Olanzapine vs haloperidol in geriatric schizophrenia: analysis of data from a double-blind controlled trial

Haloperidol (oral) versus olanzapine (oral) for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited resource and humanitarian contexts, it is key to have several options for beneficial, low-cost antipsychotics, which require minimal monitoring. We wanted to compare oral haloperidol, as one of the most available antipsychotics in these settings, with a second-generation antipsychotic, olanzapine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of haloperidol compared to olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia study-based register of trials, which is based on monthly searches of CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP. We screened the references of all included studies. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information where clarification was required or where data were incomplete. The register was last searched on 14 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing haloperidol with olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global state, relapse, clinically important change in mental state, extrapyramidal side effects, weight increase, clinically important change in quality of life and leaving the study early due to adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently evaluated and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial or harmful outcome (NNTB or NNTH) with 95% CI. For continuous data, we estimated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. For all included studies, we assessed risk of bias (RoB 1) and we used the GRADE approach to create a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 studies randomising 9132 participants. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in clinically important change in global state (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 6 studies, 3078 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in relapse (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.02; 7 studies, 1499 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in overall mental state compared to olanzapine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81; 13 studies, 1210 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every eight people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this improvement. The evidence suggests that haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects compared to olanzapine (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.28 to 5.02; 14 studies, 3290 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every three people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one additional person would experience extrapyramidal side effects. For weight gain, the evidence suggests that there may be a large reduction in the risk with haloperidol compared to olanzapine (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; 18 studies, 4302 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 10 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience weight increase. A single study suggests that haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in quality of life compared to olanzapine (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 828 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every nine people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience clinically important improvement in quality of life. Haloperidol may result in an increase in the incidence of leaving the study early due to adverse effects compared to olanzapine (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.47; 21 studies, 5047 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 22 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this outcome. Thirty otherwise relevant studies and several endpoints from 14 included studies could not be evaluated due to inconsistencies and poor transparency of several parameters. Furthermore, even within studies that were included, it was often not possible to use data for the same reasons. Risk of bias differed substantially for different outcomes and the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low. The most common risks of bias leading to downgrading of the evidence were blinding (performance bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low for the main outcomes in this review, making it difficult to draw reliable conclusions. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in terms of clinically important global state and relapse. Olanzapine may result in a slightly greater overall clinically important change in mental state and in a clinically important change in quality of life. Different side effect profiles were noted: haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects and olanzapine in a large increase in weight gain. The drug of choice needs to take into account side effect profiles and the preferences of the individual. These findings and the recent inclusion of olanzapine alongside haloperidol in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines should increase the likelihood of it becoming more easily available in low- and middle- income countries, thereby improving choice and providing a greater ability to respond to side effects for people with lived experience of schizophrenia. There is a need for additional research using appropriate and equivalent dosages of these drugs. Some of this research needs to be done in low- and middle-income settings and should actively seek to account for factors relevant to these. Research on antipsychotics needs to be person-centred and prioritise factors that are of interest to people with lived experience of schizophrenia.

Safety and tolerability of olanzapine compared with other antipsychotics in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia: a naturalistic study

Objective

To evaluate the safety and tolerability of olanzapine in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia.

Methods

A total of 135 outpatients with schizophrenia ≥60 years of age were treated with olanzapine (n = 105) or another antipsychotic (n = 30) and followed up for 6 months. Safety measures included the recording of spontaneous adverse events and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). Clinical status and effectiveness of the medications were measured using the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness and the Global Assessment of Function (GAF) scales. Quality of life was assessed by means of the Spanish version of the EuroQol. The Awad scale was applied to evaluate patients’ subjective attitude towards medication.

Results

The incidence of overall adverse events and EPS was non-significantly lower in patients treated with olanzapine than in patients treated with other antipsychotics. The use of anticholinergic drugs was significantly lower (P = 0.04) in patients treated with olanzapine. Both groups of patients experienced similar improvements in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and GAF scores. Non-significantly greater improvement in the acceptance of medication occurred at endpoint in olanzapine-treated patients than in control patients as measured by the Awad scale. The improvement in the EuroQol quality of life scale achieved at the end of study did not differ between both treatment groups.

