Ziprasidone and haloperidol in the treatment of acute exacerbation of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: comparison of intramuscular and oral formulations in a 6-week, randomized, blinded-assessment study

The safety and efficacy of sequential intramuscular/oral ziprasidone treatment of acute episode in patients with schizophrenia: a multicenter, open-labeled study

BACKGROUND

Ziprasidone mesylate injection is an atypical antipsychotic drug which is recently approved in China. In combination with its oral formulation, sequential therapy with ziprasidone brings new interventions to patients with agitation in the acute phase of schizophrenia. The purpose of this 7-day multicenter study conducted in China was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ziprasidone sequential treatment through intramuscular/oral routes in agitated patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

A total of 95 patients were enrolled from three centers in this study. The study duration was 7 days. In the first 3 days, subjects were administered an intramuscular injection of ziprasidone 10-40 mg daily and started sequentially with oral ziprasidone 40-80 mg at dinner (or lunch) from the day of the last intramuscular injection. In the following 4 days, according to the severity of the symptoms and the drug response, 120-160 mg of ziprasidone was orally administered daily. In total, six visits were scheduled to assess the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Behavioral Activity Rating Scale (BARS), the Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), and Improvement (CGI-I) scores throughout the procedure. Lastly, adverse events were recorded during treatment.

RESULTS

Out of the 95 patients that were enrolled, 83 cases were effectively completed. Visits 3, 4, 6, PANSS, and PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) subscale points, and Visit 2-Visit 6 viewpoints, BARS scale points, and baseline scores denote a progressive downward trend (P < 0.001). In this study, 62 adverse events were reported. The most common adverse events were extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) (23 cases) and excessive sedation(10 cases), and 13 cases of prolonged QTc interval were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Ziprasidone IM demonstrated significant and rapid reduction in agitation, and sequential oral formulation keep stability and continuation of the treatment can further ensure efficacy. Ziprasidone sequential therapy may provide a new approach to acute agitation in schizophrenic patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Chinese Clinical Trials Registry; URL: https://www.chictr.org.cn : ChiCTR-OIC-16007970.

Haloperidol Versus Ziprasidone With Concomitant Medications and Other Predictors of Physical Restraint Duration in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe agitation are frequently encountered in the emergency department (ED). At times, these patients are physically restrained and given calming medications; however, little is known about the effects of medications and other predictors on restraint duration.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to compare restraint duration when haloperidol or ziprasidone was used as the primary antipsychotic with or without concomitant medications, and to identify predictors of restraint duration.

METHODS

We performed a review of a retrospective cohort of physically restrained ED patients between January 1, 2013 and November 30, 2017. An unadjusted analysis and adjusted linear regression model were used to evaluate the effect of antipsychotic choice on restraint duration, controlling for sex, age, race, homelessness, arrival in restraints, re-restraint during visit, concomitant medications (i.e., benzodiazepines or anticholinergics), additional medications given during restraint, time of day, and patient disposition.

RESULTS

In 386 patients (319 haloperidol, 67 ziprasidone), the average restraint duration was 2.4 h (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2 to 2.6 h). There were no differences in physical restraint times between ziprasidone and haloperidol groups in the unadjusted (mean difference 0.12 h; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.66 h) or adjusted analyses (-12.7%; 95% CI -33.9% to 8.6%). Haloperidol given with diphenhydramine alone was associated with decreased restraint duration (-30.8%; 95% CI -50.6% to -11.1%) The largest association with restraint duration was administration of additional sedating medications during restraint, prolonging restraint by 62% (95% CI 27.1% to 96.9%). In addition, compared with White patients, Black patients spent significantly more time restrained (mean difference 33.9%; 95% CI 9.0% to 58.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Restraint duration of agitated ED patients was similar when haloperidol or ziprasidone was used as the primary antipsychotic. However, race and additional medications given during restraint were significantly associated with restraint duration.

Managing acute agitation and aggression in the world of drug shortages

Acute agitation and aggression create safety risks for both patients and staff, often leading to psychiatric emergencies. Quick and appropriate treatment is necessary to achieve safe and effective outcomes. Unfortunately, there are several factors that hinder timely interventions, such as medication shortages and delay in staff preparedness. Ultimately, the goal of managing acute agitation and aggression in the clinical setting is to de-escalate the situation and prevent harm to patients and staff. This article will explore useful interventions in realizing treatment goals for the management of agitation and aggression in adults while navigating limitations faced in practice.

Specific Anti-hostility Effects of Atypical Antipsychotics in Persons with Schizophrenia: From Clozapine to Cariprazine

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Evaluate the anti-hostility effects of available atypical antipsychotic agents.

