Carcinogenicity of psychotropic drugs: A systematic review of US Food and Drug

InnerCircle · April 21, 2017, 12:51am

THIS IS OLD NEWS. BUT IT WAS NEWS TO ME. MAY BE NEWS TO SOME OF YOU. DECIDED I WOULD TELL YOU ABOUT IT.

Published in the Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, the paper revealed the following about psych meds:

• 63.6% of antidepressants are associated with carcinogenicity, specifically mirtazapine (Remeron), sertraline (Zoloft), paroxetine (Paxil), citalopram (Celexa), escitalopram (Lexapro), duloxetine (Cymbalta) and bupropion (Wellbutrin).

• 90% of antipsychotics agents are associated with carcinogenicity, including aripiprazole
(Abilify), quetiapine (Seroquel) and all others in this class except for clozapine (Clozaril).

• 70% of benzodiazepines/hypnotics are associated with carcinogenicity,
specifically clonazepam (Klonopin), zolpidem (Ambien), zaleplon (Sonata), diazepam (Valium), eszopiclone (Lunesta), oxazepam (Serax) and midazolam (Versed).

• 25% of amphetamines/stimulants are associated with carcinogenicity, specifically methylphenidate (Ritalin).

• 85.7% of anti-convulsants (“mood stabilizers”) are associated with carcinogenicity, specifically valproate (Depacon), carbamazepine (Tegretol), gabapentin (Neurontin), pregabalin (Lyrica), oxcarbazepine (Trileptal) and topiramate (Topamax).

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275521284_Carcinogenicity_of_psychotropic_drugs_A_systematic_review_of_US_Food_and_Drug_Administration-required_preclinical_in_vivo_studies

anon11056724 · April 21, 2017, 3:42am

If the disease doesn’t make you kill yourself the meds will do it for you

anon11056724 · April 21, 2017, 4:26am

If the thunder don’t get you then the lightening will

InnerCircle · April 21, 2017, 4:28am

Recognizing the existence of this hazard can empower a patient with the knowledge to avoid dangerous consequences as a result of psych drugs.

twinklestars · April 21, 2017, 4:30am

It’s important to note that the dosage they’re giving these rats and mice is many milligrams per kilogram of body weight, much more than the milligrams per kilogram in a human dose.

anon11056724 · April 21, 2017, 4:33am

I think lamictal is cancerous. It’s nasty stuff

InnerCircle · April 21, 2017, 10:05pm

This study provided little information about what might occur at lower doses. However, it seems prudent to acknowledge the carcinogenic potential associated with these drugs and look for alternatives where they exist.

shutterbug · April 21, 2017, 11:56pm

Pfft. 25 years in and I’m still kicking booty. I say again:

“Thank gawd for my meds.”

InnerCircle · April 22, 2017, 1:19am

No one is interested in convince you whatsoever. I merely provide impartial information. It’s your body. Enjoy!

anon79999497 · April 22, 2017, 1:46am

What this basically proves is- if you’re a rodent avoid taking really heavy doses of neuroleptics.

anon11056724 · April 22, 2017, 1:47am

Well coming from a monkey I guess being a rodent isn’t so bad. Did I read that right?

anon79999497 · April 22, 2017, 1:56am

I guess it depends whether you believe a rodent is superior to a monkey.

anon11056724 · April 22, 2017, 2:17am

In India rodents are holy. So I guess I do believe that rodents are superior

Csummers · April 22, 2017, 2:58am

You’d think by the way they handle our meds that they don’t want us to live very long…snif.

InnerCircle · April 22, 2017, 3:26am

If only it were that simple. In biomedicine they don’t have the luxury of modelling on humans by beginning. Instead what they have are a lot of theoretical grounds for questioning thr predictive utiliuy of animal models.

anon79999497 · April 22, 2017, 4:04am

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Antipsychotic drugs: pro-cancer or anti-cancer? A systematic review.

G Fond, A Macgregor, J Attal, A Larue, M Brittner, D Ducasse and D Capdevielle, Medical hypotheses, Jul 2012

Important data was recently published on the potential genotoxic or carcinogenic effects of antipsychotics, as well as on their cytotoxic properties on cancer cells, that must be considered by psychiatrists in the benefit/risk ratio of their prescriptions.To answer whether or not antipsychotics, as a class or only some specific molecules, may influence cancer risk among treated patients. METHODS ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies (in vitro, animal studies and human studies) concerning effects of antipsychotic drugs on cancer development were included. The search paradigm [neoplasms AND (antipsychotic agents OR neuroleptic OR phenothiazine)] was applied to Medline (1966-present) and Web of Science (1975-present).Ninety-three studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Results can be summarized as follows: (1) patients with schizophrenia may be less likely to develop cancer than the general population, (2) antipsychotics as a class cannot be considered at the moment as at risk for cancer, even if some antipsychotics have shown carcinogenic properties among rodents, (3) phenothiazines seem to have antiproliferative properties that may be useful in multidrug augmentation strategies in various cancer treatments, but their bad tolerance may decrease usage amongst non-psychotic patients, and (4) clozapine appears to have a separate status given that this molecule shows antiproliferative effects implied in agranulocytosis as well as a potential increased risk for leukemia.Benefit/risk ratio regarding cancer risk is in favor of treating patients with schizophrenia with antipsychotic drugs. The practicing clinician should be reassuring on the subject of cancer risk due to antipsychotic drugs.

http://www.babs.unsw.edu.au/research/antipsychotic-drugs-and-their-effect-some-cancers

InnerCircle · April 22, 2017, 4:08am

Fair enough.

Esm · April 22, 2017, 4:13am

Don’t trust statistics u r given, they are prone to error and bias