Chlorpromazine versus atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia

Evaluation of Global Dystonia Rating Scale as a predictor of unfavorable outcomes among acute antipsychotics poisoned patients

Worldwide, acute antipsychotic poisoning results in high morbidities and mortalities. Though extrapyramidal syndromes are commonly associated, the extent of extrapyramidal syndromes in relation to the severity of antipsychotic poisoning has not been addressed yet. Thus, this study aimed to assess the Global Dystonia Rating Scale (GDRS) as an unfavorable outcomes predictive tool in acute antipsychotic poisoning. A cross-sectional study included 506 antipsychotic-poisoned patients admitted to Tanta University Poison Control Center, Egypt, over three years was conducted. The mean GDRS was 9.1 ± 16.7 in typical antipsychotic poisoning, which was significantly higher than that of atypical antipsychotics (4.2 ± 11.5) (p = 0.003). Patients with GDRS> 20 showed significantly higher liability for all adverse outcomes (p < 0.05). However, poisoning with typical antipsychotics was associated with significantly more cardiotoxicity (p = 0.042), particularly prolonged QRS (p = 0.005), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission (p = 0.000). In contrary to the PSS, which failed to predict the studied adverse outcomes, GDRS significantly predicted all adverse outcomes (p < 0.000) for all antipsychotic generations. In atypical antipsychotics, GDRS above three accurately predicted cardiotoxicities, prolonged QTc interval, and respiratory failure with Area under curves (AUC) of 0.937, 0.963, and 0.941, respectively. In typical antipsychotic poisoning, at higher cutoffs (7.5, 27.5, 18, and 7.5), cardiotoxicities, prolonged QTc interval, and respiratory failure were accurately predicted (AUC were 0.974, 0.961, and 0.960, respectively). GDRS is an objective, substantially useful tool that quantifies dystonia and can be used as an early reliable predictor of potential toxicity in acute antipsychotic poisoning.

Neuroleptic malignant syndrome and serotonin syndrome: a comparative bibliometric analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze and map scientific literature on Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome (NMS) and Serotonin Syndrome (SS) from prestigious, internationally indexed journals. The objective was to identify key topics, impactful articles, prominent journals, research output, growth patterns, hotspots, and leading countries in the field, providing valuable insights for scholars, medical students, and international funding agencies.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was implemented in the PubMed MeSH database using specific keywords for NMS and SS. The search was conducted in the Scopus database, renowned for its extensive coverage of scholarly publications. Inclusion criteria comprised articles published from 1950 to December 31st, 2022, restricted to journal research and review articles written in English. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel for descriptive analysis, and VOSviewer was employed for bibliometric mapping.

RESULTS

The search yielded 1150 articles on NMS and 587 on SS, with the majority being case reports. Growth patterns revealed a surge in NMS research between 1981 and 1991, while SS research increased notably between 1993 and 1997. Active countries and journals differed between NMS and SS, with psychiatry journals predominating for NMS and pharmacology/toxicology journals for SS. Authorship analysis indicated higher multi-authored articles for NMS. Top impactful articles focused on review articles and pathogenic mechanisms. Research hotspots included antipsychotics and catatonia for NMS, while SS highlighted drug interactions and specific medications like linezolid and tramadol.

CONCLUSIONS

NMS and SS represent rare but life-threatening conditions, requiring detailed clinical and scientific understanding. Differential diagnosis and management necessitate caution in prescribing medications affecting central serotonin or dopamine systems, with awareness of potential drug interactions. International diagnostic tools and genetic screening tests may aid in safe diagnosis and prevention. Reporting rare cases and utilizing bibliometric analysis enhance knowledge dissemination and research exploration in the field of rare drug-induced medical conditions.