Conclusions

Results from this naturalistic study showed that olanzapine was as safe and effective as other antipsychotic drugs in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia.

Paroxetine combined with olanzapine in the treatment of schizophrenia

Objective:

To investigate the clinical efficacy of paroxetine combined with olanzapine in the treatment of senile schizophrenia with depression.

Methods:

Eighty-four elderly schizophrenic patients with depression who were admitted to our hospital from August 2016 to February 2018 were selected as research subjects and randomly divided into observation group and control group using random number table, 42 cases in each group. The control group was treated with olanzapine orally, while the observation group was treated with olanzapine and paroxetine orally. The level of homocysteine (Hcy) in the two groups was analyzed before and after treatment. The efficacy was evaluated by the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale (PANSS) score and Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD) score. The adverse reactions of the two groups were compared.

Results:

After treatment, the level of serum Hcy in the observation group was significantly lower than that in the control group (P<0.05), and it was close to the normal level. There was no significant difference in PANSS score between the two groups before treatment (P>0.05). After treatment, the negative factor score and PANSS score in the observation group were significantly lower than those in the control group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The HAMD score of the two groups had no significant difference before treatment (P>0.05). After treatment, the HAMD score of the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group (P<0.05). The difference of incidence of adverse reactions between the two groups had no statistical significance (P>0.05).

Conclusion:

Paroxetine combined with olanzapine has a definite clinical effect in the treatment of senile schizophrenia with depression. It can effectively reduce the level of serum Hcy, relieve the symptoms of schizophrenia, and alleviate the depressive symptoms of patients, with high safety. It is worth promoting.

Second-generation antipsychotics and constipation: A review of the literature

Antipsychotics are the cornerstone in the management of psychotic disorders and schizophrenia. They are effective agents but also have a wide range of side effects. In the recent literature constipation as possible side effect has received little attention. A review of the literature concerning constipation associated with antipsychotics was performed. Overall constipation is a rarely studied or reported side effect of antipsychotic medication. Nevertheless constipation is a common side effect. Antipsychotic agents differ in their liability to induce constipation. Constipation can be severe and can lead to serious consequences such as paralytic ileus, bowel occlusion and death. Active screening, monitoring and treatment are recommended. Further research on incidence, prevalence, underlying mechanisms and preventive measures is required.

Antipsychotic drugs for elderly patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Elderly patients with schizophrenia are a particularly vulnerable group often excluded from clinical trials. Currently there is no evidence-synthesis about the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics in this subgroup. We reviewed all randomized-controlled-trials, about antipsychotics in elderly schizophrenics (last search Dec 12, 2017). Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted. The primary outcome was overall symptoms. Secondary outcomes included positive symptoms, negative symptoms, response, dropouts, quality of life, social functioning and side-effects. We included 29 references from 18 unique randomized-controlled-trials with 1225 participants published from 1958 to 2009. The definition of "elderly" was very heterogeneous across the studies (minimum age 46-65, mean age 57-73). There were evidence gaps for most drugs in many outcomes. In terms of efficacy paliperidone was associated with fewer dropouts due to inefficacy than placebo in the only placebo-controlled-trial. Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in overall symptoms, negative symptoms and response, and it was associated with fewer dropouts than risperidone. Risperidone and haloperidol produced more prolactin increase than olanzapine, and olanzapine was associated with less use of antiparkinson medication than haloperidol. Although we found no marked differences of the effects of these drugs in the elderly, the evidence presented was based on very few usually small studies. To examine specifically whether there are differences in efficacy and side-effects in elderly, which differs in meaningful ways from the general population, studies in patients who are defined by critiera as truly geriatric, which incorporates older age together with multimorbidity and fraility dimensions, may be more informative.

Clozapine-treated Patients Have Marked Gastrointestinal Hypomotility, the Probable Basis of Life-threatening Gastrointestinal Complications: A Cross Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal side effects are particularly common with clozapine and occur with other antipsychotics, ranging from mild constipation to fatal bowel obstruction and/or ischemia. While this adverse-effect spectrum has been attributed to 'gastrointestinal hypomotility', gastrointestinal transit times in antipsychotic-treated patients have not previously been measured, making this mechanism speculative.

