Carbamazepine for schizophrenia and schizoaffective psychoses

Carbamazepine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Many people with schizophrenia do not achieve a satisfactory treatment response with just antipsychotic drug treatment and various adjunct medications are used to promote additional response. The antiepileptic carbamazepine is one such drug.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine alone is an effective treatment for schizophrenia and schizoaffective psychoses and whether carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine augmentation of neuroleptic medication is an effective treatment for the same illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original version we searched The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials (December 2001), The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2001), MEDLINE (1966-2001), EMBASE (1980-2001), Biological Abstracts (1980-2001), PsycLIT (1886-2001) and PSYNDEX (1974-2001). For the most recent update we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials in July 2012. We also inspected references of all identified studies for further trials and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies and authors for additional data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carbamazepine or compounds of the carbamazepine family with placebo or no intervention, whether as sole treatment or as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication for the treatment of schizophrenia and/or schizoaffective psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For homogenous dichotomous data we calculated fixed-effect, risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We assessed the risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

The updated search did not reveal any further studies that met our inclusion criteria. The number of included studies therefore remains at 10 with the number of participants randomised still 283.One study comparing carbamazepine with placebo as the sole treatment for schizophrenia was abandoned early due to high relapse rate with 26 out of 31 participants relapsing by three months. No effect of carbamazepine was evident with no difference in relapse between the two groups (1 RCT n = 31, RR 1.07 CI 0.78 to 1.45). Another study compared carbamazepine with antipsychotics as the sole treatment for schizophrenia. No differences in terms of mental state were found when comparing 50% reduction in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores (1 RCT n = 38, RR 1.23 CI 0.78 to 1.92). A favourable effect for carbamazepine was found when more people who received the antipsychotic (perphenazine) had parkinsonism (1 RCT n = 38, RR 0.03 CI 0.00 to 0.043). Eight studies compared adjunctive carbamazepine versus adjunctive placebo, we were able use GRADE for quality of evidence for these results. Adding carbamazepine to antipsychotic treatment was as acceptable as adding placebo with no difference between the numbers leaving the study early from each group (8 RCTs n = 182, RR 0.47 CI 0.16 to 1.35, very low quality evidence). Carbamazepine augmentation was superior compared with antipsychotics alone in terms of overall global improvement, but participant numbers were low (2 RCTs n = 38, RR 0.57 CI 0.37 to 0.88). There were no differences for the mental state outcome of 50% reduction in BPRS scores (6 RCTs n = 147, RR 0.86 CI 0.67 to 1.12, low quality evidence). Less people in the carbamazepine augmentation group had movement disorders than those taking haloperidol alone (1 RCT n = 20, RR 0.38 CI 0.14 to 1.02). No data were available for the effects of carbamazepine on subgroups of people with schizophrenia and aggressive behaviour, negative symptoms or EEG abnormalities or with schizoaffective disorder.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on currently available randomised trial-derived evidence, carbamazepine cannot be recommended for routine clinical use for treatment or augmentation of antipsychotic treatment of schizophrenia. At present large, simple well-designed and reported trials are justified - especially if focusing on people with violent episodes and people with schizoaffective disorders or those with both schizophrenia and EEG abnormalities.

Antipsychotic combinations vs monotherapy in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

CONTEXT

Despite lacking evidence for its safety and efficacy, antipsychotic cotreatment is common in schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate therapeutic and adverse effects of antipsychotic cotreatment vs monotherapy in schizophrenia.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register and hand searches of relevant journals/conference proceedings.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials comparing antipsychotic monotherapy to cotreatment with a second antipsychotic.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data. For homogenous dichotomous data, we calculated random effects, relative risk (RR), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and numbers needed to treat (NNT). For continuous data, weighted mean differences were calculated.

