Lithium vs carbamazepine in the maintenance treatment of schizoaffective disorder: a randomised study

Twenty-Three Years of Declining Lithium Use: Analysis of a Pharmacoepidemiological Dataset from German-Speaking Countries

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacoepidemiological data suggest that lithium prescriptions for bipolar disorder are gradually decreasing, with less attention having been paid to other indications.

METHODS

We examined lithium prescriptions between 1994 and 2017 in data provided by the Drug Safety in Psychiatry Program AMSP, including psychiatric hospitals in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. We compared lithium use for different diagnoses before and after 2001 and in three periods (T1: 1994-2001, T2: 2002-2009, and T3: 2010-2017).

RESULTS

In a total of 158,384 adult inpatients (54% female, mean age 47.4±17.0 years), we observed a statistically significant decrease in lithium prescriptions between 1994-2000 and 2001-2017 in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder from 7.7% to 5.1% and in patients with affective disorders from 16.8% to 9.6%. Decreases in use were also observed for diagnostic subgroups: schizoaffective disorder (ICD-10 F25: 27.8% to 17.4%), bipolar disorder (F31: 41.3% to 31%), depressive episode (F32: 8.1% to 3.4%), recurrent depression (F33: 17.9% to 7.5%, all: p<0.001) and emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder (6.3% to 3.9%, p=0.01). The results in T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 were for F25: 26.7% vs. 18.2% vs. 16.2%, F32: 7.7% vs. 4.2% vs. 2.7%, F33: 17.2% vs. 8.6% vs. 6.6% and for F31: 40.8% vs. 31.7% vs 30.0%, i. e. there was no further decrease for lithium use in bipolar disorder after 2002. Lithium's main psychotropic co-medications were quetiapine (21.1%), lorazepam (20.6%), and olanzapine (15.2%).

DISCUSSION

In inpatients, the use of lithium has decreased in patients with bipolar disorder and also with various other psychiatric diagnoses.

Bipolar mania and epilepsy pathophysiology and treatment may converge in purine metabolism: A new perspective on available evidence

Decreased ATPergic signaling is an increasingly recognized pathophysiology in bipolar mania disease models. In parallel, adenosine deficit is increasingly recognized in epilepsy pathophysiology. Under-recognized ATP and/or adenosine-increasing mechanisms of several antimanic and antiseizure therapies including lithium, valproate, carbamazepine, and ECT suggest a fundamental pathogenic role of adenosine deficit in bipolar mania to match the established role of adenosine deficit in epilepsy. The depletion of adenosine-derivatives within the purine cycle is expected to result in a compensatory increase in oxopurines (uric acid precursors) and secondarily increased uric acid, observed in both bipolar mania and epilepsy. Cortisol-based inhibition of purine conversion to adenosine-derivatives may be reflected in observed uric acid increases and the well-established contribution of cortisol to both bipolar mania and epilepsy pathology. Cortisol-inhibited conversion from IMP to AMP as precursor of both ATP and adenosine may represent a mechanism for treatment resistance common in both bipolar mania and epilepsy. Anti-cortisol therapies may therefore augment other treatments both in bipolar mania and epilepsy. Evidence linking (i) adenosine deficit with a decreased need for sleep, (ii) IMP/cGMP excess with compulsive hypersexuality, and (iii) guanosine excess with grandiose delusions may converge to suggest a novel theory of bipolar mania as a condition characterized by disrupted purine metabolism. The potential for disease-modification and prevention related to adenosine-mediated epigenetic changes in epilepsy may be mirrored in mania. Evaluating the purinergic effects of existing agents and validating purine dysregulation may improve diagnosis and treatment in bipolar mania and epilepsy and provide specific targets for drug development.

Pharmacological and Somatic Treatment Effects on Suicide in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Suicide is a public health crisis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacologic and somatic therapies on suicide risk.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE for studies evaluating the effects of pharmacologic (excluding antidepressants) or somatic interventions on suicide risk was conducted. Studies were included if they used a comparison group, reported on suicide death, assessed a psychopharmacological or somatic intervention, and included adults. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fifty-seven studies were included from 2940 reviewed citations.

Results

In bipolar disorder, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to active controls (odds ratio [OR] = .58, p = .005; k = 12) and compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .46, p = .009; k = 9). In mixed diagnostic samples, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .27, p < .001; k = 12), but not compared to active controls (OR = .89, p = .468; k = 7). In psychotic disorders, clozapine was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide (OR = .46, p = .007; k = 7). Associations between suicide death and electroconvulsive therapy (OR = .77, p = .053; k = 11), non-clozapine antipsychotics in bipolar disorder (OR = .73, p = .090; k = 6) and antipsychotics in psychotic disorders (OR = .39, p = .069; k = 6) were not significant. There was no consistent relationship between antiepileptic mood stabilizers and suicide. There were insufficient studies to meta-analyze associations of suicide risk with vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, or transcranial direct current stimulation.

Conclusion

Lithium and clozapine have consistent data supporting protective effects against suicide in certain clinical contexts.Reprinted from Depress Anxiety 2022; 39:100-112, with permission from John Wiley and Sons. Copyright © 2022.

Pharmacological and somatic treatment effects on suicide in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Suicide is a public health crisis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacologic and somatic therapies on suicide risk.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE for studies evaluating the effects of pharmacologic (excluding antidepressants) or somatic interventions on suicide risk was conducted. Studies were included if they used a comparison group, reported on suicide death, assessed a psychopharmacological or somatic intervention, and included adults. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fifty-seven studies were included from 2940 reviewed citations.