Efficacy difference of antipsychotics in Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia: explained with network efficiency and pathway analysis methods

Approximately 50% of Alzheimer's disease (AD) patients will develop psychotic symptoms and these patients will experience severe rapid cognitive decline compared with those without psychosis (AD-P). Currently, no medication has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for AD with psychosis (AD+P) specifically, although atypical antipsychotics are widely used in clinical practice. These drugs have demonstrated modest efficacy in managing psychosis in individuals with AD, with an increased frequency of adverse events, including excess mortality. We compared the differences between the genetic variations/genes associated with AD+P and schizophrenia from existing Genome-Wide Association Study and differentially expressed genes (DEGs). We also constructed disease-specific protein-protein interaction networks for AD+P and schizophrenia. Network efficiency was then calculated to characterize the topological structures of these two networks. The efficiency of antipsychotics in these two networks was calculated. A weight adjustment based on binding affinity to drug targets was later applied to refine our results, and 2013 and 2123 genes were identified as related to AD+P and schizophrenia, respectively, with only 115 genes shared. Antipsychotics showed a significantly lower efficiency in the AD+P network than in the schizophrenia network (P < 0.001) indicating that antipsychotics may have less impact in AD+P than in schizophrenia. AD+P may be caused by mechanisms distinct from those in schizophrenia which result in a decreased efficacy of antipsychotics in AD+P. In addition, the network analysis methods provided quantitative explanations of the lower efficacy of antipsychotics in AD+P.

Quetiapine Ameliorates MIA-Induced Impairment of Sensorimotor Gating: Focus on Neuron-Microglia Communication and the Inflammatory Response in the Frontal Cortex of Adult Offspring of Wistar Rats

The maternal immune activation produced by the systemic administration of lipopolysaccharide (LPS) in rats provides valuable insights into the basis of behavioural schizophrenia-like disturbances and biochemical changes in the brains of the offspring, such as microglial activation. Regarding therapy, antipsychotics continually constitute the cornerstone of schizophrenia treatment. To their various efficacy and side effects, as well as not fully recognised mechanisms of action, further characteristics have been suggested, including an anti-inflammatory action via the impact on neuron–microglia axes responsible for inhibition of microglial activation. Therefore, in the present study, we sought to determine whether chronic treatment with chlorpromazine, quetiapine or aripiprazole could influence schizophrenia-like behavioural disturbances at the level of sensorimotor gating in male offspring prenatally exposed to LPS. Simultaneously, we wanted to explore if the chosen antipsychotics display a positive impact on the neuroimmunological parameters in the brains of these adult animals with a special focus on the ligand-receptor axes controlling neuron–microglia communication as well as pro- and anti-inflammatory factors related to the microglial activity. The results of our research revealed the beneficial effect of quetiapine on deficits in sensorimotor gating observed in prenatally LPS-exposed offspring. In terms of axes controlling neuron–microglia communication and markers of microglial reactivity, we observed a subtle impact of quetiapine on hippocampal Cx3cl1 and Cx3cr1 levels, as well as cortical Cd68 expression. Hence, further research is required to fully define and explain the involvement of quetiapine and other antipsychotics in Cx3cl1-Cx3cr1 and/or Cd200-Cd200r axes modulation and inflammatory processes in the LPS-based model of schizophrenia-like disturbances.

Testing the Protective Effects of Sulfobutylether-Βeta-Cyclodextrin (SBECD) and Sugammadex against Chlorpromazine-Induced Acute Toxicity in SH-SY5Y Cell Line and in NMRI Mice

Chlorpromazine (CPZ) is an antipsychotic drug which can cause several adverse effects and drug poisoning. Recent studies demonstrated that CPZ forms highly stable complexes with certain cyclodextrins (CDs) such as sulfobutylether-β-CD (SBECD) and sugammadex (SGD). Since there is no available antidote in CPZ intoxication, and considering the good tolerability of these CDs even if when administered parenterally, we aimed to investigate the protective effects of SBECD and SGD against CPZ-induced acute toxicity employing in vitro (SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells) and in vivo (zebrafish embryo) models. Our major findings and conclusions are the following: (1) both SBECD and SGD strongly relieved the cytotoxic effects of CPZ in SH-SY5Y cells. (2) SGD co-treatment did not affect or increase the CPZ-induced 24 h mortality in NMRI mice, while SBECD caused a protective effect in a dose-dependent fashion. (3) The binding constants of ligand–CD complexes and/or the in vitro protective effects of CDs can help to estimate the in vivo suitability of CDs as antidotes; however, some other factors can overwrite these predictions.

