For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
14
views
121
references
 Top references
cited by
24
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      845
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Review of withdrawal catatonia: what does this reveal about clozapine?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Withdrawal symptoms are common upon discontinuation of psychiatric medications. Catatonia, a neuropsychiatric condition proposed to be associated with gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) hypoactivity due to its robust response to benzodiazepines, has been described as a withdrawal syndrome in case reports but is not a well-recognized phenomenon. The authors undertook a review of withdrawal catatonia with an aim to understand its presentation as well as the medications and psychoactive substances it is associated with. The review identified 55 cases of withdrawal catatonia, the majority of which occurred upon discontinuation of benzodiazepines (24 cases) and discontinuation of clozapine (20 cases). No other antipsychotic medications were identified as having been associated with the onset of a catatonic episode within 2 weeks following their discontinuation. Increasing GABA activity and resultant GABA receptor adaptations with prolonged use is postulated as a shared pharmacological mechanism between clozapine and benzodiazepines that underlie their association with withdrawal catatonia. The existing evidence for clozapine’s activity on the GABA system is reviewed. The clinical presentations of benzodiazepine withdrawal catatonia and clozapine withdrawal catatonia appear to differ and reasons for this are explored. One reason is that benzodiazepines act directly on GABA A receptors as allosteric agonists, while clozapine has more complex and indirect interactions, primarily through effects on receptors located on GABA interneurons. Another possible reason for the difference in clinical presentation is that clozapine withdrawal catatonia may also involve receptor adaptations in non-GABA receptors such as dopamine and acetylcholine. The findings from our review have implications for the treatment of withdrawal catatonia, and treatment recommendations are provided. Further research understanding the uniqueness of clozapine withdrawal catatonia among antipsychotic medication may give some insight as to clozapine’s differential mechanism of action.

          Related collections

          Most cited references121

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Circuit-based framework for understanding neurotransmitter and risk gene interactions in schizophrenia.

          John Lisman, Joseph T. Coyle, Robert W. Green … (2008)
          Many risk genes interact synergistically to produce schizophrenia and many neurotransmitter interactions have been implicated. We have developed a circuit-based framework for understanding gene and neurotransmitter interactions. NMDAR hypofunction has been implicated in schizophrenia because NMDAR antagonists reproduce symptoms of the disease. One action of antagonists is to reduce the excitation of fast-spiking interneurons, resulting in disinhibition of pyramidal cells. Overactive pyramidal cells, notably those in the hippocampus, can drive a hyperdopaminergic state that produces psychosis. Additional aspects of interneuron function can be understood in this framework, as follows. (i) In animal models, NMDAR antagonists reduce parvalbumin and GAD67, as found in schizophrenia. These changes produce further disinhibition and can be viewed as the aberrant response of a homeostatic system having a faulty activity sensor (the NMDAR). (ii) Disinhibition decreases the power of gamma oscillation and might thereby produce negative and cognitive symptoms. (iii) Nicotine enhances the output of interneurons, and might thereby contribute to its therapeutic effect in schizophrenia.
          Article 0 comments Cited 264 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Atypical antipsychotics: mechanism of action.

            Philip Seeman (2002)
            Although the principal brain target that all antipsychotic drugs attach to is the dopamine D2 receptor, traditional or typical antipsychotics, by attaching to it, induce extrapyramidal signs and symptoms (EPS). They also, by binding to the D2 receptor, elevate serum prolactin. Atypical antipsychotics given in dosages within the clinically effective range do not bring about these adverse clinical effects. To understand how these drugs work, it is important to examine the atypical antipsychotics' mechanism of action and how it differs from that of the more typical drugs. This review analyzes the affinities, the occupancies, and the dissociation time-course of various antipsychotics at dopamine D2 receptors and at serotonin (5-HT) receptors, both in the test tube and in live patients. Of the 31 antipsychotics examined, the older traditional antipsychotics such as trifluperazine, pimozide, chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, haloperidol, and flupenthixol bind more tightly than dopamine itself to the dopamine D2 receptor, with dissociation constants that are lower than that for dopamine. The newer, atypical antipsychotics such as quetiapine, remoxipride, clozapine, olanzapine, sertindole, ziprasidone, and amisulpride all bind more loosely than dopamine to the dopamine D2 receptor and have dissociation constants higher than that for dopamine. These tight and loose binding data agree with the rates of antipsychotic dissociation from the human-cloned D2 receptor. For instance, radioactive haloperidol, chlorpromazine, and raclopride all dissociate very slowly over a 30-minute time span, while radioactive quetiapine, clozapine, remoxipride, and amisulpride dissociate rapidly, in less than 60 seconds. These data also match clinical brain-imaging findings that show haloperidol remaining constantly bound to D2 in humans undergoing 2 positron emission tomography (PET) scans 24 hours apart. Conversely, the occupation of D2 by clozapine or quetiapine has mostly disappeared after 24 hours. Atypicals clinically help patients by transiently occupying D2 receptors and then rapidly dissociating to allow normal dopamine neurotransmission. This keeps prolactin levels normal, spares cognition, and obviates EPS. One theory of atypicality is that the newer drugs block 5-HT2A receptors at the same time as they block dopamine receptors and that, somehow, this serotonin-dopamine balance confers atypicality. This, however, is not borne out by the results. While 5-HT2A receptors are readily blocked at low dosages of most atypical antipsychotic drugs (with the important exceptions of remoxipride and amisulpride, neither of which is available for use in Canada) the dosages at which this happens are below those needed to alleviate psychosis. In fact, the antipsychotic threshold occupancy of D2 for antipsychotic action remains at about 65% for both typical and atypical antipsychotic drugs, regardless of whether 5-HT2A receptors are blocked or not. At the same time, the antipsychotic threshold occupancy of D2 for eliciting EPS remains at about 80% for both typical and atypical antipsychotics, regardless of the occupancy of 5-HT2A receptors. The "fast-off-D2" theory, on the other hand, predicts which antipsychotic compounds will or will not produce EPS and hyperprolactinemia and which compounds present a relatively low risk for tardive dyskinesia. This theory also explains why L-dopa psychosis responds to low atypical antipsychotic dosages, and it suggests various individualized treatment strategies.
            Article 0 comments Cited 132 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Low-dose clozapine for the treatment of drug-induced psychosis in Parkinson's disease. The Parkinson Study Group.

