How drugs are named can cause more problems than they solve

motionmedication.com

Several of the most popular posts on SNfW over the past weeks are about how humans perceive the world around them.  For a writer, this is an ongoing issue.  As we all know, one reader will finish a book and tell you that it's about one thing, the next reader will come away with a different conclusion.

 Investigators know when they interview witnesses to an event, they will hear different versions of that event even though the witnesses were standing next to each other when the event occurred.  

 Apply this to the medicines most of us take, and research shows another phenomena of perception: the name the drug is given effects the way the drug acts on us.  And different people have different reactions based on perception.  The example given in the research is a patient suffering the symptoms of anxiety becoming more anxious because the drug they are given to treat their symptoms is labeled an "antipsychotic."

 Then there is the placebo effect researchers see when conducting double-blind research on a medication.  In these studies, patients are divided into two of more matched groups.  Each is given the medication with instructions on how to take the drug - neither the patients nor the medical staff administering the medicine knows who is receiving the actual drug and who is receiving the placebo, i.e., a sugar pill.  This way the medical personnel can't subconsciously influence the patients by giving away who is taking the real medication and who is taking the placebo.

 As researchers tally their results, a certain proportion of the patients taking the placebo will claim an improvement of their symptoms even though they are taking a sugar pill.

 This goes to show the power of the human mind to effect they way our body's function based on perception.  We thing we've been given a new drug, and we get better on the strength of that perception alone.

 So to give someone suffering temporary anxiety an antipsychotic medication may lead to a patient's perception of, "Oh my God, I'm psychotic," so their anxiety increases.  

 Based on this human trait, there is a move toward changing the names of medications to avoid this unintended result.

 Here's the story.


I have anxiety, why is my doctor prescribing an 
antipsychotic? New drug naming system unveiled.

What's in a name? Doctors have found that the name of the drug you are prescribed significantly influences how the patient sees the treatment. Now in a significant shift, the world's major psychiatry organisations are proposing to completely change the terminology of the drugs used in mental disorders shifting it from symptom based (e.g. antidepressant, antipsychotic etc.) to pharmacologically based (e.g. focusing on pharmacological target (serotonin, dopamine etc.) and the relevant mode of action). This will mean that patient will no longer have the confusion of being prescribed a drug for what appears to be an unrelated condition, but also means that drug names will be more understandable to doctors.

The new terminology is being presented to international clinicians at the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology conference in Berlin. This international launch marks the start of a process of discussion and negotiation between academics, clinicians, pharmaceutical companies, and regulatory bodies. The rigorous nature of the new nomenclature means that this can be supported by an app, which will assist clinicians in making the correct treatment choices. This beta 1 version of this app will be also available in Berlin.

Drug names can cause more problems than they solve
In psychiatry, drug names can cause more problems than they solve; for example, a patient may be being treated for anxiety, and yet may be prescribed an "antidepressant" or an "antipsychotic," and the stigma of being prescribed an antipsychotic can make the patient even more anxious. Often this means that patients stop taking the drug for fear of the association with the different disease.

Five Stars on Goodreads
The terminology of the drugs used by Neuropsychopharmacologists (mostly psychiatrists looking at how drugs affect the mind) is based on a classification developed in the 1960's. This often leads to confusion in both patients, and a lack of clarity in doctors.

As Professor Josef Zohar (Tel Aviv, Israel), leading the international nomenclature project said:
"As in many fields, what we know about drugs has evolved enormously since the 1960s, but the names we use to describe these drugs have not evolved in 50 years. As an analogy, I mostly use my smartphone to type SMS text messages, yet I would not call it a "typewriter," as I would have in the 1960's; the names need to reflect our contemporary knowledge. If this is true of electronics, it is certainly true of medicines."

Most drugs have more than one effect, and this can lead to great confusion in patients. For example, some 'antipsychotics' are used to treat depression (somewhat like Aspirin is taken for headaches, but also to help prevent heart disease). So the Joint Taskforce on Nomenclature has agreed that the nomenclature of drugs used in mental health need to reflect how the drugs work, rather than any one single use (This is what already happens in some fields such as hypertension).

Professor Zohar continued: "This is more than just a name change. This will change the way we talk about medications, the way we use medications and the way we explain to our patients why we are selecting the specific medications for them. We can also use the new naming system to help a clinician make informed decisions."

