Royal College of Psychiatrists still not interested in discussing important evidence on long-term antipsychotic treatment

The annual meeting of the UK’s Royal College of Psychiatrists is in full swing at the moment in London. The conference will again not be debating important new findings about antipsychotic drug treatment. Two years ago the conference organising committee rejected a suggestion to discuss this issue.

This year I proposed a similar symposium, which would have included Lex Wunderink, who led the Dutch first episode antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation study and Robin Murray who was going to present data from imaging studies (including an ongoing study at the Institute of Psychiatry) on how antipsychotics affect the brain. I was going to speak briefly about the subjective effects of antipsychotics, and about the Radar project, a national research programme funded by the UK’s National Institute of Health Research.

The proposal was rejected again. I am extremely concerned that the Royal College conference organising committee do not appear to be aware of the importance of this issue. Here is my correspondence with committee:

 

Dear Chair of the Conference Committee,

I was disappointed that my suggested symposium concerning new evidence about the potential drawbacks of long-term antipsychotic treatment was rejected again. There is increasing public and professional concern about the use of antipsychotic drugs, and yet it seems the Royal College is not interested.

To my mind and many others, the long-term results of the Dutch First Episode study (Wunderink et al, 2013) are some of the most important research results ever published in the mental health field. They raise questions about our whole approach to treating schizophrenia and psychosis. In addition to this, the evidence that long-term antipsychotic treatment is associated with brain shrinkage is obviously a hugely significant issue (Robin Murray was going to present data on this in the proposed session).

Other institutions are aware of the importance of this research. There was a session at last year’s APA conference in Toronto on long-term antipsychotic treatment, which was so well attended people had to be turned away. I was recently approached by the Editors of PLoS Medicine to write an article on antipsychotic treatment, because they were concerned about these issues. Moreover, I am part of a group of investigators, including several leading British psychiatrists, who have just been awarded a large grant by the NIHR to study antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation in the light of the concerns about the long-term impact of these drugs.

I have now twice asked the principle investigator from the Dutch First Episode study to present at the Royal College annual meeting, and twice I have had to tell him that the Royal College do not want to hear from him. I strongly believe that British psychiatrists need to hear about this research. I speak frequently all over the country, and I know that many are not aware of it.

If my presence in the proposed session is a problem, I am most happy to withdraw in favour of another speaker. In fact I would be grateful for any suggestions the conference organisers had on improving or expanding the proposed session.

I believe the Royal College’s lack of interest in this topic reflects badly on the College in particular, and on British psychiatry in general. Hence I have copied in the President.

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Moncrieff

 

This is the reply I received (with names redacted):

Dr Moncrieff

I do not really have anything to add to [the original standard rejection email], other than to reiterate that we had many more suggestions than it is possible to accept (the acceptance rate is well below 1 in 3). We use a system of rating submissions by all committee members to inform our final choices. There were many excellent submissions this year and we have been unable to accommodate them all – not because they are flawed or uninteresting, but simply because they did not compete successfully for the limited spaces available. Your submission was in that category. There is no reason that a future submission may not be successful, but it must be competitive with other submissions for that meeting.

Many thanks for your interest in organising a session for the meeting and I am sorry you were not successful on this occasion.

With best wishes, sincerely

 

To which I replied:

Dear congress organising committee representative,

Thank you for your reply.

I remain astounded and concerned that the Royal College of Psychiatrists’ International Congress organising committee do not regard the new evidence on long-term antipsychotic treatment as important enough to include in the programme for the annual Congress.

I will indeed keep trying. I believe that British psychiatrists would welcome, and benefit from, the opportunity to consider this challenging research.

Yours sincerely,

Joanna Moncrieff.

 

I did at least receive a courteous reply, encouraging a future submission:

Dr Moncrieff

Thank you very much for your email – and your intention to submit a future proposal on this interesting topic.

Many thanks, best wishes

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Royal College of Psychiatrists still not interested in discussing important evidence on long-term antipsychotic treatment

  1. Increasingly, with massive uptake of internet, email and social media, people are becoming better informed in the area of psychiatry. Increasingly they are not settling for the mindless biomedical marketing and one-dimensional treatments pedaled by mainstream psychiatrists. More and more they’re looking for, and finding, integrative GPs and psychiatrists willing and able to get to the heart of their particular difficulties, who offer effective interventions and empowering resources regardless of which scientific discipline that knowledge comes from. Increasingly, as public funding of health services falls away, it boils down to the economics of a free market. People are paying for what they know works, and consulting physicians who are wise, mature, empathetic and open-minded. Physicians who are familiar with, and are willing to apply, knowledge from new research. People are increasingly aware that, in these early days, such an integrative practice puts that doctor at risk, for example, of vexatious notifications to registration authorities by frightened, vindictive colleagues. There are more and more of us prepared to take that risk in pursuing our noble and beloved art and science – medicine. And so we have cause for optimism, and so we hold our nerve……..