ABSTRACT

In addition to hallucinations and delusions, persons with schizophrenia may exhibit hostility. In clinical trials of antipsychotics, hostility is routinely measured as part of rating scales such as the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale or Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The availability of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in 1989 led to the observation that it is possible to have a treatment effect on hostility that is independent of the treatment effect on hallucinations or delusions, and independent of general sedative effects. The data supporting this notion of a specific anti-hostility effect are the most robust for clozapine as the data include specifically designed randomized, controlled clinical trials. A specific anti-hostility effect is also observable to various degrees with most of the other atypical antipsychotics, as evidenced in post hoc analyses of clinical trials originally conducted for regulatory purposes, supplemented by post hoc analyses of large effectiveness trials. The generalizability of these studies, however, may be limited. Participants in these trials were not selected for aggressive and hostile behavior. Some of the studies also excluded patients with substance use disorders. The latter is particularly important because alcohol and substance use are well known to increase risk for hostility and aggression. Nevertheless, the repeated demonstrations of the specificity of an anti-hostility effect (in terms of statistical independence of effects on other positive symptoms and of sedation) are of potential clinical importance.

Effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of ziprasidone in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: Results of a multi-centre observational trial

Purpose

The ZEISIG study (Ziprasidone Experience in Schizophrenia in Germany/Austria) investigated the effectiveness of ziprasidone as measured by discontinuation rates and mean changes of the BPRS total. Secondary objectives included quality of life, subjective well-being, tolerability, and safety.

Subjects and methods

Two hundred and seventy-six subjects with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder were treated within an open-label, 12-week, prospective, flexible-dose observational trial of ziprasidone (40–160 mg/day). Baseline and outcome assessments mainly included Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), and Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic treatment (SWN-K).

Results

Study discontinuation due to any cause was evident in 58% of subjects, most of them within the first 4 weeks after study initiation. In study completers, ziprasidone was associated with improvements in BPRS total (44.8 to 33.6; p < 0.001), CGI, SF-12, and SWN-K total scores (80.5 to 89.5). Ziprasidone was related to reduction of weight, fasting glucose, and serum lipids. No cardiovascular adverse event or significant increase of the QTc interval was observed.

Discussion and conclusion

Approximately 60% of subjects discontinued ziprasidone prematurely, probably related to an initial and overall underdose. The present study confirmed previous tolerability and safety data of ziprasidone as well as results of its effectiveness. Independent from reason to switch, previous antipsychotic class, and severity of illness at baseline, the recommended starting dose of 80 mg/day as well as the maximum treatment dose of 160 mg/day may not be sufficient for a selected subgroup of patients.

Coprescription of QT interval-prolonging antipsychotics with potentially interacting medications in Thailand

Background

The US FDA has designated pimozide, thioridazine, and ziprasidone as contraindicated for patients at risk of QT interval prolongation, and assigned haloperidol, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, and risperidone as associated with a significant risk of QT prolongation. This study aimed to examine trends and hospital variations in concomitant prescribing among these eight selected antipsychotics, and coprescription with interacting drugs known to increase QT prolongation risk.

Methods

Data on outpatient antipsychotic prescriptions during 2012-2015 were obtained from 16 general hospitals and 10 university hospitals nationwide. A time-series analysis was used for estimating trends in coprescription that led to drug interactions.

Results

Coprescribing among the eight antipsychotics ranged from 7.5% for quetiapine to 33.1% for thioridazine. The rate of coprescription with contraindicated interacting drugs was 9.7% for thioridazine and 21.9% for pimozide, and increased by 1.1 and 1.4 percentage points (% pt.) yearly for thioridazine in general and university hospitals, respectively. Coprescribing with interacting drugs with precautions was 2.8% for quetiapine, 7.4% for ziprasidone, and 27.9% for risperidone; these percentages increased yearly by 1.7% pt. for ziprasidone and 2.6% pt. for risperidone in general hospitals, as well as by 1.0% pt. for risperidone in university hospitals. The median proportion of patients exposed to a QT-prolonging interaction was 12.3% across hospitals (interquartile range, 9.9-19.5%). Wide interhospital variation was found in percentages of drug interactions among patients receiving thioridazine, ziprasidone, paliperidone, or olanzapine in general hospitals, and among patients receiving paliperidone or pimozide in university hospitals.

Conclusions

Coprescription of antipsychotics with interacting drugs that could increase the risk of QT prolongation was common in Thailand, and thioridazine, ziprasidone, and risperidone showed increasing trends. We urge the incorporation of a unified list of QT-prolonging antipsychotics and interacting drugs into a computerized drug interaction warning system, and existing national rational drug use campaigns should cover this important issue.

