Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia

Construction of iron metabolism-related prognostic features of gastric cancer based on RNA sequencing and TCGA database

BACKGROUND

Researches have manifested that the disorder of iron metabolism is participated in Gastric cancer (GC), but whether iron metabolism-relevant genes (IMRGs) is related to the survival outcome of GC remain unknown.

METHODS

Eleven tumor as well as nine adjacent normal tissues from GC patients were underwent mRNA sequencing, and the The Cancer Genome Atlas Stomach Cancer (TCGA-STAD) datasets were acquired from the TCGA database. Cox analyses and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression were applied to build a IMRGs signature. The relationship between signature genes and the infiltration profiling of 24 immune cells were investigated using single-sample GSEA (ssGSEA). Meanwhile, the potential biological significance, genes that act synergistically with signature genes, and the upstream regulatory targets were predicted. Finally, the abundance of the signature genes were measured via the quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR).

RESULTS

A IMRGs signature was constructed according to the expression and corresponding coefficient of DOHH, P4HA3 and MMP1 (The Schoenfeld individual test showed risk score was not significant with P values = 0.83). The prognostic outcome of patients in the high-risk group was terrible (p < 0.05). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves confirmed that the IMRGs signature presented good efficiency for predicting GC prognosis (AUC > 0.6). The nomogram was performed well for clinical utilize (C-index = 0.60), and the MMP1 expression significantly increased in the cohorts at age > 60 and Stage II-IV (p < 0.05). The positive correlation of P4HA3 and MMP1 expression as well as the negative correlation of DOHH expression with risk score (p < 0.0001) and worse prognosis (p < 0.05) were detected as well. Furthermore, 11 differential immune cells were associated with these signature genes (most p < 0.01). Finally, qRT-PCR revealed that the abundance of DOHH, P4HA3 and MMP1 were high in tumor cases, indicating the complex mechanism between the high expression of DOHH as a protective factor and the high expression of P4HA3 and MMP1 as the risk factors in the development of GC.

CONCLUSION

An iron metabolism-related signature was constructed and has significant values for foretelling the OS of GC.

Perspective on medication decisions following remission from first-episode psychosis

While antipsychotics (APs) could provide rapid relief of positive symptoms in psychotic disorders, their usage is often associated with side effects, stigma and inconveniences. For these and other reasons, many psychosis patients, particularly those of first-episode psychosis (FEP) in remission, wish to discontinue maintenance treatment. The current review aims to discuss the strategies of AP treatment following remission from FEP, with particular emphasis on the evaluation of outcomes following AP discontinuation. Upon review of relevant literature, three potential strategies are put forth for treatment-responsive, remitted FEP patients: a) life-long maintenance treatment, b) AP discontinuation during second year of treatment, or c) AP discontinuation after three years of treatment. In theory, the first strategy presents the safest option for maximal symptom control. However, a rigorous RCT indicates that if AP discontinuation is to be attempted, the third strategy best prevents poor long-term clinical outcomes. Further data is needed to address the costs and benefits of each treatment strategy, compare AP-free patients with those on different types of APs, as well as explore even longer-term outcomes.

Acupuncture for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Acupuncture, with many categories such as traditional acupuncture, electroacupuncture, laser acupuncture, and acupoint injection, has been shown to be relatively safe with few adverse effects. It is accessible and inexpensive, at least in China, and is likely to be widely used there for psychotic symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of acupuncture, alone or in combination treatments compared with placebo (or no treatment) or any other treatments for people with schizophrenia or related psychoses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (February 2012), which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and clinical trials registries. We also inspected references of identified studies and contacted relevant authors for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised controlled trials involving people with schizophrenia-like illnesses, comparing acupuncture added to standard dose antipsychotics with standard dose antipsychotics alone, acupuncture added to low dose antipsychotics with standard dose antipsychotics, acupuncture with antipsychotics, acupuncture added to Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) drug with TCM drug, acupuncture with TCM drug, electric acupuncture convulsive therapy with electroconvulsive therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably extracted data from all included studies, discussed any disagreement, documented decisions and contacted authors of studies when necessary. We analysed binary outcomes using a standard estimation of risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences with 95% CI. For homogeneous data we used fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