RESULTS

In bipolar disorder, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to active controls (odds ratio [OR] = .58, p = .005; k = 12) and compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .46, p = .009; k = 9). In mixed diagnostic samples, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .27, p < .001; k = 12), but not compared to active controls (OR = .89, p = .468; k = 7). In psychotic disorders, clozapine was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide (OR = .46, p = .007; k = 7). Associations between suicide death and electroconvulsive therapy (OR = .77, p = .053; k = 11), non-clozapine antipsychotics in bipolar disorder (OR = .73, p = .090; k = 6) and antipsychotics in psychotic disorders (OR = .39, p = .069; k = 6) were not significant. There was no consistent relationship between antiepileptic mood stabilizers and suicide. There were insufficient studies to meta-analyze associations of suicide risk with vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, or transcranial direct current stimulation.

CONCLUSION

Lithium and clozapine have consistent data supporting protective effects against suicide in certain clinical contexts.

A retrospective naturalistic study on the psychopharmacological treatment of schizoaffective disorder

Evidence on the effectiveness of psychopharmacological treatment of schizoaffective disorder is scarce and mostly comes from indirect, nonspecific sources. We carried out a large retrospective study (n = 770) of every other consecutively numbered clinical record with a recorded ICD-10 diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder in the Andalusian Health Service record system. We gathered sociodemographic, drug treatment and clinical outcomes such as improvement, relapses and change over time on DSM-5 psychotic dimensions. We analyzed data to explore associations between drug use and clinical improvement. Antipsychotics were the most commonly used drugs (77%). 22.4% of patients experienced at least a mild improvement. Clozapine (odds ratio [OR] = 2.4) and aripiprazole (OR = 2.3) for global improvement, and quetiapine (OR = 3.5) for depression were the most effective drugs. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers and benzodiazepines were also associated with a better outcome in some DSM-5 dimensions such as delusions, hallucinations and language, respectively. Antipsychotic monotherapy was not associated with a better outcome. Our findings corroborate the role of antipsychotics as the essential psychopharmacological treatment for different symptoms of schizoaffective disorder. However, the role of mood stabilizers, antidepressants or BZD is controversial and should be individually considered.

Oxcarbazepine for Behavioral Disorders after Brain Injury: Factors Influencing Efficacy

Carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine are used for behavioral disorders following organic diseases. After severe acquired brain injury, patients may develop frontal symptoms. In our neurological rehabilitation routine, oxcarbazepine is used for better safety over carbamazepine, although its efficacy is not clarified. We aimed to improve knowledge on this use of oxcarbazepine, by probing clinical factors associated with response. We retrospectively examined the clinical records of our patients, collecting clinical variables and outcomes of efficacy, both clinician-rated and caregiver/self-rated. We described the distribution of clinical variables and examined their associations via logistic regressions. Patients in our cohort were predominantly pediatric, with frontal lobe damage and irritable/reactive. With an oxcarbazepine median dose of 975 mg, almost half of patients improved. We found several clinical factors associated with clinician-rated efficacy: absence of frontal damage and absence of irritability/reactivity symptoms; clinical factors associated with caregivers/patients-rated efficacy were: higher DRS score at baseline and higher patient age. In this retrospective study, we observed that oxcarbazepine was differentially efficacious in patients with specific characteristics. Our study could not examine drug therapy separately from neuropsychological therapy, nor the influence of dose. Our associative results should be verified experimentally, also assessing causality and establishing dose-related efficacy and safety.

Efficacy of Carbamazepine and Its Derivatives in the Treatment of Bipolar Disorder

Background and Objectives: This review is dedicated to the use of carbamazepine and its derivatives oxcarbazepine and eslicarbazepine in bipolar disorder and their relative strengths in treating and preventing new depressive or manic episodes. This paper will discuss the evidence of their efficacy relative to the polarity of relapse from controlled acute and maintenance/relapse prevention studies in bipolar patients. Materials and Methods: A Medline search was conducted for controlled acute and maintenance studies with carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, and eslicarbazepine in bipolar disorder. In addition, abstracts reporting on controlled studies with these medications from key conferences were taken into consideration. Results: Information was extracted from 84 articles on the acute and prophylactic efficacy of the medications under consideration. They all appear to have stronger efficacy in treating acute mania than depression, which also translates to better protection against manic than depressive relapses for carbamazepine. Still, there is a paucity of controlled acute studies on bipolar depression for all and, with the exception of carbamazepine, a lack of long-term monotherapy maintenance data. For eslicarbazepine, the efficacy in bipolar disorder remains largely unknown. Especially with carbamazepine, tolerability issues and drug-drug interactions need to be kept in mind. Conclusions: Two of the medications discussed in this review, carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, match Class A criteria according to the criteria proposed by Ketter and Calabrese, meaning acute antimanic efficacy, prevention of manic relapses, and not causing or worsening depression.

Lithium for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether:1. Lithium alone is an effective treatment for schizophrenia, schizophrenia-like psychoses and schizoaffective psychoses; and2. Lithium augmentation of antipsychotic medication is an effective treatment for the same illnesses.