METHODS

Using standardized radiopaque marker ('Metcalf') methods we established colonic transit times of antipsychotic-treated psychiatric inpatients and compared them with population normative values. We analyzed results by antipsychotic type, antipsychotic dose equivalent, anticholinergic load, duration of treatment, gender, ethnicity, and age.

OUTCOMES

For patients not prescribed clozapine, median colonic transit time was 23 h. For patients prescribed clozapine, median transit time was 104.5 h, over four times longer than those on other antipsychotics or normative values (p < 0.0001). Eighty percent of clozapine-treated patients had colonic hypomotility, compared with none of those prescribed other antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, paliperidone aripiprazole, zuclopenthixol or haloperidol). In the clozapine group, right colon, left colon and rectosigmoid transit times were all markedly abnormal suggesting pan-colonic pathology. Hypomotility occurred irrespective of gender, age, ethnicity, or length of clozapine treatment. Transit times were positively correlated with clozapine plasma level (rho = 0.451, p = 0.045), but not with duration of treatment, total antipsychotic load or demographic factors.

INTERPRETATION

Clozapine, unlike the other antipsychotics examined, causes marked gastrointestinal hypomotility, as previously hypothesized. Pre-emptive laxative treatment is recommended when starting clozapine.

Possible etiology of improvements in both quality of life and overlapping gastroesophageal reflux disease by proton pump inhibitor treatment in a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background

Symptoms suggestive of functional dyspepsia (FD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) frequently overlap with those of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Despite the high prevalence of symptomatic overlap, the underlying etiology remains poorly defined. We assessed the correlation of symptomatic relief and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with healing of reflux esophagitis to further derive insights into the underlying etiology.

Methods

626 patients with reflux esophagitis were enrolled into one of two treatment groups (classical healing concept or the complete remission concept) to investigate differences in treatment intensity. Patients were treated with pantoprazole until esophageal mucosal healing. Remission was followed for up to 6 months without treatment. Gastro-intestinal symptoms and HRQoL were analyzed using disease-specific, psychometrically validated patient-reported outcome instruments (ReQuest™, GERDyzer™).

Results

Symptomatic burden reflected by ReQuest™ substantially decreased from baseline to end of treatment by 83% and 88% in either treatment group, respectively. ReQuest™ scores significantly decreased in patients with or without heartburn and in those with symptoms suggestive of FD and IBS, indicating response of all symptom categories to treatment (p < 0.005). Therapy-associated relief of symptoms was paralleled by substantial gains in HRQoL, which continued to stabilize post-treatment.

Conclusions

Pantoprazole is effective in relieving upper and lower gastro-intestinal symptoms overlapping with erosive esophagitis, and provides sustained improvement in HRQoL post-treatment. Our results propose a link between both healing of erosive esophagitis and the slower remission of upper and lower gastro-intestinal symptoms. Since the improvement observed is likely to be multifactorial, the possibility for an immune-mediated etiology and identification of putative susceptibility factors by genome-wide association study may provide focus for future research.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00325676.

Pharmacological and clinical profile of recently approved second-generation antipsychotics: implications for treatment of schizophrenia in older patients

Antipsychotics are frequently used in elderly patients to treat a variety of conditions, including schizophrenia. While extensively studied for their impact in younger populations, there is comparatively limited evidence about the effectiveness of these agents in older patients. Further complicating this situation are the high comorbidity rates (both psychiatric and medical) in the elderly; age-related changes in pharmacokinetics that lead to a heightened proclivity for adverse effects; and the potential for multiple, clinically relevant drug interactions. With this background in mind, we review diagnostic and treatment-related issues specific to elderly patients suffering from schizophrenia. We then focus on the potential role of the most recently approved second-generation antipsychotics, paliperidone (both the extended-release oral formulation and the long-acting injectable formulation), iloperidone, asenapine and lurasidone, given the limited clinical experience with these agents in the elderly. While there is limited data to support their safety, tolerability and efficacy in older patients with schizophrenia, each has unique characteristics that should be considered when used in this population.