After an update search in 2012 the review now includes 30 studies testing different forms of acupuncture across six different comparisons. All studies were at moderate risk of bias.When acupuncture plus standard antipsychotic treatment was compared with standard antipsychotic treatment alone, people were at less risk of being 'not improved' (n = 244, 3 RCTs, medium-term RR 0.40 CI 0.28 to 0.57, very low quality evidence). Mental state findings were mostly consistent with this finding as was time in hospital (n = 120, 1 RCT, days MD -16.00 CI -19.54 to -12.46, moderate quality evidence). If anything, adverse effects were less for the acupuncture group (e.g. central nervous system, insomnia, short-term, n = 202, 3 RCTs, RR 0.30 CI 0.11 to 0.83, low quality evidence).When acupuncture was added to low dose antipsychotics and this was compared with standard dose antipsychotic drugs, relapse was less in the experimental group (n = 170, 1 RCT, long-term RR 0.57 CI 0.37 to 0.89, very low quality evidence) but there was no difference for the outcome of 'not improved'. Again, mental state findings were mostly consistent with the latter. Incidences of extrapyramidal symptoms - akathisia, were less for those in the acupuncture added to low dose antipsychotics group (n = 180, 1 RCT, short-term RR 0.03 CI 0.00 to 0.49, low quality evidence) - as dry mouth, blurred vision and tachycardia.When acupuncture was compared with antipsychotic drugs of known efficacy in standard doses, there were equivocal data for outcomes such as 'not improved' using different global state criteria. Traditional acupuncture added to TCM drug had benefit over use of TCM drug alone (n = 360, 2 RCTs, RR no clinically important change 0.11 CI 0.02 to 0.59, low quality evidence), but when traditional acupuncture was compared with TCM drug directly there was no significant difference in the short-term. However, we found that participants given electroacupuncture were significantly less likely to experience a worsening in global state (n = 88, 1 RCT, short-term RR 0.52 CI 0.34 to 0.80, low quality evidence).In the one study that compared electric acupuncture convulsive therapy with electroconvulsive therapy there were significantly different rates of spinal fracture between the groups (n = 68, 1 RCT, short-term RR 0.33 CI 0.14 to 0.81, low quality evidence). Attrition in all studies was minimal. No studies reported death, engagement with services, satisfaction with treatment, quality of life, or economic outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Limited evidence suggests that acupuncture may have some antipsychotic effects as measured on global and mental state with few adverse effects. Better designed large studies are needed to fully and fairly test the effects of acupuncture for people with schizophrenia.

Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, formulated in the 1950s, remains a benchmark treatment for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of chlorpromazine compared with placebo, for the treatment of schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (15 May 2012). We also searched references of all identified studies for further trial citations. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chlorpromazine with placebo for people with schizophrenia and non-affective serious/chronic mental illness irrespective of mode of diagnosis. Primary outcomes of interest were death, violent behaviours, overall improvement, relapse and satisfaction with care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers, re-inspected and quality assessed these. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and estimated the 95% confidence interval (CI) around this. We excluded continuous data if more than 50% of participants were lost to follow-up. Where continuous data were included, we analysed this data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval. We used a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We inspected over 1100 electronic records. The review currently includes 315 excluded studies and 55 included studies. The quality of the evidence is very low. We found chlorpromazine reduced the number of participants experiencing a relapse compared with placebo during six months to two years follow-up (n = 512, 3 RCTs, RR 0.65 CI 0.47 to 0.90), but data were heterogeneous. No difference was found in relapse rates in the short, medium or long term over two years, although data were also heterogeneous. We found chlorpromazine provided a global improvement in a person's symptoms and functioning (n = 1164, 14 RCTs, RR 0.71 CI 0.58 to 0.86). Fewer people allocated to chlorpromazine left trials early ( n = 1831, 27 RCTs, RR 0.64 CI 0.53 to 0.78) compared with placebo. There are many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is clearly sedating (n = 1627, 23 RCTs, RR 2.79 CI 2.25 to 3.45), it increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders (n = 942, 5 RCTs, RR 3.47 CI 1.50 to 8.03) and parkinsonism (n = 1468, 15 RCTs, RR 2.11 CI 1.59 to 2.80). Akathisia did not occur more often in the chlorpromazine group than placebo. Chlorpromazine clearly causes a lowering of blood pressure with accompanying dizziness (n = 1488, 18 RCTs, RR 2.38 CI 1.74 to 3.25) and considerable weight gain (n = 165, 5 RCTs, RR 4.92 CI 2.32 to 10.43).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review confirm much that clinicians and recipients of care already know but aim to provide quantification to support clinical impression. Chlorpromazine's global position as a 'benchmark' treatment for psychoses is not threatened by the findings of this review. Chlorpromazine, in common use for half a century, is a well-established but imperfect treatment. Judicious use of this best available evidence should lead to improved evidence-based decision making by clinicians, carers and patients.