SEARCH METHODS

In July 2012, 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. This search was updated on January 20, 2015. For the first version of the review, we also contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of relevant studies to identify further trials and obtain original participant data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of lithium compared with antipsychotics or placebo (or no intervention), whether as sole treatment or as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication, in the treatment of schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data, we calculated random-effects meta-analyses, risk ratios (RRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to create 'Summary of findings' tables and assessed risk of bias for included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

The update search in 2012 detected two further studies that met our inclusion criteria. We did not find any further studies that met our inclusion criteria in the 2015 search. This review now includes 22 studies, with a total of 763 participants (median mean age: 35 years, range: 26 to 72 years). Most studies were small, of short duration, and incompletely reported. As we detected a high risk of bias in many studies, the overall methodological quality of the included sample was rather low.Three small 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 (eight RCTs; n = 270, RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.11, low quality evidence).Thirteen 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 (10 RCTs; n = 396, RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.97, low quality evidence). However, this effect became non-significant when we excluded participants with schizoaffective disorders in a sensitivity analysis (seven RCTs; n = 272, RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.81), when we excluded non-double-blind studies (seven RCTs; n = 224, RR 1.82, 95% CI 0.84 to 3.96), or when we excluded studies with high attrition (nine RCTs; n = 355, RR 1.67, CI 0.93 to 3.00). The overall acceptability of treatment (measured by the number of participants leaving the studies early) was not significantly different between groups (11 RCTs; n = 320, RR 1.89, CI 0.93 to 3.84, very low quality evidence). Few studies reported on side effects. There were no significant differences, but the database is too limited to make any judgement in this regard. For example, there were no data on thyroid dysfunction and kidney problems - two major and well-known side effects of lithium.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base for the use of lithium in schizophrenia is limited to 22 studies of overall low methodological quality. There is no randomised trial-based evidence that lithium on its own is an effective treatment for people with schizophrenia. There is some GRADE low quality evidence that augmentation of antipsychotics with lithium is effective, but the effects are not significant when more prone-to-bias open RCTs are excluded. Nevertheless, further large and well-designed trials are justified. 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, and (2) people with schizoaffective disorders for whom lithium is widely used in clinical practice, although there is no evidence to support this use.

The suicide prevention effect of lithium: more than 20 years of evidence-a narrative review

The management and treatment of patients with suicidal behavior is one of the most challenging tasks for health-care professionals. Patients with affective disorders are at high risk for suicidal behavior, therefore, should be a target for prevention. Numerous international studies of lithium use have documented anti-suicidal effects since the 1970s. Despite the unambiguous evidence of lithium’s anti-suicidal effects and recommendations in national and international guidelines for its use in acute and maintenance therapy of affective disorders, the use of lithium is still underrepresented. The following article provides a comprehensive review of studies investigating the anti-suicidal effect of lithium in patients with affective disorders.

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.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for the biological treatment of bipolar disorders: update 2012 on the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

These guidelines are based on a first edition that was published in 2004, and have been edited and updated with the available scientific evidence up to October 2012. Their purpose is to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence pertaining to the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder in adults.

METHODS

Material used for these guidelines are based on a systematic literature search using various data bases. Their scientific rigor was categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and different grades of recommendation to ensure practicability were assigned.

RESULTS

Maintenance trial designs are complex and changed fundamentally over time; thus, it is not possible to give an overall recommendation for long-term treatment. Different scenarios have to be examined separately: Prevention of mania, depression, or an episode of any polarity, both in acute responders and in patients treated de novo. Treatment might differ in Bipolar II patients or Rapid cyclers, as well as in special subpopulations. We identified several medications preventive against new manic episodes, whereas the current state of research into the prevention of new depressive episodes is less satisfactory. Lithium continues to be the substance with the broadest base of evidence across treatment scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Although major advances have been made since the first edition of this guideline in 2004, there are still areas of uncertainty, especially the prevention of depressive episodes and optimal long-term treatment of Bipolar II patients.

Polarity index of pharmacological agents used for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder

Over one half of bipolar patients have been reported to be more prone to either depressive or manic relapses. This study aimed to define profiles of drugs used for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) by the means of Polarity Index. Polarity Index is a new metric indicating the relative antimanic versus antidepressive preventive efficacy of drugs. Polarity Index was retrieved by calculating Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for prevention of depression and NNT for prevention of mania ratio, as emerging from the results of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Included trials were randomized and double blind, with a minimal duration of 24 weeks, assessing effectiveness of a mood stabilizer or antipsychotic drug alone or in combination with a mood stabilizing agent versus a placebo comparator in BD maintenance treatment. Polarity Index value above 1.0 indicates a relative greater antimanic prophylactic efficacy, number below 1.0 a relative greater antidepressive efficacy. The polarity index for the drugs used in maintenance therapy for bipolar disorder was 12.09 for risperidone, 4.38 for aripiprazole, 3.91 for ziprasidone, 2.98 for olanzapine, 1.39 for lithium, 1.14 for quetiapine, and 0.40 for lamotrigine. Polarity index of valproate and oxcarbazepine may not be reliable due to the failure of their maintenance trials. The polarity index provides a measure of how much antidepressant versus antimanic a drug is in bipolar disorder prophylaxis, and may guide the choice of maintenance therapy in bipolar patients.

