| Literature DB >> 22171164 |
Marty Hinz1, Alvin Stein, Thomas Uncini.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disagreement exists regarding the etiology of cessation of the observed clinical results with administration of reuptake inhibitors. Traditionally, when drug effects wane, it is known as tachyphylaxis. With reuptake inhibitors, the placebo effect is significantly greater than the drug effect in the treatment of depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, leading some to assert that waning of drug effects is placebo relapse, not tachyphylaxis.Entities:
Keywords: depletion; dopamine; relapse; reuptake inhibitor; serotonin; tachyphylaxis
Year: 2011 PMID: 22171164 PMCID: PMC3237392 DOI: 10.2147/DHPS.S24798
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Healthc Patient Saf ISSN: 1179-1365
Group 2 demographics of bariatric group by gender at start of treatment and at evaluation of quality of appetite suppression
| Demographics Female | Demographics Male | |
|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | |
| Mean age (years) | Mean age (years) | |
| Age range (years) | Age range (years) | |
| Age SD (years) | Age SD (years) | |
| 220 entering study | 173 (78.6%) | 47 (21.4%) |
| 46.1 | 49.2 | |
| 18.1–69.6 | 19.3–63.5 | |
| 10.1 | 9.4 | |
| 198 with adequate appetite suppression studied | 157 (79.3%) | 63 (20.7%) |
| 46.1 | 49.2 | |
| 18.8–68.2 | 19.3–63.5 | |
| 9.7 | 9.3 | |
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
Hamilton-D rating scale scores for Group 1 (depression, n = 37)
| n | Mean Hamilton score | Hamilton score ranges | Standard deviation of Hamilton Score | Demographics Female | Demographics Male | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | |||||
| Age range (years) | Age range (years) | |||||
| Mean age (years) | Mean age (years) | |||||
| SD (years) | SD (years) | |||||
| Pretreatment score (>7) | 200 | 10 | 8–21 | 3.39 | n = 126 (63.0%) | n = 34 (37.0%) |
| 18.1–74.2 | 25.4–81.6 | |||||
| 51.9 | 54.1 | |||||
| 10.5 | 11.5 | |||||
| Scores two weeks after starting drug (≤7) | 93 | 5 | 1–7 | 1.76 | n = 60 (64.5%) | n = 33 (35.5%) |
| 22.3–74.2 | 25.4–74.5 | |||||
| 52.8 | 53.2 | |||||
| 10.2 | 11.1 | |||||
| Score when effects no longer observed | 37 | 12 | 7–23 | 3.61 | n = 24 (64.9%) | n = 13 (35.1%) |
| 23.4–68.2 | 25.4–67.4 | |||||
| 50.7 | 51.1 | |||||
| 9.1 | 9.8 | |||||
| Score one week after starting amino acids | 36 | 4 | 0–7 | 1.99 | n = 23 (63.9%) | n = 13 (36.1%) |
| 23.4–68.2 | 25.4–67.4 | |||||
| 50.6 | 51.1 | |||||
| 9.1 | 9.8 | |||||
Notes: Row 1: Hamilton-D score prior to starting citalopram 20 mg in the morning. Row 2: Hamilton-D score after relief of depression achieved on citalopram 20 mg per day. Row 3: Hamilton-D score when initial relief of symptoms after starting citalopram was no longer observed. Row 4: Hamilton-D score one week after the amino acid and cofactor formulation was started in combination with citalopram 20 mg.
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
Group 1 achieved relief of depression symptoms after starting citalopram then experienced return of symptoms leading to the listed observation. Group 2 achieved appetite suppression then experienced a lapse in the control of hunger leading to the listed observations
| n | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Mean (days to discontinuation of effects after starting the drug[s]) | 164 | 22 |
| Range (days to discontinuation of effects after starting the drug) | 34–490 | 4–48 |
| Standard deviation | 107.5 | 9.1 |
Group 1 subjects achieved relief of depression symptoms after starting citalopram and then experienced a return of symptoms. The amino acid precursor formula was then administered in combination with citalopram, and the listed study parameters were observed. Group 2 subjects achieved appetite suppression after starting citalopram and phentermine in combination, then experienced a return of appetite. The amino acid precursor formula was then administered in combination with citalopram and phentermine and the listed parameters were observed
| n | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Effects restored (n, [%]) | 36 (97.3%) | 195 (98.5%) |
| Mean time to restore effects (days) | 1.6 days | 1.9 days |
| Range (days) | 1–3 | 1–5 |
| Standard deviation | 0.26 days | 0.39 days |
Figure 1Inadequate levels of neurotransmitters in the synapse are associated with compromised electrical flow in the postsynaptic neurons, leading to suboptimal regulation of function and/or development of symptoms.34
Figure 3When the monoamines are in the vesicles of the presynaptic neuron they are not exposed to the enzymes that catalyze metabolism (monoamine oxidase and catechol-0-methyl transferase). They are safe from metabolism. When they relocate outside the vesicles presynaptic neuron, they are exposed at a greater frequency to these enzymes. Reuptake inhibitors create a mass migration of monoamines causing increased metabolic enzyme activity and metabolism of monoamines. This leads to monoamine depletion if significant amounts of balanced serotonin and dopamine precursors are not coadministered with the reuptake inhibitor.34
Observed differences between synaptic and postsynaptic electrical dysfunction
| Synaptic dysfunction | Postsynaptic dysfunction | |
|---|---|---|
| Electrical dysfunction is corrected with monoamines in which state? | Endogenous state | Competitive inhibition state |
| Returning monoamines to normal levels | Will restore function | Will not restore function |
| Uniform response to a low-dose competitive inhibition amino acid dosing value | Yes | No |
| Individualized amino acid dosing value needed | No | Yes |
| Requires adjusting amino acid dosing values for optimal group results | No | Yes |
| Need to obtain organic cation transporter functional status determination for optimal results | No | Yes |