Antidepressants and Antipsychotic Agents as Repurposable Oncological Drug Candidates

Drug repurposing, also known as drug repositioning/reprofiling, is a relatively new strategy for the identification of alternative uses of well-known therapeutics that are outside the scope of their original medical indications. Such an approach might entail a number of advantages compared to standard de novo drug development, including less time needed to introduce the drug to the market, and lower costs. The group of compounds that could be considered as promising candidates for repurposing in oncology include the central nervous system drugs, especially selected antidepressant and antipsychotic agents. In this article, we provide an overview of some antidepressants (citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline) and antipsychotics (chlorpromazine, pimozide, thioridazine, trifluoperazine) that have the potential to be repurposed as novel chemotherapeutics in cancer treatment, as they have been found to exhibit preventive and/or therapeutic action in cancer patients. Nevertheless, although drug repurposing seems to be an attractive strategy to search for oncological drugs, we would like to clearly indicate that it should not replace the search for new lead structures, but only complement de novo drug development.

Regulation of Reactive Oxygen Species-Mediated Damage in the Pathogenesis of Schizophrenia

The biochemical integrity of the brain is paramount to the function of the central nervous system, and oxidative stress is a key contributor to cerebral biochemical impairment. Oxidative stress, which occurs when an imbalance arises between the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the efficacy of the antioxidant defense mechanism, is believed to play a role in the pathophysiology of various brain disorders. One such disorder, schizophrenia, not only causes lifelong disability but also induces severe emotional distress; however, because of its onset in early adolescence or adulthood and its progressive development, consuming natural antioxidant products may help regulate the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. Therefore, elucidating the functions of ROS and dietary antioxidants in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia could help formulate improved therapeutic strategies for its prevention and treatment. This review focuses specifically on the roles of ROS and oxidative damage in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia, as well as the effects of nutrition, antipsychotic use, cognitive therapies, and quality of life on patients with schizophrenia. By improving our understanding of the effects of various nutrients on schizophrenia, it may become possible to develop nutritional strategies and supplements to treat the disorder, alleviate its symptoms, and facilitate long-term recovery.

Chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder with a prevalence of about 1% among the general population. It is listed among the top 10 causes of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) worldwide. Antipsychotics are the mainstay treatment. Piperacetazine has been reported to be as clinically effective as chlorpromazine, a well established 'benchmark' antipsychotic, for people with schizophrenia. However, the side effect profiles of these antipsychotics differ and it is important that an evidence base is available comparing the benefits, and potential harms of these two antipsychotics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical and side effects of chlorpromazine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses in comparison with piperacetazine.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (6 June 2015 and 8 October 2018) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, CENTRAL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and registries of clinical trials. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on chlorpromazine versus piperacetazine for people with schizophrenia, reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a fixed-effect model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 12 records referring to six trials. We included five trials, all from the 1970s, randomising 343 participants. We excluded one trial. The overall methodology and data reporting by the trials was poor. Only short-term data were available.Results from the included trials found that, in terms of global state improvement, when rated by a psychiatrist, there was no clear difference between chlorpromazine and piperacetazine (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.02; participants = 208; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence). One trial reported change scores on the mental state scale Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS); no clear difference was observed (MD -0.40, 95% CI -1.41 to 0.61; participants = 182; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Chlorpromazine appears no worse or better than piperacetazine regarding adverse effects. In both treatment groups, around 60% of participants experienced some sort of adverse effect (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.33; participants = 74; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence), with approximately 40% of these participants experiencing some parkinsonism-type movement disorder (RR 0.95, CI 0.61 to 1.49; participants = 106; studies = 3; very low-quality evidence). No clear difference in numbers of participants leaving the study early for any reason was observed (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.56; participants = 256; studies = 4; very low-quality evidence). No trial reported data for change in negative symptoms or economic costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review show chlorpromazine and piperacetazine may have similar clinical efficacy, but data are based on very small numbers of participants and the evidence is very low quality. We can not make firm conclusions based on such data. Currently, should clinicians and people with schizophrenia need to choose between chlorpromazine and piperacetazine they should be aware there is no good quality evidence to base decisions. More high quality research is needed.

