Antipsychotics

Conclusion: There are some efficacy differences between antipsychotics, but most of them are gradual rather than discrete. Differences in side-effects are more marked. These findings will aid clinicians in balancing risks versus benefits of those drugs available in their countries. They should consider the importance of each outcome, the patients' medical problems, and preferences.

Conclusion: This NMA suggests a superiority of the regulatory approved adjunctive atypical antipsychotics, thyroid hormones, dopamine compounds (modafinil and lisdexamfetamine) and lithium. Acceptability was lower with ziprasidone, mirtazapine, and cariprazine. Further research and head-to-head studies should be considered to strengthen the best available options for TRD.

Conclusion: Marked differences exist between antipsychotics in terms of metabolic side-effects, with olanzapine and clozapine exhibiting the worst profiles and aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, lurasidone, and ziprasidone the most benign profiles. Increased baseline weight, male sex, and non-white ethnicity are predictors of susceptibility to antipsychotic-induced metabolic change, and improvements in psychopathology are associated with metabolic disturbance. Treatment guidelines should be updated to reflect our findings. However, the choice of antipsychotic should be made on an individual basis,

Conclusion: The study findings suggest that esketamine's efficacy as an add-on to antidepressants is modest in treatment-resistant depression (similar to augmentation strategies with atypical antipsychotics) and is absent against suicidality itself. These findings need to be considered in light of esketamine's abuse potential and the fact that long-term effects are still not fully known. Some alarming signs concerning deaths and emerging suicidality during the testing phase are discussed, along with other regulatory issues.