RESULTS

In 19 studies (1229 patients) with 28 monotherapy and 19 cotreatment arms, antipsychotic cotreatment was superior to monotherapy regarding 2 a priori defined coprimary outcomes: less study-specific defined inefficacy (N = 22, n = 1202, RR = 0.76, CI = 0.63-0.90, P = .002, NNT = 7, CI = 4-17, P = .0008, I(2) = 78.9%) and all-cause discontinuation (N = 20, n = 1052, RR = 0.65, CI = 0.54-0.78, P < .00001). Results were consistent using Clinical Global Impressions thresholds of less than much (P = .006) and less than minimally (P = .01) improved. Specific psychopathology and adverse event data were insufficient to yield meaningful results. In sensitivity analyses, 5 efficacy moderators emerged: concurrent polypharmacy initiation, clozapine combinations, trial duration >10 weeks, Chinese trials, and second-generation + first-generation antipsychotics. In a meta-regression, similar dose combinations, second-generation + first-generation antipsychotics and concurrent polypharmacy initiation remained significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In certain clinical situations, antipsychotic cotreatment may be superior to monotherapy. However, the database is subject to possible publication bias and too heterogeneous to derive firm clinical recommendations, underscoring the need for future research.

Update: new uses for lithium and anticonvulsants

Anticonvulsants are being used clinically as monotherapy and adjuncts in mental illnesses other than affective disorders. This review focuses on the literature for anticonvulsants and lithium in substance use disorders, anxiety disorders, and schizophrenia. Given the abuse potential and other difficulties with prescribing benzodiazepines for alcohol and benzodiazepine withdrawal, anticonvulsants have been considered as an alternative. Promising therapeutic effects have been demonstrated in many of the anxiety disorders, with the greatest number of trials and positive results in posttraumatic stress disorder. Although anticonvulsant and lithium augmentation for schizophrenia is common in practice and has been studied in double-blind, randomized, controlled trials, the sum of the evidence has been inconclusive.

Treatment of schizophrenia with long-acting fluphenazine, haloperidol, or risperidone

OBJECTIVE

This study compares 3 cohorts of patients with schizophrenia before, during, and after initiating treatment with fluphenazine decanoate (FD), haloperidol decanoate (HD), or long-acting injectable risperidone (LAR).

METHODS

Administrative data are analyzed from California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) beneficiaries with schizophrenia who initiated FD, HD, or LAR treatment. Patients were required to have been continuously enrolled in Medi-Cal for 180 days before and 180 days after the start of the new episode of long-acting antipsychotic therapy.

RESULTS

There were few demographic and clinical differences among patients initiating FD, HD, and LAR. During the 180 days before starting long-acting injections, most patients initiating FD (53.5%), HD (58.5%), and LAR (61.2%) received oral antipsychotic medications for <80% of the days in this period (medication possession ratio: <0.80). The mean duration of depot treatment episodes was 58.3 days (SD = 53.6) for FD, 71.7 days (SD = 56.4) for HD, and 60.6 days (SD = 48.8) for LAR (F = 18.3, df = 2, 2694, P < .0001, HD > FD). Few patients who started on FD (5.4%), HD (9.7%), or LAR (2.6%) continued for at least 180 days. Most patients in each group (FD [77.4%], HD [78.9%], and LAR [75.5%]) received oral antipsychotic medications during the 45 days after discontinuing long-acting injections. Coprescription with antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines was common.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with long-acting antipsychotic injections tend to have complex pharmacological regimens and recent medication nonadherence. A great majority of patients initiating long-acting antipsychotic medications discontinue use within the first few months of treatment.

Lithium for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Many people with schizophrenia do not achieve a satisfactory treatment response with ordinary antipsychotic drug treatment. In these cases, various add-on medications are used, among them lithium.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of lithium for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (November 2006). This register is compiled by methodical searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, Dissertation abstracts, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, RUSSMED, Sociofile, supplemented with hand searching of relevant journals and numerous conference proceedings. We also contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of relevant studies to identify further trials and to obtain original patient data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials comparing lithium to antipsychotics or to placebo (or no intervention), whether as sole treatment or as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication for the treatment of schizophrenia and/or 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 (NNT) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