  2. Robin Murray did present on the Treatment Resistant Psychosis section, I am not sure if you are aware of this. His talk was exactly on the subject above to which you refer. In my feedback, I did request that next year more time is given to this and that he should present again

  3. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/01/14/fmri-mental-illness/#.WHt2EFzRMk4

    ‘A remarkable and troubling new paper…Sprooten et al.’s analysis included 537 studies with a total of 21,427 participants. Five mental illnesses were examined: schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, anxiety disorders, and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD)…

    …The results were rather surprising. It turned out that there were very few differences between the different disorders in terms of the distribution of the group differences across the brain…In other words, there was little or no diagnostic specificity in the fMRI results…

    …Sprooten et al. suggest that “the disorders examined here arise from largely overlapping neural network dysfunction”, in other words that the transdiagnostic trait is a neurobiological part of the cause of the various different disorders. But it seems to me that there’s no reason to assume this.

    What if the common factor is more straightforward: something like anxiety or stress during the MRI scan?’

    • That is really interesting- thank you for drawing my attention to it. I agree, it could easily be a non-specific, scan-related factor such as stress, but it could also be an indicator of a non-specific brain-based vulnerability, or possibly a common consequence of prior drug treatment.

      • I see. Yes, it could be a lot of things.

        I’m trying to figure out what exactly the differences between the “patients” and the “normals” could be. One thing comes to mind: A recent study showing people living in areas with less green and blue experience more anxiety and other problems than people in areas with lots of green and blue: “Our analyses do indeed show a relationship between GSA [green space availability] and any anxiety disorder, with prevalence being lower when more green space is available…BSA [blue space availability] was related to all health variables, with the exception of any substance use. Moreover, its associations with these health variables were stronger than those of GSA.” https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/12/access-green-blue-spaces-may-improve-mental-health/

        Maybe the “patient” group has a disproportionately large number of city-dwellers? I don’t know, it’s just a wild guess. Is there any data on whether people who live in cities are more likely to encounter psychiatry than others?

  4. There are podcasts on the RCP site one is called : Personalised approaches to pharmacotherepy for schizophrenia. It’s quite something! an analogy is drawn with trying on clothes to ‘trying on’ antipsychotics…. I mean as if anyone in their right mind would want to make such an analogy. If these people try on Olanzapine for a few months there wont be any clothes that will fit at all in the ‘trying on anti psychotic clothes shop’. And if I remember correctly wasn’t it the case that a psychiatrist was asking the Govt to pay patients to take their antipsychotics a few years back? It’s so gone wrong and crazy it’s a wast of time engaging with these people. I know who the loonies are !

  5. This is a recent reply from the Dept of Health :

    “unfortunately it is not possible to predict who may experience a side effect before taking the medicine.”

    This is totally wrong, with a Cytochrome P450 test it is possible to ascertain the phenotype of an individuals P450 enzyme system, but guess what.. not available to the public in the UK!!!

    Further:

    “The adverse effect of akathisia you refer to is a recognised side-effect of many drugs used to treat psychiatric disorders, such as many antipsychotics and antidepressants. For these medicines, akathisia is listed as a possible side effect in the product information. The product information consists of the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for prescribers, and the Patient Information Leaflet (PIL). SmPCs and PILs can be found on the MHRA website at the link below:”

    Nope! since when was Akathisia on any patient information leaflet? I have loads from the drugs coerced into taking, none of them have Akathisia as a ‘side effect’ including Olanzapine and Risperidone.

    Those of you who have suffered will know with horror how serious this condition is, and to be sure anyone can get this.

    Also it seems, the next front on all this is going to be anti inflammatory drugs… sirukumab is being trialed (or ‘trying on’ ) for major depressive disorder. I will return fire with my usual obsessive compulsive treatments of dark sarcasm and urge everyone to do the same.

  6. Just watch the two on the left in this video, one makes an analogy of his patients to pigs and calls them ‘selfish’ for not taking their “medication”

    We know Socrates mostly through two of his pupils: Plato and Xenophon

    This is from The Memorabilia Recollections of Socrates by Xenophon some 2400 years ago

    “He was astonished they did not see how far these problems lay beyond mortal ken; since even those who pride themselves most on their discussion of these points differ from each other, as madmen do. For just as some madmen, he said, have no apprehension of what is truly terrible, others fear where no fear is; some are ready to say and do anything in public without the slightest symptom of shame; others think they ought not so much as to set foot among their fellow-men; some honour neither temple, nor altar, nor aught else sacred to the name of God; others bow down to stocks and stones and worship the very beasts: so is it with those thinkers whose minds are cumbered with cares concerning the Universal Nature. One sect has discovered that Being is one and indivisible. Another that it is infinite in number. If one proclaims that all things are in a continual flux, another replies that nothing can possibly be moved at any time. The theory of the universe as a process of birth and death is met by the counter theory, that nothing ever could be born or ever will die.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s