Definitions and drivers of relapse in patients with schizophrenia: a systematic literature review

Relapse in patients with schizophrenia has devastating repercussions, including worsening symptoms, impaired functioning, cognitive deterioration and reduced quality of life. This progressive decline exacerbates the burden of illness on patients and their families. Relapse prevention is identified as a key therapeutic aim; however, the absence of widely accepted relapse definition criteria considerably hampers achieving this goal. We conducted a literature review in order to investigate the reporting of relapses and the validity of hospitalization as a proxy for relapse in patients with schizophrenia. The primary aim was to assess the range and validity of methods used to define relapse in observational or naturalistic settings. The secondary aim was to capture information on factors that predicted or influenced the risk of relapse. A structured search of the PubMed database identified articles that discussed relapse, and hospitalization as a proxy of relapse, in patients with schizophrenia. National and international guidelines were also reviewed. Of the 150 publications and guidelines identified, 87 defined relapse and 62% of these discussed hospitalization. Where hospitalization was discussed, this was as a proxy for, or a component of, relapse in the majority of cases. However, hospitalization duration and type varied and were not always well defined. Scales were used to define relapse in 53 instances; 10 different scales were used and multiple scales often appeared within the same definition. There were 95 references to factors that may drive relapse, including non-adherence to antipsychotic medication (21/95), stress/depression (11/95) and substance abuse (9/95). Twenty-five publications discussed the potential of antipsychotic therapy to reduce relapse rates-continuous antipsychotic therapy was associated with reduced frequency and duration of hospitalization. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as psychoeducation and cognitive behavioural therapy, were also commonly reported as factors that may reduce relapse. In conclusion, this review identified numerous factors used to define relapse. Hospitalization was the factor most frequently used and represents a useful proxy for relapse when reporting in a naturalistic setting. Several factors were reported to increase the risk of relapse, and observation of these may aid the identification of at-risk patients.

Pharmacological and psychosocial management of mental, neurological and substance use disorders in low- and middle-income countries: issues and current strategies

Mental, neurological, and substance use disorders (MNS) are among the largest sources of medical disability in the world, surpassing both cardiovascular disease and cancer. The picture is not different in low- and middle-income countries (LAMIC) where the relative morbidity associated with MNS is increasing, as a consequence of improvement in general health indicators and longevity. However, 80 % of individuals with MNS live in LAMIC but only close to 20 % of cases receive some sort of treatment. The main aim of this article is to provide non-specialist health workers in LAMIC with an accessible guide to the affordable essential psychotropics and psychosocial interventions which are proven to be cost effective for treating the main MNS. The MNS discussed in this article were selected on the basis of burden, following the key priority conditions selected by the Mental Health Action Programme (mhGAP) developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) (anxiety, stress-related and bodily distress disorders; depression and bipolar disorder; schizophrenia; alcohol and drug addiction; and epilepsy), with the addition of eating disorders, because of their emergent trend in middle-income countries. We review best evidence-based clinical practice in these areas, with a focus on drugs from the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines and the psychosocial interventions available in LAMIC for the management of these conditions in primary care. We do this by reviewing guidelines developed by prestigious professional associations and government agencies, clinical trials conducted in LAMIC and systematic reviews (including Cochrane reviews) identified from the main international literature databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO). In summary, it can be concluded that the availability and use of the psychotropics on the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines in LAMIC, plus an array of psychosocial interventions, can represent a cost-effective way to expand treatment of most MNS. The translation of these findings into policies can be achieved by relatively low supplementary funding, and limited effort engendered by governments and policy makers in LAMIC.