Management of Violence and Aggression in Emergency Environment; a Narrative Review of 200 Related Articles

CONTEXT

The aim of this study is to reviewing various approaches for dealing with agitated patients in emergency department (ED) including of chemical and physical restraint methods.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

This review was conducted by searching "Violence," "Aggression," and "workplace violence" keywords in these databases: PubMed, Scopus, EmBase, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Database, and Google Scholar. In addition to using keywords for finding the papers, the related article capability was used to find more papers. From the found papers, published papers from 2005 to 2018 were chosen to enter the paper pool for further review.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 200 papers were used in this paper to conduct a comprehensive review regarding violence management in ED. The results were categorized as prevention, verbal methods, pharmacological interventions and physical restraint.

CONCLUSION

In this study various methods of chemical and physical restraint methods were reviewed so an emergency medicine physician be aware of various available choices in different clinical situations for agitated patients.

Serum galectin-3, but not galectin-1, levels are elevated in schizophrenia: implications for the role of inflammation

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have reported that galectin-3 is involved in inflammatory processes in the central nervous system and that neuroinflammation may play a role in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. However, the link between schizophrenia and various galectins is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the present study is to determine whether galectin, a well-known lectin protein that binds to μ-galactoside, is associated with chronic schizophrenia.

METHODS

Thirty-six patients with schizophrenia and 36 healthy controls participated in this study. Schizophrenia symptoms were assessed using the Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale (BPRS). Serum galectin-1 and galectin-3 levels were evaluated using ELISA and compared between the participant groups. Correlation analyses were also performed to examine the relationship between BPRS scores and each galectin level.

RESULTS

Serum galectin-3 levels were significantly higher in patients with schizophrenia than they were in controls (p = 0.009, d = 0.640); however, serum galectin-1 levels were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.513). No significant correlation was identified between serum galectin-3 level and the total BPRS score; however, a significant positive correlation was found between the serum galectin-3 level and the positive symptom score of the BPRS (ρ = 0.355; p = 0.033). Additionally, a significant negative correlation was identified between serum galectin-3 levels and the negative symptom score of the BPRS (ρ = -0.387; p = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the high serum levels of galectin-3 found in patients with schizophrenia compared with that in controls, these findings may support the inflammation hypothesis of schizophrenia.

Assessment and management of agitation in psychiatry: Expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Psychomotor agitation is associated with different psychiatric conditions and represents an important issue in psychiatry. Current recommendations on agitation in psychiatry are not univocal. Actually, an improper assessment and management may result in unnecessary coercive or sedative treatments. A thorough and balanced review plus an expert consensus can guide assessment and treatment decisions.

METHODS

An expert task force iteratively developed consensus using the Delphi method. Initial survey items were based on systematic review of the literature. Subsequent surveys included new, re-worded or re-rated items.

RESULTS

Out of 2175 papers assessing psychomotor agitation, 124 were included in the review. Each component was assigned a level of evidence. Integrating the evidence and the experience of the task force members, a consensus was reached on 22 statements on this topic.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations on the assessment of agitation emphasise the importance of identifying any possible medical cause. For its management, experts agreed in considering verbal de-escalation and environmental modification techniques as first choice, considering physical restraint as a last resort strategy. Regarding pharmacological treatment, the "ideal" medication should calm without over-sedate. Generally, oral or inhaled formulations should be preferred over i.m. routes in mildly agitated patients. Intravenous treatments should be avoided.

Placebo response in antipsychotic clinical trials: a meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Because increasing placebo response rates decrease drug-placebo differences and increase the number of failed trials, it is imperative to determine what is causing this trend.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the relationship between antipsychotic medication and placebo response by publication year, and to identify associated study design and implementation variables.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched to identify randomized clinical trials of antipsychotic medications published from 1960 to July 2013.

STUDY SELECTION

Included were randomized clinical trials lasting 4 to 24 weeks, contrasting antipsychotic medication with placebo or an active comparator, and enrolling patients 18 years of age or older with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Standardized mean change scores were calculated for each treatment arm, plotted against publication year, and tested with Spearman rank correlation coefficients. Hierarchical linear modeling identified factors associated with the standardized mean change across medication and placebo treatment arms.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

We hypothesized that the mean change in placebo-treated patients would significantly increase from 1960 to the present, that a greater change would be observed in active comparator vs placebo-controlled trials, and that more protocol visits would increase the symptom change observed.

