Study objectives Insomnia disorders as well as cardiometabolic disorders are highly prevalent in the psychiatric population compared to the general population. We aimed to investigate their association and evolution over time in a Swiss psychiatric cohort. Methods Data for 2861 patients (8954 observations) were obtained from two prospective cohorts (PsyMetab and PsyClin) with metabolic parameters monitored routinely during psychotropic treatment. Insomnia disorders were based on the presence of ICD-10 “F51.0" diagnosis (non-organic insomnia), the prescription of sedatives before bedtime or the discharge letter. Metabolic syndrome was defined using the International Diabetes Federation definition, while the 10-year risk of cardiovascular event or death was assessed using the Framingham Risk Score and the Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation, respectively. Results Insomnia disorders were observed in 30% of the cohort, who were older, predominantly female, used more psychotropic drugs carrying risk of high weight gain (olanzapine, clozapine, valproate) and were more prone to suffer from schizoaffective or bipolar disorders. Multivariate analyses showed that patients with high body mass index (OR = 2.02, 95%CI [1.51–2.72] for each ten-kg/m2 increase), central obesity (OR = 2.20, [1.63–2.96]), hypertension (OR = 1.86, [1.23–2.81]), hyperglycemia (OR = 3.70, [2.16–6.33]), high density lipoprotein hypocholesterolemia in women (OR = 1.51, [1.17–1.95]), metabolic syndrome (OR = 1.84, [1.16–2.92]) and higher 10-year risk of death from cardiovascular diseases (OR = 1.34, [1.17–1.53]) were more likely to have insomnia disorders. Time and insomnia disorders were associated with a deterioration of cardiometabolic parameters. Conclusions Insomnia disorders are significantly associated with metabolic worsening and risk of death from cardiovascular diseases in psychiatric patients.

Introduction The atypical antipsychotic quetiapine is known to induce weight gain and other metabolic complications. The underlying mechanisms are multifactorial and poorly understood with almost no information on the effect of dosage. Concerns were thus raised with the rise in low-dose quetiapine off-label prescription (i. e.,<150 mg/day). Methods In this study, we evaluated the influence of quetiapine dose for 474 patients included in PsyMetab and PsyClin studies on weight and metabolic parameter evolution. Weight, blood pressure, lipid, and glucose profiles were evaluated during a follow-up period of 3 months after treatment initiation. Results Significant dose-dependent metabolic alterations were observed. The daily dose was found to influence weight gain and increase the risk of undergoing clinically relevant weight gain (≥7% from baseline). It was also associated with a change in plasma levels of cholesterol (total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, and HDL cholesterol) as well as with increased odds of developing hypertriglyceridemia, as well as total and LDL hypercholesterolemia. No impact of a dose increase on blood pressure and plasma glucose level was observed. Discussion The dose-dependent effect highlighted for weight gain and lipid alterations emphasizes the importance of prescribing the minimal effective dose. However, as the effect size of a dose increase on metabolic worsening is low, the potential harm of low-dose quetiapine should not be dismissed. Prescriptions must be carefully evaluated and regularly questioned in light of side effect onset.

Metabolic abnormalities have been associated with olanzapine treatment. We assessed if olanzapine has dose-dependent effects on metabolic parameters with changes for weight, blood pressure, lipid and glucose profiles being modelled using linear mixed-effects models. The risk of metabolic abnormalities including early weight gain (EWG) (≥5% during first month) was assessed using mixed-effects logistic regression models. In 392 olanzapine-treated patients (median age 38.0 years, interquartile range [IQR] = 26.0-53.3, median dose 10.0 mg/day, IQR = 5.0-10.0 for a median follow-up duration of 40.0 days, IQR = 20.7-112.2), weight gain was not associated with olanzapine dose (p = 0.61) although it was larger for doses versus ≤10 mg/day (2.54 AE 5.55 vs. 1.61 AE 4.51% respectively, p = 0.01). Treatment duration and co-

No abstract

Evidence regarding effectiveness and safety of clozapine once- vs. multiple-daily dosing is limited. We compared demographic and clinical parameters between patients with once- vs. multiple-daily dosing in the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany (AGATE dataset), and the Department of Psychiatry, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland, using non-parametric tests. Effectiveness and safety outcomes were available in the AGATE dataset. We performed a systematic review in PubMed/Embase until February 2022, meta-analyzing studies comparing clozapine once- vs. multiple-daily-dosing. We estimated a pooled odds ratio for adverse drug-induced reactions (ADRs) and meta-analyzed differences regarding clinical symptom severity, age, percentage males, smokers, clozapine dose, and co-medications between patients receiving once- vs. multiple-daily dosing. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa-Scale. Of 1494 and 174 patients included in AGATE and Lausanne datasets, clozapine was prescribed multiple-daily in 74.8% and 67.8%, respectively. In the AGATE cohort, no differences were reported for the clinical symptoms severity or ADR rate (p > 0.05). Meta-analyzing eight cohorts with a total of 2810 clozapine-treated individuals, we found more severe clinical symptoms (p = 0.036), increased ADR risk (p = 0.01), higher clozapine doses (p < 0.001), more frequent co-medication with other antipsychotics (p < 0.001), benzodiazepines (p < 0.001), anticholinergics (p = 0.039), and laxatives (p < 0.001) in patients on multiple- vs. once-daily dosing. Of six studies, five were rated as good, and one as poor quality. Patients responding less well to clozapine may be prescribed higher doses multiple-daily, also treated with polypharmacy, potentially underlying worse safety outcomes. Patient preferences and adherence should be considered during regimen selection.