Management of schizophrenia in late life with antipsychotic medications: a qualitative review

Although patients with schizophrenia are reported to have excess mortality compared with the general population, many affected patients will nonetheless survive and continue to have the disorder in later life. Consequently, geriatric schizophrenia will be a significant public health concern in the years to come, and evidence-based treatment of schizophrenia in older patients is becoming an urgent issue. However, there has been a paucity of comparative data to guide selection of antipsychotics for schizophrenia in late life. The primary aim of this review was to synthesize the available evidence on management of late-life schizophrenia with antipsychotic medications; a secondary aim was to evaluate treatment resistance in this population. Accordingly, PubMed and EMBASE were searched using the keywords 'antipsychotics', 'age' and 'schizophrenia' to identify psychopharmacological studies of antipsychotics in late-life schizophrenia (last search 30 April 2011). The literature search identified 23 prospective studies of use of antipsychotics for schizophrenia in older patients (generally age ≥65 years), including eight double-blind trials. The sample size was smaller than 40 patients for 52% of the studies. Two of the double-blind studies were post hoc analyses and one was a placebo-controlled trial. In the largest double-blind study, olanzapine (n = 88, median dose 10 mg/day) and risperidone (n = 87, median dose 2 mg/day) were compared in patients not resistant to these therapies, with similar effects. There have also been several open-label trials of these two agents that have shown efficacy and tolerability in non-resistant patients. Evidence on other antipsychotics has been scarce and less robust. The gold standard for treatment-resistant schizophrenia is clozapine. However, almost all of the studies of clozapine to date have effectively excluded older patients with schizophrenia. Only one small study has evaluated clozapine (n = 24, mean dose 300 mg/day) in comparison with chlorpromazine (n = 18, mean dose 600 mg/day) in a difficult-to-treat older population; the investigators reported that both treatments were similarly efficacious. Furthermore, there has been little compelling evidence in favour of or against augmentation of antipsychotics with other psychotropic medications in the older age group. Treatment of non-resistant, late-life schizophrenia with olanzapine and risperidone appears to be supported by the available evidence. However, data on geriatric patients with schizophrenia are generally scarce, particularly for treatment-resistant subpopulations, underscoring the need for more research in this important area.

Antipsychotic drug treatment for elderly people with late-onset schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is usually considered an illness of young adulthood. However, onset after the age of 40 years is reported in 23% of patients hospitalised with schizophrenia. At least 0.1% of the world's elderly population have a diagnosis of late-onset schizophrenia which seems to differ from earlier onset schizophrenia on a variety of counts including response to antipsychotic drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antipsychotic drugs for elderly people with late-onset schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (January 2010) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. We inspected references of all identified studies for further trials. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled trials that compared antipsychotic drugs with other treatments for elderly people (at least 80% older than 65 years) with a recent (within five years) diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizophrenia like illnesses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For the 2010 search, two new review authors (AE, AG) inspected all citations to ensure reliable selection. We assessed methodological quality of trials using the criteria recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. AE and AG also independently extracted data. For homogenous dichotomous data, we planned to calculate the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

There were no included studies in the original version of this review (2002 search). The 2010 search for the current update produced 211 references, among which we identified 88 studies. Only one study met the inclusion criteria and was of acceptable quality. This was an eight-week randomised trial of risperidone and olanzapine in 44 inpatients with late-onset schizophrenia. All participants completed the eight-week trial, indicating that both drugs were well tolerated. Unfortunately, this study provided little usable data. We excluded a total of 81 studies, 77 studies because they either studied interventions other than antipsychotic medication or because they involved elderly people with chronic - not late-onset - schizophrenia. We excluded a further four trials of antipsychotics in late-onset schizophrenia because of flawed design. Five studies are still awaiting classification, and one is on-going.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no trial-based evidence upon which to base guidelines for the treatment of late-onset schizophrenia. There is a need for good quality-controlled clinical trials into the effects of antipsychotics for this group. Such trials are possible. Until they are undertaken, people with late-onset schizophrenia will be treated by doctors using clinical judgement and habit to guide prescribing.