RESULTS

In the 105 trials examined, the mean change observed in placebo arms increased significantly with year of publication (n=39, r=0.52, P=.001), while the mean change in effective dose medication arms decreased significantly (n=208, r=-0.26, P<.001). Significant interactions were found between assignment to effective dose medication and publication year (t260=-5.55, P<.001), baseline severity (t260=5.08, P<.001), and study duration (t260=-3.76, P<.001), indicating that the average drug-placebo difference significantly decreased over time, with decreasing baseline severity and with increasing study duration. Medication treatment in comparator studies was associated with significantly more improvement than medication treatment in placebo-controlled trials (t93=2.73, P=.008).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The average treatment change associated with placebo treatment in antipsychotic trials increased since 1960, while the change associated with medication treatment decreased. Changes in randomized clinical trials leading to inflation of baseline scores, enrollment of less severely ill participants, and higher expectations of patients may all be responsible.

QT Interval Prolongation Associated with Intramuscular Ziprasidone in Chinese Patients: A Case Report and a Comprehensive Literature Review with Meta-Analysis

Intramuscular (IM) ziprasidone has been associated with QTc interval prolongations in patients with preexisting risk factors. A 23-year-old male Chinese schizophrenia patient experienced an increase of QTc interval of 83 milliseconds (ms) after receiving 20 mg IM ziprasidone (baseline and increased QT/QTc were, respectively, 384/418 and 450/501). This was rated as a probable adverse drug reaction (ADR) by the Liverpool ADR causality assessment tool. A systematic review including all types of trials reporting the effect of IM ziprasidone on the QTc interval prolongation identified 19 trials with a total of 1428 patients. Mean QTc change from baseline to end of each study was −3.7 to 12.8 ms after IM ziprasidone. Four randomized trials (3 of 4 published in Chinese) were used to calculate a meta-analysis of QTc interval prolongation which showed no significant differences between IM ziprasidone and IM haloperidol groups (risk ratio 0.49 to 4.31, 95% confidence interval 0.09 to 19.68, P = 0.06 to 0.41). However, our review included two cases of patients who experienced symptoms probably related to QTc prolongation after IM ziprasidone. Thus, careful screening and close monitoring, including baseline ECG, should be considered in patients receiving IM ziprasidone for the first time.

The psychopharmacology of violence: making sensible decisions

Violent behavior associated with mental disorders is a common reason for admission to a psychiatric inpatient unit. Once hospitalized, patients may continue to be intermittently agitated and have persistent aggressive behaviors, preventing their discharge back into the community. Managing agitation quickly with effective pharmacological agents can avoid further escalation to aggression and violence. In the acute setting, this usually involves the parenteral use of antipsychotics, with or without benzodiazepines. Within the past decade, short-acting intramuscular formulations of second-generation antipsychotics have become available and provide a means to induce calm with a substantially lower risk of acute dystonia or akathisia compared with haloperidol. New alternative formulations that avoid injections include inhalation and sublingual administration. Longer-term management of persistent aggressive behavior by reducing the frequency and intensity of future episodes of agitation is more complex. In contrast to agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar mania, no agents have yet been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of persistent aggressive behavior. The strongest evidence supports the use of clozapine as an antihostility agent, followed by olanzapine. Adjunctive strategies with anticonvulsants and beta-adrenergic agents may also be worthwhile to consider.

Aggression in Psychoses

Most individuals diagnosed with a mental illness are not violent, but some mentally ill patients commit violent acts. PubMed database was searched for articles published between 1980 and November 2013 using the combination of key words “schizophrenia” or “bipolar disorder” with “aggression” or “violence.” In comparison with the general population, there is approximately a twofold increase of risk of violence in schizophrenia without substance abuse comorbidity and ninefold with such comorbidity. The risk in bipolar disorder is at least as high as in schizophrenia. Most of the violence in bipolar disorder occurs during the manic phase. Violence among adults with schizophrenia may follow two distinct pathways: one associated with antisocial conduct and another associated with the acute psychopathology, particularly anger and delusions. Clozapine is the most effective treatment of aggressive behavior in schizophrenia. Emerging evidence suggests that olanzapine may be the second most effective treatment. Treatment nonadherence greatly increases the risk of violent behavior, and poor insight as well as hostility is associated with nonadherence. Nonpharmacological methods of treatment of aggression in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are increasingly important. Cognitive behavioral approaches appear to be effective in cases where pharmacotherapy alone is not sufficient.

The comparative efficacy of intramuscular antipsychotics for the management of acute agitation

OBJECTIVE

To review the current role and comparative efficacy of short-acting intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics in the management of acute agitation, in current clinical practice.

METHOD

The efficacy and tolerability of IM antipsychotics in the management of acute agitation in current clinical practice were reviewed in the Medline, PubMed, Cinahl Plus, Scopus-v.4 and PsycInfo databases.