The update search in 2006 did not detect further studies that met our inclusion criteria. The review thus still includes 20 studies with a total of 611 participants. Most studies were small, of short duration and incompletely reported, but a number of authors were willing to share their data with us. Three studies comparing lithium with placebo as the sole treatment showed no difference in any of the outcomes we analysed. In eight studies comparing lithium with antipsychotic drugs as the sole treatment, more participants in the lithium group left the studies early (n=270, RR 1.8, CI 1.2 to 2.9, NNT 9, CI 5 to 33). Several of the outcomes relating to these studies suggested that lithium is less effective than antipsychotic drugs, but it was difficult to summarise the data because a variety of rating scales were used in the studies. Eleven studies examined whether the augmentation of antipsychotic drugs with lithium salts is more effective than antipsychotic drugs alone. More participants who received lithium augmentation had a clinically significant response (n=244, RR 0.8, CI 0.7 to 0.96, NNT 8, CI 4 to 33). However, statistical significance became borderline when participants with schizoaffective disorders were excluded in a sensitivity analysis (n=120, RR 0.8, CI 0.6 to 1.0, p=0.07). Furthermore, more participants in the lithium augmentation groups left the studies early (n=320, RR 2.0 CI 1.3 to 3.1, NNT 7, CI 4 to 14), suggesting a lower acceptability of lithium augmentation compared to those on antipsychotics alone. No superior efficacy of lithium augmentation in any specific aspect of the mental state was found. While based on very little data, there were no differences between groups for adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no randomised trial-based evidence that lithium on its own is an effective treatment for people with schizophrenia. The evidence available on augmentation of antipsychotics with lithium is inconclusive, but does justify further, large, simple and well-designed trials. These should concentrate on two target groups: 1) people with no affective symptoms, so that trialists can determine whether lithium has an effect on the core symptoms of schizophrenia, 2) people with schizoaffective disorders for whom lithium is widely used in clinical practice, although there is no evidence to support this use.

Benzodiazepines for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Many people with schizophrenia do not achieve a satisfactory treatment response with ordinary antipsychotic drug treatment. In these cases, various add-on medications are used, among them benzodiazepines.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of benzodiazepines for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The reviewers searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (last search March 2005). This register is compiled by methodical searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, Dissertation abstracts, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, RUSSMED, Sociofile, supplemented with hand searching of relevant journals and numerous conference proceedings. We also contacted authors of relevant studies in order to obtain missing data from existing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing benzodiazepine to antipsychotics or to placebo (or no intervention), whether as sole treatment or as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication for the treatment of schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected abstracts, selected studies and re-inspected and quality assessed the full reports. We independently extracted relevant outcomes. Dichotomous data were analysed using relative risks (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data were analysed using weighted mean differences. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm (NNH) statistics were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