Role of paliperidone extended-release in treatment of schizoaffective disorder

Schizoaffective disorder is characterized by the presence of symptoms of both schizophrenia and a major mood disorder. The coexistence of these symptoms can be difficult to manage, and these patients are generally treated with antipsychotics as well as mood stabilizers and/or antidepressants. Additionally, no established treatment guidelines exist for this disorder. This review describes the combined results of two international, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies of paliperidone extended-release (ER), an atypical antipsychotic recently approved in the US for the treatment of schizoaffective disorder. Subjects in these six-week trials were aged 18-65 years, had a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder based on the Structural Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition) Disorders, and were experiencing an acute exacerbation. The subjects from these studies had significant symptomatology as evidenced by a mean (standard deviation) baseline Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score of 92.8 (13.0). Based on Young Mania Rating Scale and/or a 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of ≥16 at baseline, 79.5% and 66.9% of subjects presented with prominent manic and depressive symptoms, respectively, and 46.4% presented with mixed symptoms. Approximately half (45%) of subjects were taking adjunctive mood stabilizers and/or antidepressants. Paliperidone ER was found to be effective in improving psychotic and mood symptoms in these subjects. Paliperidone ER was also effective as monotherapy or adjunctive to mood stabilizers and/or antidepressants for subjects with prominent manic, depressive, or mixed symptoms at baseline. No new tolerability signals were observed in this population. To the best of our awareness, these pooled data provide the largest data set of patients with schizoaffective disorder, and extend our knowledge of disease characteristics and treatment response.

Schizoaffective disorder--an ongoing challenge for psychiatric nosology

OBJECTIVE

Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in mental health services. The present article aims to provide an overview of diagnostic reliability, symptomatology, outcome, neurobiology and treatment of schizoaffective disorder.

METHOD

Literature was identified by searches in "Medline" and "Cochrane Library".

RESULTS

The diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder has a low reliability. There are marked differences between the current diagnostic systems. With respect to psychopathological symptoms, no clear boundaries were found between schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and affective disorders. Common neurobiological factors were found across the traditional diagnostic categories. Schizoaffective disorder according to ICD-10 criteria, but not to DSM-IV criteria, shows a more favorable outcome than schizophrenia. With regard to treatment, only a small and heterogeneous database exists.

CONCLUSION

Due to the low reliability and questionable validity there is a substantial need for revision and unification of the current diagnostic concepts of schizoaffective disorder. If future diagnostic systems return to Kraepelin's dichotomous classification of non-organic psychosis or adopt a dimensional diagnostic approach, schizoaffective disorder will disappear from the psychiatric nomenclature. A nosological model with multiple diagnostic entities, however, would be compatible with retaining the diagnostic category of schizoaffective disorder.

Treatment of schizoaffective disorder - a challenge for evidence-based psychiatry

OBJECTIVE

Schizoaffective disorder is a common diagnosis in mental health services. The aim of the present article was to review treatment studies for schizoaffective disorder and draw conclusions for clinical decision making.

METHOD

We searched MEDLINE and Cochrane Library for relevant clinical trials and review articles up to the year 2008.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies using standardized diagnostic criteria, 14 of which were randomized controlled trials, could be identified. The comparability of studies is limited by the use of different diagnostic criteria. The studies reviewed do not permit consistent recommendations as to whether schizoaffective disorder should be treated primarily with antipsychotics, mood stabilizers or combinations of these drugs. The relevance of diverse subtypes of schizoaffective disorder for treatment recommendations is unclear.

CONCLUSION

The pertinent empirical database is small and heterogeneous. The lack of conclusive recommendations is related to issues of nosological status, plurality of diagnostic criteria and validity of the concept of schizoaffective disorder.

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 evaluate the effects of carbamazepine and its derivatives for the treatment of schizophrenia and related psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

For the original version we searched Biological Abstracts (1980-2001), The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2001), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials (December 2001), EMBASE (1980-2001), MEDLINE (1966-2001), PsycLIT (1886-2001) and PSYNDEX (1974-2001). For the current update we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials in March 2005 and in December 2006. 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 comparing carbamazepine or compounds of the carbamazepine family to 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 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 did not reveal any further studies that met our inclusion criteria. The number of included studies therefore remains at ten with the number of participants randomised still 258. 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 4.1 CI 0.8 to 1.5). 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 BPRS scores (1 RCT n=38, RR 1.2 CI 0.8 to 1.9). 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 0.04, NNH 1 CI 0.9 to 1.4). Eight studies compared adjunctive carbamazepine versus adjunctive placebo. 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 0.5 CI 0.2 to 1.4). Carbamazepine augmentation was superior compared with antipsychotics alone in terms of overall global improvement, but participant numbers were low (2RCTs n=38, RR 0.6 CI 0.4 to 0.9, NNT 2 CI 1 to 5). There were no differences for the mental state outcome of 50% reduction in BPRS scores (6 RCTs n=147, RR 0.9 CI 0.7 to 1.1). Less people in the carbamazepine augmentation group had movement disorders than those taking haloperidol alone (1 RCT n=20, RR 0.4 CI 0.1 to 1.0). 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 those with violent episodes and people with schizoaffective disorders or those with both schizophrenia and EEG abnormalities.

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.

The association of consumer expectations, experiences and satisfaction with newly prescribed medications

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between medication expectations and subsequent experience on treatment satisfaction and intention to continue using the medication.

METHODS

A longitudinal study with two surveys administered to each patient. Patients prescribed a new medication were recruited in pharmacies within Michigan. Medication-related expectations were evaluated at baseline. Experiences, satisfaction and intent to continue were evaluated a month later. Analyses used included factorial ANOVA models, multiple linear regressions and structural equation modeling (SEM). Impact of satisfaction on intention to continue was evaluated using correlation analysis and SEM.