Where Does Evidence from New Trials for Schizophrenia Fit with the Existing Evidence: A Case of the Emperor's New Clothes?

Advent of "atypical" antipsychotics has spawned new trials in the recent years and the number of such trial reports has been increasing exponentially. As clinicians we have been led to believe that "atypicals" are better than "typicals" despite the odd dissenting voice in academic and clinical circles. This has been largely ignored until the publication of two landmark, independent, pragmatic trials, Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) and Cost Utility of the Latest Antipsychotic Drugs in Schizophrenia Study (CUtLASS), which proved that thoughtfully chosen "typical" antipsychotics were as good as the newer "atypicals." We pooled "leaving the study early data" from Cochrane Reviews that existed before CATIE and CUtLASS and added data from CATIE and CUtLASS to the pool for a "before and after" comparison. Addition of CATIE and CUtLASS data only led to narrowing of the already existing confidence intervals, merely increasing precision, and decreasing the risk of Type II error. Perhaps surprisingly, CATIE and CUtLASS when pooled with the already existing data showed us that we had chosen to turn a blind eye to findings that already existed. This leads clinicians to question as to whether, in future, we need to feel less guilty about crying out early on that the emperor has no clothes on.

A single blind comparative clinical study of the effects of chlorpromazine and risperidone on positive and negative symptoms in patients of schizophrenia

OBJECTIVES

The present study was undertaken to test the comparative efficacy of chlorpromazine and risperidone in patients of schizophrenia in a tertiary care hospital of Maharashtra.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

About 100 subjects of either sex between 15 and 75 years of age were randomly assigned either chlorpromazine or risperidone. Only those patients were included who met International Classification of Diseases 10 revision criteria by World Health Organization. To avoid bias, the test drugs were coded as A and B. The study coordinator was unaware of the prescribed drugs; however, the prescribing psychiatrist knew about the drug treatment.

RESULTS

Both chlorpromazine and risperidone significantly decreased the mean score of positive and general symptoms in patients of schizophrenia. Although chlorpromazine decreased the mean score of negative symptoms, it was not statistically significant. Risperidone reduced the mean score of negative symptoms to a significant extent. The cost (Rs. 3000-4000) of risperidone was more than the cost (Rs. 700-1000) of chlorpromazine per patient per annum. The dropouts were less (25%) in the risperidone group than in the chlorpromazine group (75%). The more purchase of risperidone than of chlorpromazine was observed in our study.

CONCLUSION

The response rates for positive and general symptoms were found to be equal for both chlorpromazine and risperidone. However, risperidone was found to be more effective than chlorpromazine in treating negative symptoms. The dropout rate was less in the risperidone group than in the chlorpromazine group. The compliance was also better in the risperidone group, even though the cost of risperidone was more than that of chlorpromazine.

Do findings from new trials for schizophrenia fit with existing evidence: not duped … just beguiled?

No treatment has caused a greater revolution in the treatment of people with schizophrenia than chlorpromazine. The new generation of drugs has been embraced by psychiatry with an enthusiasm fostered by the unmet needs of both patients and industry. Recent, independently funded trials have highlighted already existing data illustrating how the new antipsychotics drugs are an additional advance but not a revolution. In this story there are lessons for psychiatry to opt for science rather than seduction.

Packages of care for schizophrenia in low- and middle-income countries

In the third in a series of six articles on packages of care for mental disorders in low- and middle-income countries, Jair Mari and colleagues discuss the treatment of schizophrenia.

Treatment and prevention of mental disorders in low-income and middle-income countries