RESULTS

The comparative efficacy of the rapidly-acting IM atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, ziprasidone and aripiprazole) is similar to that of the typical antipsychotic, haloperidol. IM olanzapine and ziprasidone were associated with fewer extrapyramidal side-effects and had similar cardiac tolerability to IM haloperidol.

CONCLUSIONS

Further studies are required in the ongoing development of contemporary, evidence-based clinical guidelines in acute agitation, including head-to-head comparisons of currently utilized IM atypical antipsychotics, sequential treatment or combinations of medications.

Intramuscular ziprasidone versus haloperidol for managing agitation in Chinese patients with schizophrenia

Intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics are preferred for efficient control of agitation symptoms. Previous studies have demonstrated that IM ziprasidone is efficacious and safe for treatment of agitation in schizophrenia. However, clinicians now recognize that racial differences may contribute to altered therapeutic response and tolerability. This study compared the efficacy and tolerability of IM ziprasidone versus IM haloperidol for the management of agitation in Chinese subjects with schizophrenia. Subjects with acute schizophrenia were randomized to either ziprasidone (n = 189, 10 to 20 mg as required up to a maximum of 40 mg/d) or haloperidol (n = 187, 5 mg every 4 to 8 hours to a maximum of 20 mg/d) for 3 days. Psychiatric assessments and adverse events were assessed at baseline, 2, 4, 24, 48, and 72 hours. In the ziprasidone group, 2.1% of subjects discontinued versus 3.7% in the haloperidol group. The least squares mean change (SE) from baseline to 72 hours in Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale total score was -17.32 (0.7) for ziprasidone (n = 167) and -18.44 (0.7) for haloperidol (n = 152), with a 95% confidence interval treatment difference of -0.7 to 2.9. Fewer subjects experienced adverse events after ziprasidone (n = 54, 28.6%) than haloperidol (n = 116, 62.0%), with a notably higher incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms in the haloperidol group (n = 69, 36.9%) compared to the ziprasidone group (n = 4, 2.1%). For controlling agitation in schizophrenia in this Chinese study, ziprasidone had a favorable tolerability profile and comparable efficacy and safety compared to haloperidol.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia, part 1: update 2012 on the acute treatment of schizophrenia and the management of treatment resistance

These updated guidelines are based on a first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia published in 2005. For this 2012 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful and these guidelines are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating people suffering from schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines, a systematic review of the MEDLINE/PUBMED database and the Cochrane Library, in addition to data extraction from national treatment guidelines, has been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and then categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F; Bandelow et al. 2008b, World J Biol Psychiatry 9:242). This first part of the updated guidelines covers the general descriptions of antipsychotics and their side effects, the biological treatment of acute schizophrenia and the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Efficacy of second-generation-antipsychotics in the treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether second-generation-antipsychotics (SGAs) are effective for negative symptoms treatment in schizophrenia.

METHODS

Two meta-analyses were carried out using placebo or haloperidol as comparators. The search included the following databases: Pubmed, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Proquest Health and Medical Complete, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Current Contents Connect. The outcome measure used was the change in negative symptoms, choosing a standardized statistic (Cohen's d) to synthesize the data.

RESULTS

In the placebo-controlled meta-analysis, the effect sizes (Cohen's d) obtained for amisulpride, haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone were 0.52, 0.34, 0.43, 0.36, 0.40 and 0.46, respectively, favoring active treatment against placebo (P<0.001 in all cases). The haloperidol-controlled meta-analysis only showed a statistically significant trend favoring antipsychotics over haloperidol (Cohen's d=0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Most antipsychotics (amisulpride, haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone) are effective in the treatment of negative symptoms. Amisulpride and ziprasidone showed higher effect sizes.

Rapid tranquilization for agitated patients in emergency psychiatric rooms: a randomized trial of olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone as the first medication(s) used to treat patients with agitation and aggressive behavior. METHOD: One hundred fifty patients with agitation caused by psychotic or bipolar disorder were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus midazolam, haloperidol plus promethazine or haloperidol alone. The Overt Agitation Severity Scale, Overt Aggression Scale and Ramsay Sedation Scale were applied within 12 hours after the first dosage. RESULTS: All medications produced a calming effect within one hour of administration, but only olanzapine and haloperidol reduced agitation by less than 10 points, and only olanzapine reduced aggression by less than four points in the first hour. After twelve hours, only patients treated with haloperidol plus midazolam had high levels of agitation and aggression and also more side effects. Ziprasidone, olanzapine and haloperidol alone had more stable results for agitation control, while ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine and olanzapine had stable results for aggression control. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol were effective in controlling agitation and aggression caused by mental illness over 12 hours. Although all the drugs had advantages and disadvantages, haloperidol plus midazolam was associated with the worst results in all the observed parameters.