Repositioning chlorpromazine for treating chemoresistant glioma through the inhibition of cytochrome c oxidase bearing the COX4-1 regulatory subunit

Patients with glioblastoma have one of the lowest overall survival rates among patients with cancer. Standard of care for patients with glioblastoma includes temozolomide and radiation therapy, yet 30% of patients do not respond to these treatments and nearly all glioblastoma tumors become resistant. Chlorpromazine is a United States Food and Drug Administration-approved phenothiazine widely used as a psychotropic in clinical practice. Recently, experimental evidence revealed the anti-proliferative activity of chlorpromazine against colon and brain tumors. Here, we used chemoresistant patient-derived glioma stem cells and chemoresistant human glioma cell lines to investigate the effects of chlorpromazine against chemoresistant glioma. Chlorpromazine selectively and significantly inhibited proliferation in chemoresistant glioma cells and glioma stem cells. Mechanistically, chlorpromazine inhibited cytochrome c oxidase (CcO, complex IV) activity from chemoresistant but not chemosensitive cells, without affecting other mitochondrial complexes. Notably, our previous studies revealed that the switch to chemoresistance in glioma cells is accompanied by a switch from the expression of CcO subunit 4 isoform 2 (COX4-2) to COX4-1. In this study, chlorpromazine induced cell cycle arrest selectively in glioma cells expressing COX4-1, and computer-simulated docking studies indicated that chlorpromazine binds more tightly to CcO expressing COX4-1 than to CcO expressing COX4-2. In orthotopic mouse brain tumor models, chlorpromazine treatment significantly increased the median overall survival of mice harboring chemoresistant tumors. These data indicate that chlorpromazine selectively inhibits the growth and proliferation of chemoresistant glioma cells expressing COX4-1. The feasibility of repositioning chlorpromazine for selectively treating chemoresistant glioma tumors should be further explored.

Movement Disorders Associated With Antipsychotic Medication in People With Schizophrenia: An Overview of Cochrane Reviews and Meta-Analysis

Movement disorders associated with antipsychotic medications are relatively common, stigmatising, and potentially disabling. Their prevalence in people with psychosis who are prescribed second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) is uncertain, as is their level of recognition by clinicinas. We conducted meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials included in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses to estimate the prevalence of new-onset dystonia, akathisia, parkinsonism, and tremor with SGAs (amisulpride, asenapine, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, L-sulpiride, and ziprasidone) approved in Canada and the UK, comparing them with haloperidol and chlorpromazine. We used a random effects model because of the heterogeneity between-studies in drug dosage and method of ascertainment of movement disorders. Our systematic search yielded 37 Cochrane systematic reviews (28 for SGAs), which generated 316 informative randomised controlled trials (243 for SGAs). With respect to SGAs, prevalence estimates ranged from 1.4% (quetiapine) to 15.3% (L-sulpiride) for dystonia, 3.3% (paliperidone) to 16.4% (L-sulpiride) for akathisia, 2.4% (asenapine) to 29.3% (L-sulpiride) for parkinsonism, and 0.2% (clozapine) to 28.2% (L-sulpiride) for tremor. Prevalence estimates were not influenced by treatment duration, the use of a flexible or fixed dosing scheme, or whether studies used validated instruments for the screening/rating of movement disorders. Overall, we found high overlap on the prevalence of new-onset movement disorders across different SGAs precribed for established psychoses. Variations in prevalence figures across antipsychotic medications were observed for the different movement disorders. Differences in pharmacological properties, such as for the dopamine D2 R association rate and serotonin 5-HT2A antagonism, could contribute to this variation.

Chlorpromazine versus penfluridol for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of chlorpromazine, a benchmark antipsychotic, has not been fully assessed in direct comparison with different individual antipsychotics. Penfluridol is another old antipsychotic with a long half-life so one oral dose may last up to one week. This could confer advantage.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical effects of chlorpromazine compared with penfluridol for adults with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

On 31 March 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials focusing on chlorpromazine versus penfluridol for adults with schizophrenia or related disorders. Outcomes of interest were death, service utilisation, global state, mental state, adverse effects and leaving the study early. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we planned to estimate the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a fixed-effect model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