Antipsychotic medication for early episode schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are unclear. There have been numerous suggestions that people with early episodes of schizophrenia appear to respond differently than those with multiple prior episodes. The number of episodes may moderate response to drug treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antipsychotic medication treatment on people with early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register (July 2007) as well as references of included studies. We contacted authors of studies for further data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies with a majority of first and second episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders comparing initial antipsychotic medication treatment with placebo, milieu, or psychosocial treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Working independently, we critically appraised records from 681studies, of which five studies met inclusion criteria. John Rathbone from the Schizophrenia Group supported us with the data extraction. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) where possible. For continuous data, we calculated mean difference (MD). We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies with a combined N = 998 met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 724) provided leaving the study early data and results suggested that individuals treated with a typical antipsychotic medication are less likely to leave the study early than those treated with placebo (Chlorpromazine: 3 RCTs N = 353, RR 0.4 CI 0.3 to 0.5, NNT 3.2, Fluphenaxine: 1 RCT N = 240, RR 0.5 CI 0.3 to 0.8, NNT 5; Thioridazine: 1 RCT N = 236, RR 0.44 CI 0.3 to 0.7, NNT 4.3, Trifulperazine: 1 RCT N = 94, RR 0.96 CI 0.3 to 3.6). Two studies (Cole 1964; May 1976) contributed data to assessment of side effects and present a general pattern of more frequent side effects among individuals treated with typical antipsychotic medications compared to placebo. Rappaport 1978 suggested a higher rehospitalisation rate for those receiving chlorpromazine compared to placebo (N = 80, RR 2.29 CI 1.3 to 4.0, NNH 2.9). However, a higher attrition in the placebo group is likely to have introduced a survivor bias into this comparison, as this difference becomes non-significant in a sensitivity analysis on intent-to-treat participants (N = 127, RR 1.69 CI 0.9 to 3.0). One study (May 1976) contributes data to a comparison of trifluoperazine to psychotherapy on long-term health in favour of the trifluoperazine group (N = 92, MD 5.8 CI 1.6 to 0.0); however, data from this study are also likely to contain biases due to selection and attrition. One study (Mosher 1995) contributes data to a comparison of typical antipsychotic medication to psychosocial treatment on six-week outcome measures of global psychopathology (N = 89, MD 0.01 CI -0.6 to 0.6) and global improvement (N = 89, MD -0.03 CI -0.5 to 0.4), indicating no between-group differences. On the whole, there is very little useable data in the few studies meeting inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With only a few studies meeting inclusion criteria, and with limited useable data in these studies, it is not possible to arrive at definitive conclusions. The preliminary pattern of evidence suggests that people with early episode schizophrenia treated with typical antipsychotic medications are less likely to leave the study early, but more likely to experience medication-related side effects. Data are too sparse to assess the effects of antipsychotic medication on outcomes in early episode schizophrenia.

A tipping point in drug dosing in late-life schizophrenia

Minimally effective doses of antipsychotics are likely influenced by several clinical and demographic characteristics of patients, with age being one of the most important elements. In light of age-related physiologic changes as well as interindividual differences in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic systems, individualized dosing with regard to age will be critically important for safer drug treatment for older patients with schizophrenia. In the present review, we propose the following cautious psychopharmacologic interventions for this population: 1) simple regimen (avoid polypharmacy), 2) be aware of the presence of patients who are very sensitive to drugs, 3) gradual dose titration, and 4) timely and thorough assessments of therapeutic and side effects. The age-related antipsychotic sensitivity highlights the importance of finding the lowest possible effective dose of antipsychotic drugs as patients with schizophrenia age to maximize therapeutic effects and minimize side effects.

Aripiprazole for late-life schizophrenia

Antipsychotics are frequently used in elderly patients to treat a variety of conditions, including schizophrenia. While extensively studied for their impact in younger populations, there is comparatively limited evidence about the effectiveness of these agents in older patients. Further complicating this situation are the high co-morbidity rates (both psychiatric and medical) in the elderly; age-related changes in pharmacokinetics leading to a heightened proclivity for adverse effects; and the potential for multiple, clinically relevant drug interactions. With this background in mind, we review diagnostic and treatment-related issues specific to elderly patients suffering from schizophrenia and other psychotic conditions, focusing on the potential role of aripiprazole.

The elderly safety imperative and antipsychotic usage

Behavioral and psychotic symptoms are common problems in older adults, and as the population ages, understanding the benefits and risks of antipsychotic usage is increasingly important. In this age group, psychotic symptoms may occur in patients with dementia or as part of schizophrenia, mood disorders, delirium, or delusional disorder. Various antipsychotics have been studied in older adults with psychotic symptoms, demonstrating mixed, but real, benefit, especially in relation to carefully selected patients. Caution is required because of the potential side effects and risks, which include increased mortality and cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. This article reviews the use of antipsychotics in older adults, with emphasis on the risks and side effects, particularly in dementia patients with behavioral and psychotic symptoms.