Ziprasidone hydrocloride: what role in the management of schizophrenia?

Background

Since schizophrenia is considered one of the top ten causes of disease-related disability in the world, the development of second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics (SGAs) has increased the hopes of psychiatrists. SGAs, however, cannot be considered a unique pharmacological class since each SGA has many complex pharmacologic actions, only some of which are shared with other SGAs. Even though manyantipsychotics have similar efficacy on average, prescribers may be able to achieve better than average results by considering differences in selecting a specific drug for a specific patient. Clinicians know that each patient is unique. In order to achieve best outcomes for the individual patient, the better therapy is the therapy tailored for the single patient.

Objectives

With this article, we provide information on a relatively new antipsychotic ziprasidone released in 2001 by Pfizer for the treatment of schizophrenia. Compared with other first line atypical antipsychotics ziprasidone has a unique profile due to potent interaction with serotonergic receptors and lesser action upon α1 adrenergic, H1 and M1 antagonist activities. This paper describes the development of ziprasidone, its unique properties and its metabolically-friendly profile including its receptor binding affinities, pharmacokinetics, CNS activity results of clinical efficacy and relevant clinical trials. Safety, efficacy and patient preference are also examined. The available literature on ziprasidone of the last five years is reviewed.

Safety of the electroconvulsive therapy-ziprasidone combination

In clinical practice, a nonnegligible proportion of patients with mood or psychotic disorders undergo electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) concomitantly with pharmacotherapy. Ziprasidone, a combined serotonin and dopamine receptor antagonist, is a second-generation antipsychotic agent with a lower incidence of extrapyramidal motor symptoms and prolactin elevation and a safer profile of adverse effects on plasma lipids, glucose levels, and body weight than other antipsychotics. To the best of our knowledge, there are as yet no available reports on the safety of the ECT-ziprasidone combination. We report here on a series of 8 female inpatients who underwent ECT while receiving ziprasidone (20-80 mg/d) as part of their regimen. Seven patients were treated for major depressive episode in the context of unipolar major depressive disorder (n = 5) or of bipolar disorder I (n = 2), whereas 1 patient was treated for exacerbation of schizophrenic symptoms. In all cases, the combination was well tolerated with only minimal adverse effects and unremarkable changes in corrected QT interval.

Using oral ziprasidone effectively: the food effect and dose-response

Ziprasidone is a newer "atypical" or "second-generation" antipsychotic. Oral ziprasidone (ziprasidone hydrochloride) has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of schizophrenia, and acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar disorder (with or without psychotic features). Comparisons with other second-generation antipsychotics in meta-analyses reveal similar efficacy to that observed for quetiapine or aripiprazole, but inferior efficacy to that of olanzapine or risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, the rate of dose titration and the dose achieved may have an important bearing on ziprasidone's efficacy profile, with a target dose range of 120-160 mg/day being associated with optimal symptom control and greater persistence with treatment. In addition, enhancing ziprasidone's effectiveness requires ensuring that ziprasidone is administered with a 500 kcal meal; otherwise, absorption of oral ziprasidone is substantially reduced and cannot be compensated for by increasing the prescribed dose. Regarding tolerability, ziprasidone has important advantages in that it is not associated with clinically significant weight gain or adverse changes in cholesterol, triglycerides, or glycemic control, and patients may experience moderate improvement in these measures when switching to ziprasidone from a different antipsychotic. Ziprasidone also lacks significant persistent effects on prolactin levels, is not anticholinergic, and only infrequently causes extrapyramidal side effects or postural hypotension; however, it can be associated with somnolence. Ziprasidone may prolong the electrocardiogram (ECG) QT interval but this does not appear to pose a substantial clinical problem. Provided that an adequate dose of ziprasidone is prescribed, and administered with a 500 kcal meal, ziprasidone can be effectively used to control symptoms without the long-term liabilities of metabolic side effects.

Bipolar disorder and aggression

AIMS

In clinical practice, overt aggressive behaviour is frequently observed in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder. It can be dangerous and complicates patient care. Nevertheless, it has not been adequately studied as a phenomenon that is separate from other symptoms such as agitation. The aim of this review is to provide information on the prevalence, clinical context, and clinical management of aggression in patients with bipolar disorder.

METHODS

MEDLINE and PsycInfo data bases were searched for articles published between 1966 and November 2008 using the combination of key words 'aggression' or 'violence' with 'bipolar disorder'. For the treatment searches, generic names of mood stabilisers and antipsychotics were used in combination with key words 'bipolar disorder' and 'aggression'. No language constraint was applied. Articles dealing with children and adolescents were not included.