The review includes three studies with a total of 130 participants. Short-term results for hospital admissions showed no clear difference between chlorpromazine and penfluridol (1 RCT, n = 29, RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.60, low-quality evidence). No clear difference in the incidence of akathisia was found at medium term (2 RCTs, n = 85, RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.06, low-quality evidence), and similar numbers of participants - nearly half - from each treatment group left the study early (3 RCTs, n = 130, RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.77, low-quality evidence). The risk of needing additional antiparkinsonian medication was less in the chlorpromazine group (2 RCTs, n = 74, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.95). No useable data reported clinically important change in global or mental state. No data were reported for relapse. No deaths were reported by the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only three small studies provided data and the quality of reporting and evidence is low. Limited data indicate the efficacy and adverse effects profiles of chlorpromazine and penfluridol are generally similar. Penfluridol, however, may confer advantage by needing to be given only once per week. Firm conclusions are not possible without good-quality trials, and where these treatments are used, such trials are justified.

Classics in Chemical Neuroscience: Aripiprazole

Aripiprazole was the first antipsychotic developed to possess agonist properties at dopamine D₂ autoreceptors, a groundbreaking strategy that presented a new vista for schizophrenia drug discovery. The dopamine D₂ receptor is the crucial target of all extant antipsychotics, and all developed prior to aripiprazole were D₂ receptor antagonists. Extensive blockade of these receptors, however, typically produces extrapyramidal (movement) side effects, which plagued first-generation antipsychotics, such as haloperidol. Second-generation antipsychotics, such as clozapine, with unique polypharmacology and D₂ receptor binding kinetics, have significantly lower risk of movement side effects but can cause myriad additional ones, such as severe weight gain and metabolic dysfunction. Aripiprazole's polypharmacology, characterized by its unique agonist activity at dopamine D₂ and D₃ and serotonin 5-HT_1A receptors, as well as antagonist activity at serotonin 5-HT_2A receptors, translates to successful reduction of positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia, while also mitigating risk of weight gain and movement side effects. New observations, however, link aripiprazole to compulsive behaviors in a small group of patients, an unusual side effect for antipsychotics. In this review, we discuss the chemical synthesis, pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, drug metabolism, and adverse events of aripiprazole, and we present a current understanding of aripiprazole's neurotherapeutic mechanisms, as well as the history and importance of aripiprazole to neuroscience.

Chlorpromazine dose for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) Model Lists of Essential Medicines lists chlorpromazine as one of its five medicines used in psychotic disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To determine chlorpromazine dose response and dose side-effect relationships for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (December 2008; 2 October 2014; 19 December 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing low doses of chlorpromazine (≤ 400 mg/day), medium dose (401 mg/day to 800 mg/day) or higher doses (> 800 mg/day) for people with schizophrenia, and which reported clinical outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We included studies meeting review criteria and providing useable data. Review authors extracted data independently. For dichotomous data, we calculated fixed-effect risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) and their 95% CIs based on a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and graded trial quality using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation).

MAIN RESULTS

As a result of searches undertaken in 2014, we found one new study and in 2016 more data for already included studies. Five relevant studies with 1132 participants (585 are relevant to this review) are now included. All are hospital-based trials and, despite over 60 years of chlorpromazine use, have durations of less than six months and all are at least at moderate risk of bias. We found only data on low-dose (≤ 400 mg/day) versus medium-dose chlorpromazine (401 mg/day to 800 mg/day) and low-dose versus high-dose chlorpromazine (> 800 mg/day).When low-dose chlorpromazine (≤ 400 mg/day) was compared to medium-dose chlorpromazine (401 mg/day to 800 mg/day), there was no clear benefit of one dose over the other for both global and mental state outcomes (low-quality and very low-quality evidence). There was also no clear evidence for people in one dosage group being more likely to leave the study early, over the other dosage group (moderate-quality evidence). Similar numbers of participants from each group experienced agitation and restlessness (very low-quality evidence). However, significantly more people in the medium-dose group (401 mg/day to 800 mg/day) experienced extrapyramidal symptoms in the short term (2 RCTS, n = 108, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.74, moderate-quality evidence). No data for death were available.When low-dose chlorpromazine (≤ 400 mg/day) was compared to high-dose chlorpromazine (> 800 mg/day), data from one study with 416 patients were available. Clear evidence of a benefit of the high dose was found with regards to global state. The low-dose group had significantly fewer people improving (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.25, moderate-quality evidence). There was also a marked difference between the number of people leaving the study from each group for any reason, with significantly more people leaving from the high-dose group (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.89, moderate-quality evidence). More people in the low-dose group had to leave the study due to deterioration in behaviour (RR 2.70, 95% CI 1.34 to 5.44, low-quality evidence). There was clear evidence of a greater risk of people experiencing extrapyramidal symptoms in general in the high-dose group (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, moderate-quality evidence). One death was reported in the high-dose group yet no effect was shown between the two dosage groups (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.14, moderate-quality evidence). No data for mental state were available.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The dosage of chlorpromazine has changed drastically over the past 50 years with lower doses now being the preferred of choice. However, this change was gradual and arose not due to trial-based evidence, but due to clinical experience and consensus. Chlorpromazine is one of the most widely used antipsychotic drugs yet appropriate use of lower levels has come about after many years of trial and error with much higher doses. In the absence of high-grade evaluative studies, clinicians have had no alternative but to learn from experience. However, such an approach can lack scientific rigor and does not allow for proper dissemination of information that would assist clinicians find the optimum treatment dosage for their patients. In the future, data for recently released medication should be available from high-quality trials and studies to provide optimum treatment to patients in the shortest amount of time.