Sensitivity to antipsychotic drugs in older adults

Antipsychotic medications are widely used to manage psychotic and behavioral disorders in older adults, including primary psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia, and psychosis and behavioral disturbances associated with dementia. These two broad diagnostic indications are associated with contrasting recommended treatment durations, with the former requiring indefinite treatment across the life span. Antipsychotic drug dosing for schizophrenia is based primarily on studies of younger patients and thus may not apply to older adults. It is critically important to address the effects of aging on antipsychotic dosing given the recent emergence of data that suggest a critical role for age-related sensitivity to these drugs. Antipsychotic drugs are not only associated with somatic and neurological adverse effects but also increased all-cause mortality and sudden cardiac death in this vulnerable population. This review focuses on the sensitivity of older adults to adverse effects from antipsychotic medications and the current pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic explanatory models of susceptibility. Implications of recent research findings for individualized pharmacotherapy are discussed.

Dosing of antipsychotics in schizophrenia across the life-spectrum

Age effects on dosing of antipsychotics in schizophrenia and mechanisms underlying those effects have not been well understood. The objective of this article is to review the literature regarding effects of age on antipsychotic dosing in schizophrenia and potential mechanisms underlying the age-related antipsychotic sensitivity. According to prescription surveys, age appears to have biphasic effects on prescribed antipsychotic dose. The dose increased with age through the third decade, subsequently plateaued, and decreased after the fifth decade. The first half of this inverted U-shaped relationship may be attributable to a deterioration process in the early phase of schizophrenia and the contribution of 'tachyphylaxis' of antipsychotics on the dopaminergic system. The following age-related decline in prescribed dose is likely associated with physiological aging. Recent data suggest that this increased antipsychotic sensitivity with age comes from age-related functional decline in the dopaminergic system, including endogenous dopamine level and dopamine receptor density. Although the evidence on potential mechanisms underlying age effects on antipsychotic dosing is still limited, alterations in the dopaminergic system due to aging and chronic exposure to this drug may contribute to the inverted U-shaped relationship between dose and age. This age-related antipsychotic sensitivity highlights the importance of finding the lowest possible effective dose of antipsychotic drugs as patients age to enhance therapeutic effects as well as minimize their side effects.

Dropout rates in randomized clinical trials of antipsychotics: a meta-analysis comparing first- and second-generation drugs and an examination of the role of trial design features

Dropout is often used as an outcome measure in clinical trials of antipsychotic medication. Previous research is inconclusive regarding (a) differences in dropout rates between first- and second-generation antipsychotic medications and (b) how trial design features reduce dropout. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of antipsychotic medication was conducted to compare dropout rates for first- and second-generation antipsychotic drugs and to examine how a broad range of design features effect dropout. Ninety-three RCTs that met inclusion criteria were located (n = 26 686). Meta-analytic random effects models showed that dropout was higher for first- than second-generation drugs (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-1.66). This advantage persisted after removing study arms with excessively high dosages, in flexible dose studies, studies of patients with symptom exacerbation, nonresponder patients, inpatients, and outpatients. Mixed effects models for meta-analysis were used to identify design features that effected dropout and develop formulae to derive expected dropout rates based on trial design features, and these assigned a pivotal role to duration. Collectively, dropout rates are lower for second- than first-generation antipsychotic drugs and appear to be partly explained by trial design features thus providing direction for future trial design.

Long-term outcomes in chronically hospitalized geriatric patients with schizophrenia: retrospective comparison of first generation and second generation antipsychotics

INTRODUCTION

Some groups have reported the longitudinal course of elderly poor outcome schizophrenic patients to be characterized by progressive decline in cognitive functions and functional capacity. Although many of these patients experience minimal reduction of psychotic symptoms, there may be beneficial effects of antipsychotic treatments on cognitive functions and functional capacity.