RESULTS

A total of 344 usable responses were obtained. SEM showed that expectation scores were not associated with both experience (path coefficient = 0.10) and satisfaction (path coefficient = 0.02, NS). On the other hand, experience was strongly associated with satisfaction (path coefficient = 0.89) and satisfaction was strongly associated with intent to continue using the new medication (path coefficient = 0.81).

CONCLUSIONS

This study empirically supports the value of the patient's experience and its contribution to satisfaction, which in turn is associated with intended continued use mainly due to greater effectiveness of the newly prescribed medication. Satisfied consumers should be more adherent, thus enhancing the probability of positive therapeutic outcomes.

Decreased risk of suicides and attempts during long-term lithium treatment: a meta-analytic review

OBJECTIVES

To update and extend comparisons of rates of suicides and suicide attempts among patients with major affective disorders with versus without long-term lithium treatment.

METHODS

Broad searching yielded 45 studies providing rates of suicidal acts during lithium treatment, including 34 also providing rates without lithium treatment. We scored study quality, tested between-study variance, and examined suicidal rates on versus off lithium by meta-analytic methods to determine risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

In 31 studies suitable for meta-analysis, involving a total of 85,229 person-years of risk-exposure, the overall risk of suicides and attempts was five times less among lithium-treated subjects than among those not treated with lithium (RR = 4.91, 95% CI 3.82-6.31, p < 0.0001). Similar effects were found with other meta-analytic methods, as well as for completed versus attempted suicide, and for bipolar versus major mood disorder patients. Studies with higher quality ratings, including randomized, controlled trials, involved shorter exposures with somewhat lesser lithium superiority. Omitting one very large study or those involving lithium-discontinuation had little effect on the results. The incidence-ratio of attempts-to-suicides increased 2.5 times with lithium-treatment, indicating reduced lethality of suicidal acts. There was no indication of bias toward reporting positive findings, nor were outcomes significantly influenced by publication-year or study size.

CONCLUSIONS

Risks of completed and attempted suicide were consistently lower, by approximately 80%, during treatment of bipolar and other major affective disorder patients with lithium for an average of 18 months. These benefits were sustained in randomized as well as open clinical trials.

Suicide in 406 mood-disorder patients with and without long-term medication: a 40 to 44 years' follow-up

There is no data on the variation in the suicide risk over lifetime and on the suicide-preventive effect of the long-term treatment of mood-disorder patients with antidepressants and neuroleptics. Our research focused on 186 unipolar (D), 60 bipolar II (Dm), 130 nuclear bipolar I (MD), and 30 preponderantly manic patients (M/Md); that were followed-up from 1963 to 2003. By 2003, 45 (11.1%) of the 406 patients had committed suicide. Suicide rates were highest among D patients (Standardized Mortality Ratio, SMR = 26.4), MD (SMR = 13.6), Dm (SMR = 10.6) and lowest among M/Md patients (SMR = 4.7). Prospectively, the suicide rate decreased over the 44 years' follow-up; Lithium, neuroleptics and antidepressants reduced suicides significantly. Long-term treatment also reduced overall mortality, and combined treatments proved more effective than mono-therapy.

New medication treatment options for bipolar disorders

OBJECTIVE

To assess new treatment options for bipolar disorders.

METHOD

Controlled studies of new treatments for bipolar disorders were identified by computerized searches and reviews of scientific meeting proceedings, and were compiled by drug category.

RESULTS

Two main categories of medications, newer anticonvulsants and newer antipsychotics, are yielding emerging new treatment options for bipolar disorders. Newer anticonvulsants have diverse psychotropic profiles, and although not generally effective for acute mania, may have utility for other aspects of bipolar disorders (e.g. lamotrigine for maintenance or acute bipolar depression), or for comorbid conditions (e.g. gabapentin for anxiety or pain, topiramate for obesity, bulimia, alcohol dependence, or migraine, and zonisamide for obesity). In contrast, newer antipsychotics generally appear effective for acute mania, and some may ultimately prove effective in acute depression (e.g. olanzapine combined with fluoxetine, quetiapine) and maintenance (e.g. olanzapine).

CONCLUSION

Emerging research is yielding new treatment options for bipolar disorders and comorbid conditions.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for the biological treatment of bipolar disorders, part III: maintenance treatment

As with the two preceding guidelines of this series, these practice guidelines for the pharmacological maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder were developed by an international task force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). Their purpose is to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence relating to maintenance treatment. The data used for these guidelines were extracted from a MEDLINE and EMBASE search, from recent proceedings from key conferences and various national and international treatment guidelines. The scientific justification of support for particular treatments was categorised into four levels of evidence (A-D). As these guidelines are intended for clinical use, the scientific evidence was not only graded, but also reviewed by the experts of the task force to ensure practicality.

Novel antipsychotics in bipolar and schizoaffective mania

OBJECTIVE

Novel antipsychotics are increasingly used in the treatment of bipolar and schizoaffective mania. This paper presents an overview of the controlled studies in this field.

METHOD

Using cross-references, a computerized search was performed on MEDLINE and EMBASE psychiatry covering the period 1990-2002.

RESULTS

Olanzapine and risperidone, added to mood stabilizers, and olanzapine as monotherapy enjoy the most evidential support in terms of efficacy and side-effect profile for their use in acute bipolar mania. The use of modern antipsychotics in bipolar prophylaxis and in both the short- and long-term treatment of schizomania has not been widely studied yet.