Chlorpromazine versus clotiapine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a chronic, disabling and severe mental disorder, characterised by disturbance in perception, thought, language, affect and motor behaviour. Chlorpromazine and clotiapine are among antipsychotic drugs used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effects, safety and cost-effectiveness of chlorpromazine compared with clotiapine for adults with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Schizophrenia's Trials Register (last update search 16/01/2016), which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and clinical trials registries. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the Register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised clinical trials focusing on chlorpromazine versus clotiapine for schizophrenia. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We have included four studies, published between 1974 and 2003, randomising 276 people with schizophrenia to receive either chlorpromazine or clotiapine. The studies were poor at concealing allocation of treatment and blinding of outcome assessment. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global and mental state, specific change in negative symptoms, incidence of movement disorder (dyskinesia), leaving the study early for any reason, and costs. All reported data were short-term (under six months' follow-up).The trials did not report data for the important outcomes of clinically important change in global or mental state, or cost of care. Improvement in mental state was reported using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). When chlorpromazine was compared with clotiapine the average improvement scores for mental state using the PANSS total was higher in the clotiapine group (1 RCT, N = 31, MD 11.50 95% CI 9.42 to 13.58, very low-quality evidence). The average change scores on the PANSS negative sub-scale were similar between treatment groups (1 RCT, N = 21, MD -0.97 95% CI -2.76 to 0.82, very low-quality evidence). There was no clear difference in incidence of dyskinesia (1 RCT, N = 68, RR 3.00 95% CI 0.13 to 71.15, very low-quality evidence). Similar numbers of participants left the study early from each treatment group (3 RCTs, N = 158, RR 0.68 95% CI 0.24 to 1.88, very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Clinically important changes in global and mental state were not reported. Only one trial reported the average change in overall mental state; results favour clotiapine but these limited data are very difficult to trust due to methodological limitations of the study. The comparative effectiveness of chlorpromazine compared to clotiapine on change in global state remains unanswered. Results in this review suggest chlorpromazine and clotiapine cause similar adverse effects, although again, the quality of evidence for this is poor, making firm conclusions difficult.

Chlorpromazine versus metiapine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, a widely available and inexpensive antipsychotic drug, is considered the benchmark treatment for schizophrenia worldwide. Metiapine, a dibenzothiazepine derivative, has been reported to have potent antipsychotic characteristics. However, no evidence currently exists on the effectiveness of chlorpromazine in treatment of people with schizophrenia compared to metiapine, a newer antipsychotic.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of chlorpromazine versus metiapine for the treatment of people with schizophrenia SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials in November 2015 and 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on chlorpromazine versus metiapine for adults with schizophrenia. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and reporting useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a random-effects model for analyses. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three studies randomising 161 people with schizophrenia. Data were available for only two of our seven prestated main outcomes. Clinically important improvement in global state was measured using the Clinical Global Impression (CGI). There was no clear difference between chlorpromazine and metiapine groups (2 RCTs, n = 120, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.47, very low quality evidence) and numbers of participants with parkinsonism at eight weeks were similar (2 RCTs, n = 70, RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.46 to 2.03, very low quality evidence). There were no useable data available for the other key outcomes of clinically important improvement in mental state, readmission due to relapse, satisfaction with treatment, aggressive or violent behaviour, or cost of care.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chlorpromazine has been the mainstay treatment for schizophrenia for decades, yet available evidence comparing this drug to metiapine fails to provide high-quality trial based data. However, the need to determine whether metiapine is more or less effective than chlorpromazine seems to be lacking in clinical relevance and future research on this comparison seems unlikely.

