From The New York Times:

New federally financed drug research reveals a stark disparity: children covered by Medicaid are given powerful antipsychotic medicines at a rate four times higher than children whose parents have private insurance. And the Medicaid children are more likely to receive the drugs for less severe conditions than their middle-class counterparts, the data shows.

Those findings, by a team from Rutgers and Columbia, are almost certain to add fuel to a long-running debate. Do too many children from poor families receive powerful psychiatric drugs not because they actually need them — but because it is deemed the most efficient and cost-effective way to control problems that may be handled much differently for middle-class children?

The questions go beyond the psychological impact on Medicaid children, serious as that may be. Antipsychotic drugs can also have severe physical side effects, causing drastic weight gain and metabolic changes resulting in lifelong physical problems.

On Tuesday, a pediatric advisory committee to the Food and Drug Administration met to discuss the health risks for all children who take antipsychotics. The panel will consider recommending new label warnings for the drugs, which are now used by an estimated 300,000 people under age 18 in this country, counting both Medicaid patients and those with private insurance.

Meanwhile, a group of Medicaid medical directors from 16 states, under a project they call Too Many, Too Much, Too Young, has been experimenting with ways to reduce prescriptions of antipsychotic drugs among Medicaid children.

They plan to publish a report early next year.

The Rutgers-Columbia study will also be published early next year, in the peer-reviewed journal Health Affairs. But the findings have already been posted on the Web, setting off discussion among experts who treat and study troubled young people.

...as Congress works on health care legislation that could expand the nation’s Medicaid rolls by 15 million people — a 43 percent increase — the scope of the antipsychotics problem, and the expense, could grow in coming years.

The F.D.A. has approved antipsychotic drugs for children specifically to treat schizophrenia, autism and bipolar disorder. But they are more frequently prescribed to children for other, less extreme conditions, including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, aggression, persistent defiance or other so-called conduct disorders — especially when the children are covered by Medicaid, the new study shows.

Although doctors may legally prescribe the drugs for these “off label” uses, there have been no long-term studies of their effects when used for such conditions.

The Rutgers-Columbia study found that Medicaid children were more likely than those with private insurance to be given the drugs for off-label uses like A.D.H.D. and conduct disorders. The privately insured children, in turn, were more likely than their Medicaid counterparts to receive the drugs for F.D.A.-approved uses like bipolar disorder.

From The New York Times:

The popular drugs known as atypical antipsychotics, prescribed for an array of conditions, including schizophrenia, autism and dementia, double patients’ risk of dying from sudden heart failure, a study has found.

The finding is the latest in a succession of recent reports contradicting the long-held assumption that the new drugs, which include Risperdal, Zyprexa and Seroquel, are safer than the older and much less expensive medications that they replaced.

The risk of death from the drugs is not high, on average about 3 percent in a person being treated at least 10 years, according to the study, published Thursday in The New England Journal of Medicine. Nor was the risk different from that of the older antipsychotic drugs.

But it was significant enough that an accompanying editorial urged doctors to limit their prescribing of antipsychotic drugs, especially to children and elderly patients, who can be highly susceptible to the drugs’ side effects, including rapid weight gain.

In recent years, the newer drugs, which account for about 90 percent of the market, have become increasingly controversial, as prescription rates to children and elderly people have soared. Doctors use the drugs to settle outbursts related to a host of psychiatric disorders, including attention deficit disorder and Alzheimer’s disease. Most are not approved for such use. After an analysis of study data, the Food and Drug Administration required that all antipsychotics’ labels contain a warning that the drugs were associated with a heightened risk of heart failure in elderly patients.

The new study, an analysis of more than 250,000 Medicaid records, is the first to rigorously document that risk for the newer drugs in adults over 30 without previous heart problems.

In the study, researchers at Vanderbilt University and the Nashville Veterans Affairs Medical Center analyzed Tennessee Medicaid records for 276,907 people ages 30 to 74. About a third of them began taking an antipsychotic medication in the period studied, from 1990 to 2005, either a newer atypical or an older drug. Two-thirds made up a control group. The researchers excluded patients with heart disease or other problems that might put them at higher risk of cardiac failure.

They found 478 sudden cardiac deaths among those taking the drugs, about twice the rate of the control group. The risk — equivalent to 3 deaths for every 1,000 patients taking the drugs for a year — was about the same whether people took the newer or older medications. The higher the dose of the drug, the study found, the higher the risk of sudden death.

“The implication of this study is that physicians need to do a very careful cardiovascular evaluation prior to prescribing these drugs,” especially if there are alternative treatments, said the lead author, Wayne A. Ray, a professor of preventive medicine at Vanderbilt and the Nashville veterans’ hospital. “Then, if they’re used, to pay careful attention to using the lowest possible dose.”

From The Associated Press:

Anti-psychotic drugs commonly used to treat Alzheimer's disease may double a patient's chance of dying within a few years, suggests a new study that adds to concerns already known about such medications.

The research was published Friday in the medical journal, Lancet Neurology.

Ballard and colleagues followed 165 patients aged 67 to 100 years with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease from 2001 to 2004 in Britain. Half continued taking their anti-psychotic drugs, which included Risperdal, Thorazine and Stelazine. The other half got placebos.

Of the 83 receiving drugs, 39 were dead after a year. Of the 82 taking fake pills, 27 were dead after a year. Most deaths in both groups were due to pneumonia.

After two years, 46 percent of Alzheimer's patients taking the anti-psychotics were alive, versus 71 percent of those not on the drugs. After three years, only 30 percent of patients on the drugs were alive, versus 59 percent of those not taking drugs.

In the United Kingdom and the United States, guidelines advise doctors to use anti-psychotic drugs cautiously and temporarily. But in many nursing homes in Europe and North America, up to 60 percent of patients with dementia are routinely given the drugs for one to two years.

"The drug regimen for any person with Alzheimer's needs to be personalized," said William Thies of the Alzheimer's Association in the U.S. Thies was not connected to the study. "At some points, some people will be better off with no medication."

Simon Lovestone of the Institute of Psychiatry at King's College in London said psychiatrists should try environmental or behavioral therapies instead of anti-psychotics.

Experts aren't sure how the anti-psychotics increase patients' risk of dying. But they think the drugs could be damaging to the brain and their sedative effects make patients less able to exercise and more susceptible to deadly infections.