CONCLUSION

More controlled trials are still needed comparing modern antipsychotics as monotherapy and adjunctive to mood stabilizers with conventional antipsychotics, lithium, anticonvulsants and with each other in short-term and, especially, maintenance treatment of (schizo)mania. Partly based on controlled studies, olanzapine, risperidone and other modern antipsychotics could become preferable for these indications.

Psychopharmacological treatment with lithium and antiepileptic drugs: suggested guidelines from the Danish Psychiatric Association and the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Association in Denmark

A subcommittee under the Danish Psychiatric Association and the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Association in Denmark have recently developed national guidelines for the psychopharmacological treatment with lithium and antiepileptic drugs, and the present translation aims at contributing to the international discussion on the development of proper guidelines for the treatment of bipolar disorder. Among the antiepileptic drugs, the report deals with valproate, carbamazepine and lamotrigine and to a lesser extent with oxcarbazepine, gabapentin and topiramate. The various drugs will be reviewed, outlining the scientific evidence for mood-stabilizing properties and discussing major side effects, the most important interactions with other drugs and practical use. Special considerations during pregnancy and lactation, during treatment of children and adolescents and during treatment of the elderly will also be presented. Antidepressants and antipsychotics are beyond the scope of the report, but due to the mood-stabilizing properties of at least some of the atypical antipsychotics, these agents will be brought into some focus in connection with the overall treatment guidelines for the different phases of bipolar disorder given at the end of this report.

Concepts in the treatment of bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Concepts in the treatment of bipolar disorder are discussed considering clinical practice.

METHOD

Results of the Multicenter Study of Long-term Treatment of Affective and Schizoaffective Psychoses (MAP) study, a controlled maintenance trial, are interpreted with respect to treatment concepts.

RESULTS

The spectrum of patients diagnosed as bipolar has become more heterogeneous. It now comprises subtypes requiring differentiated treatment. The MAP study confirms that prophylactic efficacy of lithium seems to be specific to classic manic-depressive illness, whereas carbamazepine might be more efficacious in non-classic bipolar patients. With respect to clinical practice, treatment evaluation should also consider anti suicidal effects, inter-episodic morbidity and compliance. In these respects, results are in favour of lithium. Furthermore, data indicate that adherence to lithium clearly depends on illness concepts. This encourages efforts to supplement pharmacotherapy by psychoeducation and psychotherapy.

CONCLUSION

With the broadening of diagnostic criteria, the treatment of bipolar disorder has become more complex. Patients need an integrated approach, including differentiated mood-stabilizing pharmacotherapy and psychotherapeutic measures.

NMDA receptor antagonist effects, cortical glutamatergic function, and schizophrenia: toward a paradigm shift in medication development

There is an urgent need to improve the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia despite the introduction of important new medications. New treatment insights may come from appreciating the therapeutic implications of model psychoses. In particular, basic and clinical studies have employed the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) glutamate receptor antagonist, ketamine, as a probe of NMDA receptor contributions to cognition and behavior. These studies illustrate a translational neuroscience approach for probing mechanistic hypotheses related to the neurobiology and treatment of schizophrenia and other disorders. Two particular pathophysiologic themes associated with schizophrenia, the disturbance of cortical connectivity and the disinhibition of glutamatergic activity may be modeled by the administration of NMDA receptor antagonists. The purpose of this review is to consider the possibility that agents that attenuate these two components of NMDA receptor antagonist response may play complementary roles in the treatment of schizophrenia.

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

The reviewers searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (March 2002). 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

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

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were extracted independently by at least two reviewers. Dichotomous data were analysed using relative risks (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) estimated. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm statistics were calculated. Continuous data were analysed using weighted mean differences (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

The review currently 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.

REVIEWER'S 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 it justifies 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.

Long-term outcome of lithium prophylaxis in bipolar disorder with mood-incongruent psychotic features: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

No study has assessed systematically up to now the long-term outcome of lithium prophylaxis in bipolar patients with vs. without mood-incongruent psychotic features.

METHODS

All bipolar patients with mood-incongruent psychotic features who started lithium prophylaxis at a lithium clinic during 14 years were followed up prospectively for 5 years, along with a control group of non-psychotic bipolars.

RESULTS

Psychotic patients were significantly less likely than controls to be still on lithium after 5 years, and to present a reduction of at least 50% of time spent in hospital during the lithium treatment period compared with a pre-treatment period of the same duration. The time to 50% risk of readmission was significantly increased among both groups during lithium treatment. 39.6% of prospective episodes in psychotic patients did not include mood-incongruent psychotic features.

LIMITATIONS

This is a naturalistic study carried out at a lithium clinic. No control group of bipolar patients who did not receive lithium was available.

CONCLUSIONS

Lithium exerts a significant impact on the course of bipolar disorder with mood-incongruent psychotic features, although this impact is less pronounced than in classical manic-depressive illness.

Clinical predictors of response to lamotrigine and gabapentin monotherapy in refractory affective disorders

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current study was to examine possible clinical predictors of positive response to lamotrigine or gabapentin monotherapy in treatment-refractory affectively ill patients.