METHODS

This naturalistic study compared the longitudinal course of psychotic symptoms, cognitive functions and functional impairment in geriatric schizophrenic patients treated with first generation (N=97) or second generation (N=78) antipsychotic medications. Mixed effects linear regression analyses were used to examine the effects of treatment (first generation vs. second generation antipsychotic), time and treatment x time.

RESULTS

Cognitive functions (Mini Mental State Examination time effect estimate=-.41, p<.001; ADAS-L Cog time effect estimate=.64, p<.001) and self-care skills (ADAS-L Self-Care time effect estimate=.65, p<.001) declined over time for the subject group as a whole and this decline was not modified by treatment with second generation antipsychotics relative to first generation antipsychotics. Similarly, second generation antipsychotic treatment produced no effect on the progressive worsening of negative symptom over time.

CONCLUSION

This long-term naturalistic study of poor outcome geriatric patients with schizophrenia did not find atypical antipsychotics to produce any differential protective effect relative to typical antipsychotics on the long-term manifestations of symptoms, cognition and self-care in poor outcome geriatric schizophrenic patients.

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine and risperidone in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia: an open study of six months duration

BACKGROUND

Following an earlier study in which elderly patients with schizophrenia had their typical antipsychotic medication changed to olanzapine or risperidone, the 61 patients were followed for up to a further six months to see if either treatment was superior in terms of efficacy or side effects.

AIMS

To determine whether either olanzapine or risperidone was superior in terms of efficacy or side effects when treating schizophrenia in late life.

METHODS

Psychiatric symptoms, side effects and quality of life were rated every six weeks for 24 weeks of open label comparative treatment using standard measures. Group differences were examined using analysis of covariance and within-group changes over time were assessed using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

There were 34 olanzapine and 32 risperidone patients who entered the study, but intention to treat data was only available for 61 of the 66 patients. There were no clinical or demographic differences between the groups. Parkinsonism, positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia improved in both groups both from baseline switch to olanzapine or risperidone and during the six month follow-up after completion of crossover. No significant differences were seen between groups on most measures. However, patients treated with olanzapine showed a significantly greater improvement in quality of life from baseline compared to risperidone patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Both drugs were well tolerated and their use was associated with fewer symptoms of schizophrenia and less adverse effects than were seen when the patients were taking a typical antipsychotic at baseline. Olanzapine appears to have particular benefit with regard to quality of life.

Antipsychotic medication for elderly people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

A large and growing number of older people across the world suffer from schizophrenia. Recommendations for their treatment are largely based on data extrapolated from studies of the use of antipsychotic medications in younger populations. In addition most manufacturers of such medications recommend prescription of reduced doses to the elderly. The evidence base for these assumptions is unclear and raises obvious questions regarding the appropriateness of such prescribing practice.

OBJECTIVES

To find and assimilate good evidence of the effects of antipsychotic medication for treatment of schizophrenia in people over 65 years of age.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (May 2003). We inspected references of all included studies for further trials and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All clinical randomised trials evaluating antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses in older people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty two elderly people with schizophrenia participated in three relevant randomised controlled studies. We were unable to extract usable data on quality of life, satisfaction, service use, or economic outcomes. One small study (n=18) compared thioridazine with remoxipride (RR leaving the study early 1.0 CI 0.07 to 13.6). A second study (n=175) compared risperidone with olanzapine. Global state 'not improved/worse' was not significantly different between treatments (n= 171, RR 1.26 CI 0.8 to 1.9); mental state PANSS total endpoint scores were also equivocal (n=171, RR 0.98 CI 0.76 to 1.26) as were all cognitive function tests. The third study (subset n=59) compared olanzapine with haloperidol and mental state change scores (BPRS WMD -3.60 CI -10.8 to 3.6; PANSS WMD -6.00 CI -18.3 to 6.3) were equivocal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotics may be widely used in the treatment of elderly people with schizophrenia, however, based on this systematic review, there are little robust data available to guide the clinician with respect to the most appropriate drug to prescribe. Clearly reported large short, medium and long-term randomised controlled trials with participants, interventions and primary outcomes that are familiar to those wishing to help elderly people with schizophrenia are long overdue.