As an example the drug fluoxetine (also known as Prozac, etc.) is currently classified as an antidepressant, but is also used for bulimia and other indications. Obviously, suffering from bulimia and being given an antidepressant is potentially confusing. Under the new classification fluoxetine would be described as follows:
  1. Class/mechanism: Serotonin, re-uptake inhibitor
  2. Indications: Major depressive disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, panic disorder (and others)
  3. Efficacy: Improves symptoms of depression and anxiety and reduces compulsive behavior and obsessional thoughts. Side effects; GI symptoms, anxiety, changes in sleep early in treatment, sexual dysfunction
  4. Neurobiological description: Neurotransmitter actions / Physiological / Brain Circuits are all listed in the new classification.
  • NOTE: the above points 1-4 are not the complete listing for Fluoxetine, Talk with your physician or pharmacist for a complete description..
American College of Neuropsychopharmacology representative to the expert group, Professor David Kupfer (University of Pittsburgh), said: "This change in terminology represents a major shift in the way which clinicians, and their patients, will think about the drugs they use. This new system is being launched at the ECNP in Berlin, so there is a long period of negotiation and discussion to come before we get complete agreement. Nevertheless, this will mean a real change in the way we talk about the drugs used in psychiatry and neuroscience."

Related posts:
*  *  *  *  *
Story Source:  Materials provided by European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP).  "I have anxiety, why is my doctor prescribing an antipsychotic? New drug naming system unveiled." ScienceDaily, 19 October 2014

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Workout supplements: An emerging eating disorder in men?

Image
therewontbeanydoves.wordpress.com When developing a fictional character, you may not think about the character using large amounts of over-the-counter dietary supplements.  Especially a man who uses large amounts of workout supplements. While there has been widespread publicity on the dangers of the non-prescribed use of anabolic steroids, not much is said about legal, over-the-counter supplements.  Are there risks?  And if so, what are they?  There are several things the writer should consider. Supplement use is becoming an eating disorder with many men who use them to prepare for and recover from a workout. There is growing evidence of a link between muscle-building supplements and testicular cancer. There is evidence that over-the counter medications and supplements are the most common causes of drug-induced liver failure (a rare event, but still a risk.)  There is even evidence that, “certain popular herbal and dietary supplements can also cause liver damage,"
Read more

Remember faces but not names? You got it wrong.

Image
Source:   Daily Excelsior So, you think you're good at remembering faces, but terrible with names? New research has revealed we are actually better at remembering names than faces The cringe-worthy experience of not being able to remember an acquaintance's name leads many of us to believe we are terrible with names. However, new research has revealed this intuition is misleading; we are actually better at remembering names than faces. With the Christmas party season fast approaching, there will be plenty of opportunity to re-live the familiar, and excruciatingly-awkward, social situation of not being able to remember an acquaintance's name. This cringe-worthy experience leads many of us to believe we are terrible at remembering names. However, new research has revealed this intuition is misleading; we are actually better at remembering names than faces. The authors of the study, from the University of York, suggest that when we castigate ourselves f
Read more

Using Artificial Intelligence to Predict Violence. . . or to Control It?

Image
Dell EMC InFocus A staple of science fiction is a future where artificial intelligence (AI) is used to control people's behavior, or, in which AI supplants the human element. I have mixed feelings about AI, its uses, and our future.  For one thing, it's questionable that the human brain can increase in size or complexity without causing the system to slow down.  The brain of a "genius" isn't larger than yours or mine, its simply organized differently.  The difference between early versions of humans and modern humans is in large part, size.  Yes, brain organization plays a role, but until the latest iteration of us, brain size was the critical factor. If we as a species have survived based on brain size, and brain size has maxed out, how do we continue to evolve intellectually?  Better organization?  Yes, but can we ever hope to create and control this type of evolutionary activity? One solution to maxed human brain size is creating an interface
Read more

M.I.T. Research Explains How Will Rogers Observation Works

Image
Finally it appears that MIT has gotten involved in proving Will's syllogism, "There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." Read his statement carefully.   ONE learns by reading.   A FEW who learn by observation. Then there's the rest of us. The reason for this, it turns out, is a special circuit in the brain that you or I need to have a functioning version of to actually learn by observing others.  Based on how we all behave, it is a circuit most of us must be missing.   Or perhaps it shorted out the first time we peed on an electric fence and it has yet to grow back.   *  *  *  *  * Brain circuit helps us learn by watching others Scientists pinpoint neural interactions that are necessary for observational learning Researchers have identified a brain circuit required to learn by watching others. This circuit,
Read more

War Leaves 17 Women for Every Man

Image
Source: Psychology Today This report of a "Y-chromosone Bottleneck" that occurred seven thousand years ago raises some interesting questions. In it, the author theorizes that war may have the effect of simplifying the male genome to the point that it's like having but one man for every 17 women.  Sounds like a male fantasy, but is it good for humanity and the potential for our survival on our planet? Research shows that healthy populations depend on genetic diversity such as in this report from 2015,  Genetic Diversity Linked to Today's Taller, Smarter People .  So if war has the effect of creating a male genome bottleneck, does the bottleneck limit the diversity needed to maintain a healthy population?  Could genetic bottlenecks be the reason that some militarily aggressive cultures such as the ancient Romans and Greeks are very peaceful today?  i.e., have they had the aggression breed out of them by years of wars in which the most warlike men died in bat
Read more