METHODS

Forty-five patients with treatment refractory bipolar (n = 35) or unipolar (n = 10) affective disorder participated in a clinical study evaluating six weeks of treatment with lamotrigine, gabapentin, or placebo monotherapy given in a double-blind, randomized fashion with two subsequent cross-overs to the other agents. Patients received daily mood ratings and weekly cross-sectional scales. Much or very much improved on the Clinical Global Impression scale modified for bipolar illness was considered a positive response. Degree of response was correlated with a number of baseline demographic and course of illness variables in a univariate analysis and then by linear regression.

RESULTS

Response rates to lamotrigine (51%) exceeded those to gabapentin (28%) and placebo (21%). A positive response to lamotrigine monotherapy was associated with a bipolar diagnosis; fewer hospitalizations; fewer prior medication trials; and male gender (of which the latter two variables survived logistic regression). For gabapentin, degree of response correlated with shorter duration of illness; younger age; and lower baseline weight (with the latter two surviving linear regression).

CONCLUSIONS

In this highly treatment-refractory population, lamotrigine appeared most effective for male patients with fewer prior medication trials. Gabapentin monotherapy, although not better than placebo, appeared most effective in those with younger age and lower baseline weight. These preliminary data in a treatment refractory subgroup may help in the further definition of the range of clinical utility of these widely used anticonvulsants.

Bipolar disorder

Bipolar, or manic-depressive, disorder is a frequent, severe, mostly recurrent mood disorder associated with great morbidity. The lifetime prevalence of bipolar disorder is 1.3 to 1.6%. The mortality rate of the disease is two to three times higher than that of the general population. About 10-20% of individuals with bipolar disorder take their own life, and nearly one third of patients admit to at least one suicide attempt. The clinical manifestations of the disease are exceptionally diverse. They range from mild hypomania or mild depression to severe forms of mania or depression accompanied by profound psychosis. Bipolar disorder is equally prevalent across sexes, with the exception of rapid cycling, a severe and difficult to treat variant of the disorder, which arises mostly in women. Because of the high risk of recurrence and suicide, long-term prophylactic pharmacological treatment is indicated. Lithium salts are the first choice long-term preventive treatment for bipolar disorder. They also possess well documented antisuicidal effects. Second choice prophylactic treatments are carbamazepine and valproate, although evidence of their effectiveness is weaker.

Carbamazepine for schizophrenia and schizoaffective psychoses

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of carbamazepine and its derivatives for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Biological Abstracts (1980-2001), The Cochrane Library (Issue 3, 2001), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials (December 2001), EMBASE (1980-2001), MEDLINE (1966-2001), PsycLIT (1886-2001) and PSYNDEX (1974-2001). Citations from included trials were also inspected and relevant companies and authors contacted for additional data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing carbamazepine or compounds of the carbamazepine family to 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

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were extracted independently by at least two reviewers. Dichotomous data were analysed using Peto odds ratio (OR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) estimated. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm statistics were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten studies with a total of 258 participants were included. One study comparing carbamazepine with placebo as the sole treatment for schizophrenia (n=31) was stopped early due to high relapse rate. No effect of carbamazepine was evident (OR relapse 1.5 CI 0.2 to 9.7). Another study (n=38) compared carbamazepine with antipsychotics as the sole treatment for schizophrenia. No differences in terms of mental state were found (OR 50% BPRS reduction 1.9 CI 0.5 to 7.2). More people who received the antipsychotic (perphenazine) had parkinsonism (OR 0.03 CI 0.01 to 0.1, NNH 1 CI 0.9 to 1.4). Eight studies compared adjunctive carbamazepine plus antipsychotics versus placebo plus antipsychotics. Adding carbamazepine was as acceptable as adding placebo (n=182, OR leaving the study early 0.4 CI 0.1 to 1.4). Carbamazepine augmentation of antipsychotics was superior compared with antipsychotics alone, but participant numbers were low (n=38, OR 0.1 CI 0.02 to 0.4, NNT 2 CI 1 to 5). There were no differences for mental state outcomes (6 RCTs, n=147, OR 50% BPRS reduction 0.99 CI 0.2 to 6.0). Less people in the carbamazepine augmentation group had movement disorders than those taking haloperidol alone (1 RCT, n=20, OR 0.15 CI 0.03 to 0.8). The effects of carbamazepine on subgroups of people with schizophrenia and aggressive behaviour, negative symptoms or EEG abnormalities or with schizoaffective disorder are unknown.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

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

Lithium treatment at 52

The paper reviews briefly and comments in detail on selected events in the history of lithium treatment. The events include Cade's discovery of lithium's antimanic action, the discovery and establishment of its prophylactic action, the ensuing debate, amelioration and prevention of side effects and risks, use during pregnancy, non-compliance, selection of patients, information and instruction, the question whether new and better prophylactic agents are about to oust lithium, the use of combination treatment, the effect of lithium on suicidal behavior, the benefits of prophylactic lithium treatment, and the design of future comparative trials.