Atypical antipsychotics in elderly patients with dementia or schizophrenia: review of recent literature

Atypical antipsychotics have become a common pharmacologic option for the treatment of various psychiatric and behavioral symptoms in older adults, although these medications have been officially approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use only in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Despite the widespread use of these agents, there is a relative shortage of rigorously conducted trials. This review focuses on recently published randomized, blinded, controlled trials involving the use of atypical antipsychotics in elderly patients with dementia (n = 9) or schizophrenia (n = 3), with some discussion of published large, open-label studies and a few unpublished controlled trials. In general, the studies of patients with dementia reported modest efficacy of atypical antipsychotics when compared to placebo and conventional antipsychotics. In addition, an advantage in terms of motor side effects was consistently noted with atypical antipsychotics when compared to conventional antipsychotics. The studies have also shown, however, a greater risk of mortality and adverse cerebrovascular events with several of these agents than with placebo in individuals with dementia. There are insufficient data comparing atypical antipsychotics to one another. In the trials involving elderly persons with schizophrenia, atypical antipsychotics were associated with significant improvements in psychopathology; differences in efficacy among atypical antipsychotics were unclear. A careful consideration of the risk-benefit ratio of atypical antipsychotics, as well as that of available alternative treatments, is needed for each individual elderly patient. Clinical judgment, caution, and consent should be the watchwords in this area of psychopharmacology.

Olanzapine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic reported to be effective without producing disabling extrapyramidal adverse effects associated with older, typical antipsychotic drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the clinical effects and safety of olanzapine compared with placebo, typical and other atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia and schizophreniform psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We updated the first search [Biological Abstracts (1980-1999), The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 1999), EMBASE (1980-1999), MEDLINE (1966-1999), PsycLIT (1974-1999) and The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (October 2000)] in October 2004 using the Cochrane Schizophrenia's Group's register of trials. We also searched references of all included studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies and authors.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised clinical trials comparing olanzapine with placebo or any antipsychotic treatment for people with schizophrenia or schizophreniform psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently extracted data and, for homogeneous dichotomous data, calculated the random effects relative risk (RR), the 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat (NNT) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data we calculated weighted mean differences.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty five trials are included (total n>10000 people with schizophrenia). Attrition from olanzapine versus placebo studies was >50% by six weeks, leaving interpretation of results problematic. Olanzapine appeared superior to placebo at six weeks for the outcome of 'no important clinical response' (any dose, 2 RCTs n=418, RR 0.88 CI 0.8 to 0.1, NNT 8 CI 5 to 27). Although dizziness and dry mouth were reported more frequently in the olanzapine-treated group, this did not reach statistical significance. The olanzapine group gained more weight. When compared with typical antipsychotic drugs, data from several small trials are incomplete. With high attrition in both groups (14 RCTs, n=3344, 38% attrition by six weeks, RR 0.81 CI 0.65 to 1.02) the assumptions included in all data are considerable. For the short term outcome of 'no important clinical response', olanzapine seems as effective as typical antipsychotics (4 RCTs, n=2778, RR 0.90 CI 0.76 to 1.06). People allocated olanzapine experienced fewer extrapyramidal adverse effects than those given typical antipsychotics. Weight change data for the short term are not statistically significant but results between three to 12 months suggest a clinically important average gain of four kilograms for people given olanzapine (4 RCTs, n=186, WMD 4.62, CI 0.6 to 8.64). Twenty three percent of people in trials of olanzapine and other atypical drugs left by eight weeks; 48% by three to12 months (11 RCTs, n=1847, RR 0.91 CI 0.82 to 1.00). There is little to choose between the atypicals, although olanzapine may cause fewer extrapyramidal adverse effects than other drugs in this category. Olanzapine produces more weight gain than other atypicals with some differences reaching conventional levels of statistical significance (1 RCT, n=980, RR gain at 2 years 1.73 CI 1.49 to 2.00, NNH 5 CI 4 to 7). There are very few data for people with first episode illness (1 RCT, duration 6 weeks, n=42). For people with treatment-resistant illness there were no clear differences between olanzapine and clozapine (4 RCTs, n=457).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The large proportion of participants leaving studies early in these trials makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions on olanzapine's clinical effects. For people with schizophrenia it may offer antipsychotic efficacy with fewer extrapyramidal adverse effects than typical drugs, but more weight gain. There is a need for further large, long-term randomised trials with more comprehensive data.