Effects of Melatonin on Liver Injuries and Diseases

Liver injuries and diseases are serious health problems worldwide. Various factors, such as chemical pollutants, drugs, and alcohol, could induce liver injuries. Liver diseases involve a wide range of liver pathologies, including hepatic steatosis, fatty liver, hepatitis, fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocarcinoma. Despite all the studies performed up to now, therapy choices for liver injuries and diseases are very few. Therefore, the search for a new treatment that could safely and effectively block or reverse liver injuries and diseases remains a priority. Melatonin is a well-known natural antioxidant, and has many bioactivities. There are numerous studies investigating the effects of melatonin on liver injuries and diseases, and melatonin could regulate various molecular pathways, such as inflammation, proliferation, apoptosis, metastasis, and autophagy in different pathophysiological situations. Melatonin could be used for preventing and treating liver injuries and diseases. Herein, we conduct a review summarizing the potential roles of melatonin in liver injuries and diseases, paying special attention to the mechanisms of action.

Antipsychotic treatment: experiences of fully recovered service users

BACKGROUND

There is lack of long-term controlled studies evaluating treatment effects of antipsychotic medication. A complete investigation should include the service user perspective.

AIMS

To investigate experiences of clinically recovered service users of antipsychotic medications during and after a first episode of psychosis.

METHOD

We used a thematic analytic approach within an interpretative-phenomenological framework. 20 clinically recovered service users were interviewed.

RESULTS

Themes: (1) Antipsychotic drugs reduce mental chaos during the acute phase, (2) Non-stigmatizing environments were perceived to increase chances of successful use, (3) Antipsychotic drugs beyond the acute phase - considered to compromise the contribution of individual effort in recovery, (4) Prolonged use - perceived to reduce likelihood of functional recovery, (5) Antipsychotic medication was considered as a supplement to trustful relationships.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute phase antipsychotic treatment was mostly perceived as advantageous by this sample, who was in clinical recovery. However, costs were often seen as outweighing benefits beyond the acute stage. Findings clearly emphasize the need for a collaborative approach to be integrated across all phases of care. This study underscores the need to investigate sub-group differences with regard to long-term antipsychotic treatment.

Treatment resistant schizophrenia: a comprehensive survey of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a common serious mental health condition which has significant morbidity and financial consequences. The mainstay of treatment has been antipsychotic medication but one third of people will have a 'treatment resistant' and most disabling and costly illness. The aim of this survey was to produce a broad overview of available randomised evidence for interventions for people whose schizophrenic illness has been designated 'treatment resistant'.

METHOD

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's comprehensive Trials Register, selected all relevant randomised trials and, taking care not to double count, extracted the number of people randomised within each study. Finally we sought relevant reviews on the Cochrane Library and investigated how data on this subgroup of people had been presented.

RESULTS

We identified 542 relevant papers based on 268 trials (Average size 64.8 SD 61.6, range 7-526, median 56 IQR 47.3, mode 60). The most studied intervention is clozapine with 82 studies (total n = 6299) comparing it against other anti-psychotic medications. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), or transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) supplementing a standard care and risperidone supplementation of clozapine has also been extensively evaluated within trials. Many approaches, however, were clearly under researched. There were only four studies investigating combinations of non-clozapine antipsychotics. Only two psychological approaches (CBT and Family Rehabilitation Training) had more than two studies. Cochrane reviews rarely presented data specific to this important clinical sub-group.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey provides a broad taxonomy of how much evaluative research has been carried out investigating interventions for people with treatment resistant schizophrenia. Over 280 trials have been undertaken but, with a few exceptions, most treatment approaches--and some in common use--have only one or two relevant but small trials. Too infrequently the leading reviews fail to highlight the paucity of evidence in this area--as these reviews are maintained this shortcoming should be addressed.