State of the art of drug treatment of schizophrenia and the future position of the novel/atypical antipsychotics

Neuroleptic medication is the most important part of the treatment regimen for schizophrenic patients. The efficacy of neuroleptics in the acute and long-term treatment of schizophrenia is very well proven and the effect size is comparatively high. After more than 40 years of clinical practice with the classical neuroleptics, several more or less generally accepted rules for the management of drug treatment in schizophrenia have been established. The paper aims to describe these standards, discussing, among other things, developments which have appeared in the last 10 to 20 years, e.g. the tendency to a lower daily dose during acute treatment and the tendency to alternative strategies during long-term treatment. The paper especially also takes into consideration the benefits of the novel/atypical antipsychotics as compared to the classical neuroleptics, which will change the current treatment standards under several aspects--a change which is already ongoing. The novel/atypical antipsychotics will be much better accepted by patients, thus leading to increased compliance, will be associated with a better quality of life and will possibly change the long-term outcome of schizophrenic patients in a very important manner. It should be considered that the so-called novel/atypical neuroleptics do not constitute a homogeneous group but are a group of individual drugs, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. As was the situation with the classical neuroleptics, the physician also has to choose the most adequate drug under consideration of the risk/benefit profile of each drug in relation to the disposition of the individual patient.

Non-adherence with long-term prophylaxis: a 6-year naturalistic follow-up study of affectively ill patients

In a retrospective 6-year follow-up, we assessed the reasons for and the frequency and consequences of non-adherence in 76 affectively ill patients receiving lithium prophylaxis in two lithium clinics. Thirty-eight bipolar (50%), 21 unipolar (27.6%) and 17 schizoaffective patients (22.4%) diagnosed according to DSM-III-R, were investigated with a specialized follow-up documentation. Of the patients 53.9% discontinued prophylaxis at some time; 43.2% of the discontinuations occurred during the first 6 months. In contrast to other studies the main reason reported for non-adherence was resistance against long-term treatment. According to the Lithium Attitudes Questionnaire non-adherent patients showed significantly less acceptance of the prophylaxis in general, of the effectiveness of lithium and of the severity of their illness than adherent patients. In a multivariate analysis of various parameters, only the negative attitude to prophylaxis correlated significantly with non-adherence. Significant correlation was found between treatment outcome and duration of initial prophylaxis. During the 6-year follow-up only the adherent patients showed a significant reduction of the number and duration of admissions. Our findings confirmed non-adherence as a major problem in the effectiveness of lithium prophylaxis. The authors recommend prospective investigations of attitudes and the impact of psychoeducation on long-term adherence.

Comparative pharmacology of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia

The treatment of acute mania and schizophrenia overlap considerably in terms of the typical and atypical neuroleptics, but begin to diverge with the recognized mood stabilizers for bipolar affective illness--lithium, carbamazepine, and valproate--which are substantially less effective in schizophrenia than in affective illness. Moreover, the L-type calcium channel blocker verapamil is reported to be effective in mania, but it may exacerbate schizophrenia. A series of new putative mood stabilizing anticonvulsants (such as lamotrigine, gabapentin, and topiramate) and possible second-messenger targeted treatments (tamoxifen and omega-3 fatty acids) deserve further study in both affective and schizophrenic syndromes. Repeated transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of the brain offers considerable promise in the treatment of a variety of neuropsychiatric syndromes, especially with preliminary evidence of frequency-dependent effects on regional cerebral blood flow. New insights about the potential neurotrophic effects of lithium and the gene transcriptional effects of other psychotropics offer exciting new targets for therapeutics and strategies for future clinical trials and therapeutic applications in both syndromes.

Differential response to lithium and carbamazepine in the prophylaxis of bipolar disorder

In a randomized, prospective, multicenter study with an observation period of 2.5 years, the differential prophylactic efficacy of lithium versus carbamazepine was compared in 171 patients fulfilling DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder. Serum drug levels were 0.6+/-0.1 mmol/L for lithium and 6.1+/-1.3 microg/mL for carbamazepine. Patients were subdivided into a classical subgroup (bipolar I patients without mood-incongruent delusions and without comorbidity, N = 67) and a nonclassical subgroup including all other patients (N = 104). Classical bipolar patients had a lower rehospitalization rate with lithium than with carbamazepine prophylaxis (p = 0.005). For the nonclassical group, a trend in favor of carbamazepine was found. In the lithium group, there was a positive association between hospitalization rate and number of nonclassical features (bipolar II/not otherwise specified, mood-incongruent delusions, comorbidity; p = 0.035). For carbamazepine, this association was negative (p = 0.033). Analyses including mixed states as an additional nonclassical feature confirmed the results. In conclusion, lithium seems to be superior to carbamazepine in treating classical bipolar cases. Patients with nonclassical features might profit more from prophylaxis with carbamazepine, which seems to have a broader spectrum of activity.

Lithium versus carbamazepine in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders--a randomised study

In a randomised multicentre study, the prophylactic efficacy of lithium and carbamazepine was compared in 144 patients with bipolar disorder (74 vs. 70 patients; observation period: 2.5 years; lithium serum level: 0.63 +/- 0.12 mmol/l, carbamazepine dose: 621 +/- 186 mg/day). Hospitalisations, recurrences, need of psychotropic comedication and adverse effects prompting discontinuation were defined as treatment failures. Survival analyses regarding hospitalisations and recurrences showed no statistically significant differences between both drugs. Results were distinctly in favour of lithium, considering recurrences combined with comedication (P = 0.041) and/or adverse effects (P = 0.007). Whereas adverse effects prompting discontinuation were more frequent under carbamazepine (9 vs. 4, ns), lithium patients reported more often slight/moderate side effects (61% vs. 21% after 2.5 years; P = 0.0006). In completers, recurrences occurred in 28% (lithium) vs. 47% (carbamazepine) of the patients (P = 0.06). Lithium seems to be superior to carbamazepine in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder, in particular when applying broader outcome criteria including psychotropic comedication and severe side effects.