              JH Friedman (1999)
              Drug-induced psychosis is a difficult problem to manage in patients with Parkinson's disease. Multiple open-label studies have reported that treatment with clozapine at low doses ameliorates psychosis without worsening parkinsonism. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of low doses of clozapine (6.25 to 50 mg per day) in 60 patients at six sites over a period of 14 months. The patients (mean age, 72 years) had idiopathic Parkinson's disease and drug-induced psychosis of at least four weeks' duration. All the patients continued to receive fixed doses of antiparkinsonian drugs during the four weeks of the trial. Blood counts were monitored weekly in all the patients. The mean dose of clozapine was 24.7 mg per day. The patients in the clozapine group had significantly more improvement than those in the placebo group in all three of the measures used to determine the severity of psychosis. The mean (+/-SE) scores on the Clinical Global Impression Scale improved by 1.6+/-0.3 points for the patients receiving clozapine, as compared with 0.5+/-0.2 point for those receiving placebo (P<0.001). The score on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale improved by 9.3+/-1.5 points for the patients receiving clozapine, as compared with 2.6+/-1.3 points for those receiving placebo (P=0.002). The score on the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms improved by 11.8+/-2.0 points for the patients receiving clozapine, as compared with 3.8+/-1.9 points for those receiving placebo (P=0.01). Seven patients treated with clozapine had an improvement of at least three on the seven-point Clinical Global Impression Scale, as compared with only one patient given placebo. Clozapine treatment improved tremor and had no deleterious effect on the severity of parkinsonism. In one patient, clozapine was discontinued because of leukopenia. Clozapine, at daily doses of 50 mg or less, is safe and significantly improves drug-induced psychosis without worsening parkinsonism.
              Article 0 comments Cited 85 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Matthew Lander: +204-787-7478 , mlander2@exchange.hsc.mb.ca
                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Transl Psychiatry
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Transl Psychiatry
                Title: Translational Psychiatry
                Publisher: Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                ISSN (Electronic): 2158-3188
                Publication date (Electronic): 31 July 2018
                Publication date PMC-release: 31 July 2018
                Publication date Collection: 2018
                Volume: 8
                Electronic Location Identifier: 139
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9609, GRID grid.21613.37, Department of Psychiatry, , University of Manitoba, ; Winnipeg, Canada
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0367 2697, GRID grid.1014.4, Discipline of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, , Flinders University, ; Adelaide, Australia
                [3 ]GRID grid.430453.5, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, ; Adelaide, Australia
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9609, GRID grid.21613.37, Departments of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Community Health Sciences, , University of Manitoba, ; Winnipeg, Canada
                Article
                Publisher ID: 192
                DOI: 10.1038/s41398-018-0192-9
                PMC ID: 6068101
                PubMed ID: 30065280
                SO-VID: 3e73b931-f1d9-4732-9124-3a4de6d34417
                Copyright © © The Author(s) 2018
                License:

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                Date received : 10 January 2017
                Date revision received : 5 March 2018
                Date accepted : 11 May 2018
                Categories
                Subject: Review
                Custom metadata
                issue-copyright-statement © The Author(s) 2018

                ScienceOpen disciplines: Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                Data availability:
                ScienceOpen disciplines: Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content845

                See all similar

                Cited by24

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors878

                See all reference authors