RESULTS

Acutely ill hospitalised bipolar patients have a higher risk for aggression than other inpatients. In a population survey, the prevalence of aggressive behaviour after age 15 years was 0.66% in persons without lifetime psychiatric disorder, but 25.34% in bipolar I disorder. Comorbidity with personality disorders and substance use disorders is frequent, and it elevates the risk of aggression in bipolar patients. Impulsive aggression appears to be the most frequent subtype observed in bipolar patients. Clinical management of aggression combines pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches.

DISCUSSION

A major problem with the evidence is that aggression is frequently reported only as one of the items contributing to the total score on a scale or a subscale. This makes it impossible to ascertain specifically aggressive behaviour. Large controlled head-to-head randomised controlled studies comparing treatments for aggressive behaviour in bipolar disorder are not yet available. There is some evidence favouring divalproex, but it is not particularly strong .We do not know if there are any efficacy differences among antipsychotics for this indication.

A meta-analysis of the risk of acute extrapyramidal symptoms with intramuscular antipsychotics for the treatment of agitation

OBJECTIVE

We examined the evidence for a decreased risk of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) with intramuscular second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) versus intramuscular haloperidol alone or in combination with an anticholinergic agent.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE (1950 to the present), and EMBASE and the Cochrane Database through January 16, 2008, for studies published in English of intramuscular SGAs and intramuscular haloperidol alone or in combination with an anticholinergic agent using the following drug names: ziprasidone, Geodon, olanzapine, Zyprexa, aripiprazole, Abilify, haloperidol, and Haldol. We then searched this pool of studies for trials with the terms intramuscular, IM, or injectable. Initially, we included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To obtain more data comparing SGAs to the combination of haloperidol and an anticholinergic, we conducted a second analysis including studies of any methodology.

STUDY SELECTION

Seven RCTs that compared intramuscular SGAs to intramuscular haloperidol alone were identified. However, we found only one RCT of haloperidol plus an anticholinergic. In the second analysis, we identified 18 studies, including 4 using haloperidol combined with promethazine (an antihistamine with anticholinergic properties).

DATA EXTRACTION

The primary outcome measure was acute dystonia; secondary outcome measures included akathisia, parkinsonism, or the need for additional anticholinergic medication. For RCTs, risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for each outcome. When all studies were included in the second analysis, we calculated the risk of acute dystonia.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Among RCTs (N = 2032), SGAs were associated with a significantly lower risk of acute dystonia (RR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.39), akathisia (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.14 to 0.44), and anticholinergic use (RR = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.09 to 0.43) compared with haloperidol alone. When all trials were considered (N = 3425), rates of acute dystonia were higher for haloperidol alone (4.7%) than for SGAs (0.6%) or for haloperidol plus promethazine (0.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Intramuscular SGAs have a significantly lower risk of acute EPS compared to haloperidol alone. However, intramuscular haloperidol plus promethazine has a risk of acute dystonia comparable to intramuscular SGAs. The decision to use SGAs should consider other factors in addition to the reduction of EPS, which can be prevented by the use of an anticholinergic agent.

Pharmacological control of acute agitation: focus on intramuscular preparations

Acute agitation in the psychiatric emergency setting is a common presentation, which can endanger the patient, caregivers and professional staff. Rapid and effective treatment, followed by ongoing evaluation and maintenance treatment where appropriate, is key to circumvent negative outcomes. Nonpharmacological measures are the first step in treating the acutely agitated patient, and include verbal intervention and physical restraint. Pharmacological treatment is often required to ensure the safety of the patient, caregivers and the treatment team. The need for drug delivery in uncooperative patients favours the use of intramuscular preparations for the acutely agitated patient. Intramuscular treatment options include benzodiazepines, conventional antipsychotics and atypical antipsychotics. Each of these medications offers a unique pharmacological profile that must be considered when treating acutely agitated patients, who may be unwilling or unable to accurately communicate their co-morbid conditions and concomitant medications.

Methodological issues in current antipsychotic drug trials

Every year numerous reports on antipsychotic drug trials are being published in neuropsychiatric journals, adding new information to our knowledge in the field. The information however is often hard for the reader to interpret, sometimes contradictory to comparable available studies and leaves more questions open than it actually answers. Although the overall quality of the studies is rather good, there are manifold options for further improvement in the conception, conduct, and reporting of antipsychotic drug trials. In this survey, we address methodological challenges such as the limited generalizability of outcomes due to patient selection and sample size; the vague or even lacking definition of key outcome parameters such as response, remission or relapse, insufficient blinding techniques, the pitfalls of surrogate outcomes and their assessment tools; the varying complex statistical approaches; and the challenge of balancing various ways of reporting outcomes. The authors present practical examples to highlight the current problems and propose a concrete series of suggestions on how to further optimize antipsychotic drug trials in the future.

