olanzapine pharmacodynamics (mechanisms/methods of action). What Zyprexa does and how it does it.
Table of Contents (hide)
When you read about the mechanism of action, or how it works, in Zyprexa’s PI sheet, it’s almost as vague as how likely it will work. Pretty much every beginning paragraph of the mechanism of action section for every crazy med (and many other non-crazy meds) is a variation on “We don’t know exactly how Panacea, or other drugs like it, works to treat whatever you take it for. In various studies, mostly on rats and other animals, we’ve determined that it does the following…” What you read in the PI sheet is often, but not always the original theorized mechanism of action, or what they thought it does when they started testing the drug for whatever it is now used for1.
After researchers who aren’t being paid by the manufacturer get their hands on med it’s just one study after another, in humans and animals, that supports the original theory. Or determines a precise area in the brain where stuff takes place. Or finds an additional thing the med does. Or finds that it doesn’t do something they originally thought it did. Or finds out that everyone was completely wrong in the first place and the method of action is radically different. That last one does happen. Neurontin (gabapentin) was originally thought to be a synthetic form of GABA that could cross the blood-brain barrier. Turns out that it’s just like every other anticonvulsant and works on voltage channels. Except that it’s unique in that it affects a part of your brain that nothing else touches. Except for Lyrica (pregablin), and a few meds under development (e.g. PD-210714). Still, some people are calling those parts of your brain some people are calling those “gabapentin receptors”, along the lines of benzodiazepine receptors. There supposedly were citalopram receptors as well, but that turned out to be a myth. Ironically gabapentin doesn’t directly affect GABA.
Every day a new peer-reviewed journal is published somewhere adding to our knowledge about how a particular med works, or making us crazier with more contradictory data.
It would be nice if we could break things down into neat parameters like we can with pharmacokinetics, but we can’t. The best we can do is tell you what they originally thought it did, let you know if there are any meds with similar mechanisms / methods (the terms are interchangeable) of action, and give you our best guess as to what it really does based upon more recent research.
as far as we can tell
No two medications will have the exact same mechanisms / methods of action. Sometimes a drug that is developed from the active metabolite of another, essentially inert med e.g. Invega (paliperidone) is a predigested form of Risperdal (risperidone) and is basically the same thing. However there is no good conversion of dosages between the two like there is for Tegretol (carbamazepine) and Trileptal (oxacarbazeine). Like Invega and Risperdal, Pristiq (desvenlafaxine) is the active metabolite of Effexor (venlafaxine), but Pristiq has a somewhat different mechanism of action than Effexor. Mainly it kicks Effexor’s ass when it comes to how potent its inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake is.
All SSRIs are essentially interchangeable, making it possible to work out equivalent dosages so you don’t need to wait until you’ve cleared one drug to start another. But Celexa (citalopram) and Lexapro (escitalopram) are vastly more selective than Prozac (fluoxetine), and so the side effect profiles, and pretty much everything else, are very different when you compare Celexa or Lexapro with other SSRIs, but practically identical when compared with each other. While most people couldn’t tell the difference between Lexapro and Celexa,2 because Lexapro is a derivative of Celexa, a few people will respond differently to the two.
|Keep Crazy Meds on the air. Donate some spare electronic currency you have floating around The Cloud|
2 The one real difference used to be cost. Now that Lexapro is available as a generic in the US that difference isn't as great as it once was.
Date created Wednesday, 20 July 2011 at 11:21:11 Page Author: JerodPoore Last edited by: JerodPoore on 2013–12–08
Page design and explanatory material by Jerod Poore, copyright © 2004 - 2013. All rights reserved.
Support Crazy Meds by
joining my doubleplusgood circle jerk adding me to your Google+ circle.
Almost all of the material on this site is by Jerod Poore and is copyright © 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 Jerod Poore. Except, of course, the PI sheets - those are the property of the drug companies who developed the drugs the sheets are about - and any documents that are written by other people which may be posted to this site will remain the property of the original authors. You cannot reproduce this page or any other material on this site outside of the boundaries of fair use copying without the express permission of the copyright holder. That’s usually me, so just ask first. That means if want to print out a few pages to take to your doctor, therapist, counselor, support group, non-understanding family members or something like that - then that’s OK to just do. Go for it! Please. As long as you include this copyright notice and the following disclaimer, I’m usually cool with it.
All rights reserved. No warranty is expressed or implied in this information. Consult one or more doctors and/or pharmacists before taking, or changing how you take any neurological and/or psychiatric medication. Your mileage may vary. What happened to us won’t necessarily happen to you. If you still have questions about a medication or condition that were not answered on any of the pages you read, please ask them on the Crazy Meds Forum.
The information on Crazy Meds pertains to and is intended for adults. While some information about children and adolescents is occasionally presented (e.g. US FDA approvals), pediatric-specific data such as dosages, side effects, off-label applications, etc. are rarely included in the articles on drugs or discussed on the forum. If you are looking for information regarding meds for children you’ll have to go somewhere else.
Know your sources!
Nobody on this site is a doctor, a therapist, or a pharmacist. We don’t portray them either here or on TV. Only doctors can diagnose and treat an illness. While it’s not as bad as it used to be, some doctors still get pissed off by patients who know too much about medications, so tread lightly when and where appropriate. Diagnosing yourself from a website is like defending yourself in court, you suddenly have a fool for a doctor. Don’t be a cyberchondriac, thinking you have every disease you see a website about, or that you’ll get every side effect from every medication1. Self-prescribing is as dangerous as buying meds from fraudulent online pharmacies that promise you medications without prescriptions.