We review the evidence on effectiveness of interventions for the treatment and prevention of selected mental disorders in low-income and middle-income countries. Depression can be treated effectively in such countries with low-cost antidepressants or with psychological interventions (such as cognitive-behaviour therapy and interpersonal therapies). Stepped-care and collaborative models provide a framework for integration of drug and psychological treatments and help to improve rates of adherence to treatment. First-generation antipsychotic drugs are effective and cost effective for the treatment of schizophrenia; their benefits can be enhanced by psychosocial treatments, such as community-based models of care. Brief interventions delivered by primary-care professionals are effective for management of hazardous alcohol use, and pharmacological and psychosocial interventions have some benefits for people with alcohol dependence. Policies designed to reduce consumption, such as increased taxes and other control strategies, can reduce the population burden of alcohol abuse. Evidence about the efficacy of interventions for developmental disabilities is inadequate, but community-based rehabilitation models provide a low-cost, integrative framework for care of children and adults with chronic mental disabilities. Evidence for mental health interventions for people who are exposed to conflict and other disasters is still weak-especially for interventions in the midst of emergencies. Some trials of interventions for prevention of depression and developmental delays in low-income and middle-income countries show beneficial effects. Interventions for depression, delivered in primary care, are as cost effective as antiretroviral drugs for HIV/AIDS. The process and effectiveness of scaling up mental health interventions has not been adequately assessed. Such research is needed to inform the continuing process of service reform and innovation. However, we recommend that policymakers should act on the available evidence to scale up effective and cost-effective treatments and preventive interventions for mental disorders.

Chlorpromazine for schizophrenia: a Cochrane systematic review of 50 years of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine (CPZ) remains one of the most common drugs used for people with schizophrenia worldwide, and a benchmark against which other treatments can be evaluated. Quantitative reviews are rare; this one evaluates the effects of chlorpromazine in the treatment of schizophrenia in comparison with placebo.

METHODS

We sought all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing chlorpromazine to placebo by electronic and reference searching, and by contacting trial authors and the pharmaceutical industry. Data were extracted from selected trials and, where possible, synthesised and random effects relative risk (RR), the number needed to treat (NNT) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated.

RESULTS

Fifty RCTs from 1955-2000 were included with 5276 people randomised to CPZ or placebo. They constitute 2008 person-years spent in trials. Meta-analysis of these trials showed that chlorpromazine promotes a global improvement (n = 1121, 13 RCTs, RR 0.76 CI 0.7 to 0.9, NNT 7 CI 5 to 10), although a considerable placebo response is also seen. People allocated to chlorpromazine tended not to leave trials early in both the short (n = 945, 16 RCTs, RR 0.74 CI 0.5 to 1.1) and medium term (n = 1861, 25 RCTs, RR 0.79 CI 0.6 to 1.1). There were, however, many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is sedating (n = 1242, 18 RCTs, RR 2.3 CI 1.7 to 3.1, NNH 6 CI 5 to 8), increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders, Parkinsonism and causes low blood pressure with dizziness and dry mouth.

CONCLUSION

It is understandable why the World Health Organization (WHO) have endorsed and included chlorpromazine in their list of essential drugs for use in schizophrenia. Low- and middle-income countries may have more complete evidence upon which to base their practice compared with richer nations using recent innovations.

Risperidone versus olanzapine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medication is a mainstay of treatment for schizophrenia and risperidone and olanzapine are the most popular treatment choice of the new generation drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effects, safety and cost effectiveness of risperidone compared with olanzapine for treating schizophrenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (June 2004) which is based on regular searches of, amongst others, BIOSIS, CENTRAL, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. References of all identified studies were inspected for further trials. We also contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all clinical randomised trials comparing risperidone with olanzapine for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For homogenous dichotomous data we calculated random effects, relative risk (RR), 95% confidence intervals (CI) and, where appropriate, numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/H) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