The review currently includes 31 studies with over 2000 participants. Most studies were small, of short duration - one to 13 weeks - and inconsistently and incompletely reported. Eight studies compared benzodiazepines as a sole agent with placebo. More participants receiving benzodiazepines showed a clinically significant response (n=222, 4 RCTs, RR 0.54 CI 0.3 to 1.0, NNT 3 CI 2 to 17). Only one small study found a significant group difference in favour of benzodiazepines regarding the improvement in overall BPRS mental state. Different rating scales were used to assess general mental state, and therefore many outcomes could not be pooled and no overall direction of effect emerged. Some adverse events observed in these studies suggested that benzodiazepines were more harmful than placebos but again the data were incompletely reported and without overall effect. Thirteen studies examined the effects of benzodiazepines in comparison to antipsychotics as a sole treatment. Trials that reported on clinical response found no advantage for any treatment group concerning improvement of the participants' global state, except of one small study that analysed the mean CGI severity score at one hour. This comparison is highly limited by the low numbers of studies reporting on global function and the short trial duration. Two studies showed a statistically significant superiority of antipsychotics in terms of relapse prevention at one year. Desired sedation occurred significantly more often among participants in the benzodiazepine group than among participants in the antipsychotic treatment group at 20 (n=301, 1 RCT, RR 1.32 CI 1.2 -1.5, NNT 5, CI 3 to 8) and 40 minutes(n= 301, 1 RCT, RR 1.13 CI 1.0 to 1.2, NNT 9 CI 6 to 33), but not at 30, 60 or 12 minutes. Other outcomes relating to the general or specific mental state revealed no significant differences between groups. As far as adverse events were reported there were no results in favour of any group. Sixteen studies examined whether the augmentation of antipsychotics with benzodiazepines is more effective than antipsychotics as a sole treatment. During the first hour of treatment the combination treatment group benefited from the additional benzodiazepine in terms of the participants global state. This benefit diminished over time and was not reproducible at 2 hours or longer. No superior efficacy of benzodiazepine augmentation could be found regarding the general mental state. Specific aspects of the mental state showed no group difference except for desired sedation at 30 and 60 minutes. Somnolence affected the combination treatment group significantly more than the control group (n=118, 2 RCTs, RR 3.30 CI 1.0 to 10.4, NNH 8 CI 5 to 50). We found use of antiparkinson medication to be less frequently used in the combination treatment group (n=282, RR 0.68 CI 0.5 to 1.0, NNT 9 CI 6 to 48). Adverse events were poorly reported and the results were based on very little data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Randomised trial-derived evidence is currently too poor to recommend benzodiazepines neither as a sole nor as an adjunctive agent in schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. The only significant effects were seen in terms of short-term sedation, at best. The evidence available on augmentation of antipsychotics with benzodiazepines is inconclusive and justifies large, simple and well-designed future trials focusing on clinical response, mental state, aggressive behaviour and adverse events.

Use of concomitant medication with antipsychotic treatment in outpatients with schizophrenia: results from the European Schizophrenia Outpatients Health Outcomes (SOHO) study

Use of concomitant medications with antipsychotic agents in the treatment of schizophrenia is common but lacks a clear scientific rationale. We evaluated concomitant medication usage during the first 6 months of the prospective, observational, European Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (SOHO) study, examining its frequency, variation according to type of antipsychotic drug used, and impact on treatment tolerability. We also determined factors that were associated with concomitant medication use. The use of concomitant medications differed greatly among the countries participating in the SOHO study. The presence of depressive symptoms and being female were associated with the use of concomitant antidepressants. Certain antipsychotics were associated with less use of concomitant medications: significantly fewer olanzapine-, quetiapine- and clozapine-treated patients used concomitant anticholinergics or anxiolytics/hypnotics. Patients using concomitant medications had an increased incidence of sexually related side effects and extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) at 6 months follow-up compared with patients not using concomitant medications. The results should be interpreted conservatively due to the observational design of SOHO.

Treatment of alcohol withdrawal: chlormethiazole vs. carbamazepine and the effect on memory performance--a pilot study

Although relatively little attention has been paid to the question how acute alcohol withdrawal might affect cognitive functions, this factor remains of particular interest because it influences psychotherapeutic treatment during detoxification. The clinical outcome and neuropsychological state of 37 inpatients with alcohol withdrawal was investigated in a randomized single-blind approach. Two different medical strategies [chlormethiazole (CMZ) vs. carbamazepine (CBZ)] in the treatment of inpatients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome were compared. Among comparable groups (related to gender, age, initial alcohol level, severity of abuses, severity of initial withdrawal symptoms such as tremor, perspiration, psychomotor agitation, hallucinations, orientation, intelligence, patient demographics), CBZ is just as potent as CMZ in therapy of withdrawal symptoms (circulatory function, vegetative function, psychomotor activity). Patients in both groups showed initial impairments in some neuropsychological tests (d2, Zahlen-Verbundings test, Beck Depression Inventory, Anxiety Sensitivity Index) with significant improvement during detoxification. Additionally, CBZ-treated patients showed significantly better verbal memory performance during the first days of treatment. Without any addictive potential, CBZ therapy could be very supportive in alcohol detoxification. In addition a higher verbal memory performance state could be favourable for a psychotherapeutic approach.