All information on this site has been obtained through our personal experience and the experiences family, friends, what people have reported on various reputable sites all over teh intergoogles, the medications’ product information / summary of product characteristic (PI/SPC) sheets, and from sources that are referenced throughout the site. As such the information presented here is not intended as a substitute for real medical advice from your real doctor, just a compliment to it. You should never, ever, replace what a real doctor tells you with something from a website on the Internet. The farthest you should ever take it is getting a second opinion from another real doctor. Educate yourself - always read the PI/SPC sheet or patient information leaflet (PIL) that comes with your medications and never ever throw them away.
Crazy Meds is not responsible for the content of sites we provide links to. We like them, or they’re paid advertisements, or they’re something else we think you should read to help you make an informed decision about a particular med. Sometimes they’re more than one of those things. But what’s on those sites is their business, not ours.
All brand names of the drugs listed in this site are the trademarks of the companies named on the PI/SPC sheet associated with the medication, sometimes on the pages about the drugs, even though those companies may have been acquired by other companies who may or may not be listed in this site by the time you read this. Or the rights to the drug were sold to another company. And any or all of the companies involved may have changed their names.
Crazy Meds is optimized for the browser you’re not using on the platform you wish you had. Between you and me, it all looks a lot cleaner using Safari or Chrome, although more than half of the visitors to this site use either Safari or Internet Explorer, so I’m doing my best to make things look nice for IE as well. I’m using Firefox and running Windows 72. On a computer that sits on top of my desk. With a 23 inch monitor. Hey, at least you can make the text larger or smaller by clicking on the + or - buttons in the upper right hand corner. If you have Java enabled. Like 99% of the websites on the planet, Crazy Meds is hosted on domain running an open source operating system with a variety of open source applications, including the software used to display what you’ve been reading. As such Crazy Meds is not responsible for whatever weird shit your browser does or does not do when you read this site3.
No neurologists, psychiatrists, therapists or pharmacists were harmed in the production of this website. Use only as directed. Void where prohibited. Contains nuts. Certain restrictions may apply. All data are subject to availability. Not available on all mobile devices, in the 12 Galaxies Guiltied to a Zegnatronic Rocket Society, or in all dimensions of reality.
‘Everything is true, nothing is permitted.’ - Jerod Poore
1 While there are plenty of books to help you with hypochondria, for some reason there’s not much in the way of websites. Then again, staying off of the Internet is a large part of curing/managing the disorder.
2 Remember kids, Microsloth operating systems are like TOS Star Trek movies with in that every other one sucks way, way more. With TOS Star Trek movies you don’t want to bother watching the odd-numbered ones. With Microsloth OS you don’t want to buy and install the even-numbered ones. Anyone who remembers ME and Vista knows what I mean.
3 Have I mentioned how open source operating systems for commercial applications is one of the dumbest ideas in the history of dumb ideas?
[begin rant] I rent a dedicated server for Crazy Meds. It’s sitting on a rack somewhere in Southern California along with a bunch of other servers that other people have rented. The hardware is identical, but no two machines have exactly the same operating systems. I don’t even need to see what is on any of the others to know this. If somebody got their server at the exact same time, with the exact same features as I did, I’m confident that there would be noticeable differences in some aspects of the operating systems. So what does this mean? For one thing it means that no two computers in the same office of a single company have the same operating system, and the techs can spend hours figuring out what the fuck the problem could be based on that alone. It also means that application software like IP board that runs the forum here has to have so many fucking user-configurable bells and whistles that even when I read the manual I can’t find every setting, or every location that every flag needs to be set in order for a feature to run the way I want it to run. And in the real world it means you can get an MBA not only with an emphasis on resource planning, but with an emphasis on using SAP - a piece of software so complex there are now college programs on how to use it. You might think, “But don’t people learn how to use Photoshop or Adobe Illustrator in college?” Sure, in order to create stuff. And in a way you’re creating stuff with SAP. But do you get a Bachelor of Fine Arts degree with an emphasis on Photoshop?
Back in the Big Iron Age the operating systems were proprietary, and every computer that took up an entire room with a raised floor and HVAC system, and had less storage and processing power than an iPhone, had the same operating system as every other one, give or take a release level. But when a company bought application software like SAP, they also got the source code, which was usually documented and written in a way to make it easy to modify the hell out of it. Why? Because accounting principles may be the same the world over, and tax laws the same across each country and state, but no two companies have the same format for their reports, invoices, purchase orders and so forth. Standards existed and were universally ignored. If something went wrong it went wrong the same way for everyone, and was easy to track down. People didn’t need to take a college course to learn how to use a piece of software.
I’m not against the open source concept entirely. Back then all the programmers read the same magazines, so we all had the same homebrew utilities. We even had a forerunner of QR Code to scan the longer source code. Software vendors and computer manufacturers sponsored conventions so we could, among other things, swap recipes for such add-ons and utilities. While those things would make our lives easier, they had nothing to do with critical functions of the operating system. Unless badly implemented they would rarely cause key application software to crash and burn. Whereas today, with open source everything, who the hell knows what could be responsible some part of a system failing. [/end rant]