OBJECTIVE: Lurasidone is an antipsychotic drug that shows a relative lack of weight gain common to many antipsychotics. Aripiprazole and ziprasidone also show little weight gain and can reduce olanzapine-induced food intake and weight gain in animals, paralleling some clinical findings. We hypothesized that lurasidone would have similar actions. METHODS: Female Lister-hooded rats received intraperitoneal injection either 2× vehicle (saline), lurasidone (3 mg/kg) and vehicle, olanzapine (1 mg/kg) and vehicle, or olanzapine and lurasidone. Following drug administration food intake was measured for 60min. A further series of rats underwent a seven-day regime of once-daily administration of the above doses and free access to food and water. Weight gain over the course of the study was monitored. RESULTS: Olanzapine induced a significant increase in food intake while lurasidone showed no significant effect. Co-administration of lurasidone with olanzapine suppressed the increase in food intake. Repeated dosing showed an increase in body weight after seven days with olanzapine, and no significant effect observed with lurasidone, while repeated administration of lurasidone with olanzapine reduced the effect of olanzapine on the increase in body weight. CONCLUSION: These findings support our hypotheses in that lurasidone, in addition to a lack of effect on acute food intake and short term weight gain, can reduce olanzapine-induced food intake and weight gain in rats. This indicates the drug to have an active anti-hyperphagic mechanism, rather than solely the absence of a drug-induced weight gain that is such a severe limitation of drugs such as olanzapine.
Animals ; Antipsychotic Agents ; Aripiprazole ; Body Weight ; Eating ; Female ; Humans ; Injections, Intraperitoneal ; Lurasidone Hydrochloride ; Rats ; Water ; Weight Gain

The prevalence of canine H3N8 influenza and human H1N1 and H3N2 influenza in dogs in Ohio was estimated by conducting serologic tests on 1,082 canine serum samples. In addition, risk factors, such as health status and age were examined. The prevalences of human H1N1, H3N2, and canine H3N8 influenzas were 4.0%, 2.4%, and 2.3%, respectively. Two samples were seropositive for two subtypes (H1N1 and H3N2; H1N1 and canine influenza virus [CIV] H3N8). Compared to healthy dogs, dogs with respiratory signs were 5.795 times more likely to be seropositive against H1N1 virus (p = 0.042). The prevalence of human flu infection increased with dog age and varied by serum collection month. The commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay used in this study did not detect nucleoprotein-specific antibodies from many hemagglutination inhibition positive sera, which indicates a need for the development and validation of rapid tests for influenza screening in canine populations. In summary, we observed low exposure of dogs to CIV and human influenza viruses in Ohio but identified potential risk factors for consideration in future investigations. Our findings support the need for establishment of reliable diagnostic standards for serologic detection of influenza infection in canine species.
Animals ; Antibodies ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Dogs* ; Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay ; Hemagglutination ; Hospitals, Animal* ; Humans ; Influenza A virus* ; Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype ; Influenza, Human* ; Mass Screening ; Ohio* ; Orthomyxoviridae ; Prevalence ; Risk Factors ; Seroepidemiologic Studies* ; Serologic Tests