the asymptotic GP or the rate of GP. Ration type and SB level had no effect (P [0.05) on CH4 production; however, at 36 h of incubation, SB extract decreased CH4 production. The rations PC75 and PC150 increased cecal pH compared with the control ration. The PC150 ration had the highest (P\0.05) DM degradability, short chain fatty acids production, and gas yield after 24 h of incubation, with no effect (P[0.05) of SB inclusion on all investigated fermentation kinetic parameters. It is concluded that increasing the level of PC in the diet of horse and replacing CG up to 60%, increased GP and improved cecal fermentation kinetics without affecting CH4 production. Inclusion of S. babylonica extract in the tested rations had weak effects on fermentation kinetics although it decreased the lag time of GP

Harnessing the potential of ligninolytic enzymes for lignocellulosic biomass pretreatment

Abundant lignocellulosic biomass from various industries provides a great potential feedstock for the production of value-added products such as biofuel, animal feed, and paper pulping. However, low yield of sugar obtained from lignocellulosic hydrolysate is usually due to the presence of lignin that acts as a protective barrier for cellulose and thus restricts the accessibility of the enzyme to work on the cellulosic component. This review focuses on the significance of biological pretreatment specifically using ligninolytic enzymes as an alternative method apart from the conventional physical and chemical pretreatment. Different modes of biological pretreatment are discussed in this paper which is based on (i) fungal pretreatment where fungi mycelia colonise and directly attack the substrate by releasing ligninolytic enzymes and (ii) enzymatic pretreatment using ligninolytic enzymes to counter the drawbacks of fungal pretreatment. This review also discusses the important factors of biological pretreatment using ligninolytic enzymes such as nature of the lignocellulosic biomass, pH, temperature, presence of mediator, oxygen, and surfactant during the biodelignification process

New Pharmacological Agents to Aid Smoking Cessation and Tobacco Harm Reduction: What has been Investigated and What is in the Pipeline?

A wide range of support is available to help smokers to quit and aid attempts at harm reduction, including three first-line smoking cessation medications: nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline and bupropion. Despite the efficacy of these, there is a continual need to diversify the range of medications so that the needs of tobacco users are met. This paper compares the first-line smoking cessation medications to: 1) two variants of these existing products: new galenic formulations of varenicline and novel nicotine delivery devices; and 2) twenty-four alternative products: cytisine (novel outside of central and eastern Europe), nortriptyline, other tricyclic antidepressants, electronic cigarettes, clonidine (an anxiolytic), other anxiolytics (e.g. buspirone), selective 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors, supplements (e.g. St John’s wort), silver acetate, nicobrevin, modafinil, venlafaxine, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI), opioid antagonist, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) antagonists, glucose tablets, selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists, nicotine vaccines, drugs that affect gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmission, drugs that affect N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDA), dopamine agonists (e.g. levodopa), pioglitazone (Actos; OMS405), noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, and the weight management drug lorcaserin. Six criteria are used: relative efficacy, relative safety, relative cost, relative use (overall impact of effective medication use), relative scope (ability to serve new groups of patients), and relative ease of use (ESCUSE). Many of these products are in the early stages of clinical trials, however, cytisine looks most promising in having established efficacy and safety and being of low cost. Electronic cigarettes have become very popular, appear to be efficacious and are safer than smoking, but issues of continued dependence and possible harms need to be considered

The effects of lifestyle interventions on (long-term) weight management, cardiometabolic risk and depressive symptoms in people with psychotic disorders:A meta-analysis

AIMS: The aim of this study was to estimate the effects of lifestyle interventions on bodyweight and other cardiometabolic risk factors in people with psychotic disorders. Additionally, the long-term effects on body weight and the effects on depressive symptoms were examined. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched four databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared lifestyle interventions to control conditions in patients with psychotic disorders. Lifestyle interventions were aimed at weight loss or weight gain prevention, and the study outcomes included bodyweight or metabolic parameters. RESULTS: The search resulted in 25 RCTs -only 4 were considered high quality- showing an overall effect of lifestyle interventions on bodyweight (effect size (ES)  =  -0.63, p<0.0001). Lifestyle interventions were effective in both weight loss (ES =  -0.52, p<0.0001) and weight-gain-prevention (ES =  -0.84, p = 0.0002). There were significant long-term effects, two to six months post-intervention, for both weight-gain-prevention interventions (ES =  -0.85, p = 0.0002) and weight loss studies (ES =  -0.46, p = 0.02). Up to ten studies reported on cardiometabolic risk factors and showed that lifestyle interventions led to significant improvements in waist circumference, triglycerides, fasting glucose and insulin. No significant effects were found for blood pressure and cholesterol levels. Four studies reported on depressive symptoms and showed a significant effect (ES =  -0.95, p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Lifestyle interventions are effective in treating and preventing obesity, and in reducing cardiometabolic risk factors. However, the quality of the studies leaves much to be desired