We found no difference for the outcome of unchanged or worse in the short term (n=548, 2 RCTs, RR 1.00 CI 0.88 to 1.15). One study, sponsored by the manufactures of olanzapine, favoured this drug for the outcome of relapse/rehospitalisation by 12 months (n=279, RR 2.16 CI 1.31 to 3.54, NNT 7 CI 4 to 25). Most mental state data showed the two drugs to as effective as each other (n=552, 2 RCTs, RR 'no <20% decrease PANSS by eight weeks' 1.01 CI 0.87 to 1.16). At least two thirds of people given risperidone or olanzapine experienced an adverse event (n=300, 2 RCTs, RR 1.16 CI 0.70 to 1.94). About 20% had anticholinergic symptoms (n=719, 3 RCTs, RR 1.12 CI 0.77 to 1.63) and 20% of both groups experienced insomnia (n=594, 3 RCTs, RR 1.33 CI 0.95 to 1.85) and approximately 33% sleepiness (n=719, 4 RCTs, 0.99 CI 0.79 to 1.23). One third of people given either drug experienced some extrapyramidal symptoms (n=893, 3 RCTs, RR 1.18 CI 0.75 to 1.88) but 25% of people using risperidone require medication to alleviate extrapyramidal adverse effects (n=419, 2 RCTs, RR 1.76 CI 1.25 to 2.48, NNH 8 CI 4 to 25). People allocated to risperidone were less likely to gain weight compared with those given olanzapine and the weight gain resulting from olanzapine can be considerable and of rapid onset (n=377, 1 RCT, RR gain more than 7% of their baseline weight 0.40 CI 0.23 to 0.70, NNT 8 CI 6 to 17). Risperidone may cause more sexual dysfunction than olanzapine (n=370, 2 RCTs, RR abnormal ejaculation 4.36 CI 1.38 to 13.76, NNH 20 CI 6 to 176; n=31, 1 RCT, RR impotence 2.43 CI 0.24 to 24.07). Within trials both drugs are associated with equal attrition (n=1217, 7 RCTs, RR leaving the study early 1.17 CI 0.92 to 1.49).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data regarding quality of life and economic outcomes are difficult to interpret, and for both these highly marketed new drugs we know very little from evaluative studies regarding service outcomes, general functioning and behaviour, engagement with services and treatment satisfaction. There is little to differentiate between risperidone and olanzapine except on the issue of adverse effects and both these drugs have unpleasant adverse effects. Risperidone is particularly associated with movement disorders and sexual dysfunction. Olanzapine can cause considerable rapid weight gain.This review highlights the need for large, independent, well designed, conducted and reported pragmatic randomised studies.

Risperidone versus typical antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

The 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs, such as haloperidol and chlorpromazine, are frequently used as the first line treatment for people with schizophrenia. However, about 5-25% of these people show poor response to these treatments and side effects often makes compliance with the 'older generation' of drug treatment problematic. Although the efficacy of these medications with respect to 'positive' symptoms is well described, little evidence exists that 'conventional' antipsychotic treatment has any effect on the 'negative' symptoms of schizophrenia. Risperidone is one of the 'new generation' neuroleptic compounds. As well as its reputed tendency to cause fewer movement disorders it is claimed that risperidone may improve negative symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of risperidone for schizophrenia in comparison to 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1980-1997), Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (1997), The Cochrane Library (1997, Issue1), EMBASE (1980-1997), MEDLINE (1966-1997), PsycLIT (1974-1997), and SCISEARCH (1997) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials comparing risperidone to any 'conventional' neuroleptic treatment for those with schizophrenia or other serious mental illnesses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were also independently extracted. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone, haloperidol and duration of illness were undertaken for the primary outcomes of clinical improvement, side effects (movement disorders) and acceptability of treatment. For homogeneous dichotomous data the odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve short-term studies and two long term studies provided data on 3401 people. This review provides no evidence relating to the effect of risperidone on cognitive or social functioning, quality of life, employment status, discharge from hospital and relapse rates. Risperidone increases the odds of moderate clinical improvement (OR 0.65, CI 0.55-0.77, NNT 10, CI 7-16). It appears to have little or no additional effect on the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia but did have less tendency to cause movement disorders, largely in comparison with haloperidol (OR 0.43, CI 0.34-0.55, NNT 7, CI 5-10) for use of antiparkinsonian medication. Risperidone seems to be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia (OR 0.69 CI 0.57-0.83, NNT 15, CI 10-30, 30% baseline risk of dropping out). Those taking risperidone are also marginally less likely to experience somnolence (OR 0.78, CI 0. 61-0.99, NNT 22). Weight gain, however, is more likely with risperidone (OR 1.51 CI 1.14-2.00, NNT 13). Funnel plots show that smaller studies generally show greater benefit for risperidone than larger studies. A publication bias in favour of risperidone amongst the included studies may explain this effect. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone (excluding those receiving 1 or 2 mg) did not materially change the results for the principal outcomes. Excluding data from those on higher doses of haloperidol (>10mg/day) does marginally change the results. Risperidone is less effective in achieving clinical improvement and preventing dropout but outcomes relating to movement disorders change little.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Little can be concluded about the long term effects of risperidone and generalising results beyond a comparison with haloperidol would be imprudent. Risperidone may be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia and have marginal benefits in terms of limited clinical improvement and side