Managing the acutely agitated and psychotic patient

Agitation can present as an emergency in the course of numerous psychiatric conditions including intoxication, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and delirium. This article reviews relevant literature regarding the definition, etiology, measurement, and management of episodic agitation and pays particular attention to intramuscular treatments. The impact of changes in methodology between the era of first- and second-generation antipsychotics, the implications of those changes for external validity of studies of second-generation studies, and the recent evolution of expert consensus are discussed.

Ziprasidone for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: a review of the clinical trials

Ziprasidone is a newer "atypical" or "second-generation" antipsychotic. Oral ziprasidone (ziprasidone hydrochloride) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of schizophrenia, and acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar disorder (with or without psychotic features). Ziprasidone intramuscular (ziprasidone mesylate) is FDA-approved for acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia. Oral ziprasidone appears efficacious, and has been shown to have some limited clinical advantages over chlorpromazine and haloperidol in ameliorating negative symptoms of schizophrenia. In Phase 2 of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) for schizophrenia, ziprasidone did not match the clinical performance of olanzapine and risperidone, appearing closer in overall effectiveness to quetiapine. The rate of dose titration and the dose achieved may have an important bearing on ziprasidone's efficacy profile. In studies of usage for acute agitation in individuals with schizophrenia, intramuscular ziprasidone has been shown to be efficacious and relatively well tolerated. Regarding tolerability, ziprasidone, has important advantages in that it is not associated with clinically significant weight gain or adverse changes in cholesterol, triglycerides, or glycemic control, and patients may experience moderate improvement in these measures when switching to ziprasidone from a different antipsychotic agent. It also lacks significant persistent effects on prolactin levels, is not anticholinergic, and only infrequently causes extrapyramidal side effects or postural hypotension, although it can be associated with somnolence. This tolerability profile may be quite valuable in the treatment of some patients. Ziprasidone may prolong the electrocardiogram (ECG) QTc interval (QT interval corrected for heart rate by a standard algorithm), but after 5 years' clinical availability ziprasidone (by itself) does not appear to pose a substantial clinical problem in this regard. Therefore, ziprasidone may be considered a first-line drug option in the treatment of schizophrenia or manic episodes, but, in view of the differences among antipsychotic medications, drug selection should be guided by the patient's individual characteristics and situation.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of ziprasidone versus haloperidol in sequential intramuscular/oral treatment of exacerbation of schizophrenia: economic subanalysis of the ZIMO trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost effectiveness of ziprasidone versus haloperidol in sequential intramuscular (IM)/oral treatment of patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia in Spain.

METHODS

A cost-effectiveness analysis from the hospital perspective was performed. Length of stay, study medication and use of concomitant drugs were calculated using data from the ZIMO trial. The effectiveness of treatment was determined by the percentage of responders (reduction in baseline Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] negative symptoms subscale >or=30%). Economic assessment included estimation of mean (95% CI) total costs, cost per responder and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per additional responder. The economic uncertainty level was controlled by resampling and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

A total of 325 patients (ziprasidone n = 255, haloperidol n = 70) were included in this economic subanalysis. Ziprasidone showed a significantly higher responder rate compared with haloperidol (71% vs 56%, respectively; p = 0.023). Mean total costs were euro3582 (95% CI 3226, 3937) for ziprasidone and euro2953 (95% CI 2471, 3436) for haloperidol (p = 0.039), mainly due to a higher ziprasidone acquisition cost. However, costs per responder were lower with ziprasidone (euro5045 [95% CI 4211, 6020]) than with haloperidol (euro5302 [95% CI 3666, 7791], with a cost per additional responder (ICER) for ziprasidone of euro4095 (95% CI -130, 22 231). The acceptability curve showed an ICER cut-off value of euro13 891 at the 95% cost-effectiveness probability level for >or=30% reduction in BPRS negative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with haloperidol, ziprasidone was significantly better at controlling psychotic negative symptoms in acute psychoses. The extra cost of ziprasidone was offset by a higher effectiveness rate, yielding a lower cost per responder. In light of the social benefit (less family burden and greater restoration of productivity), the incremental cost per additional responder with sequential IM/oral ziprasidone should be considered cost effective in patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia in Spain.

Efficacy and safety of oral aripiprazole compared with haloperidol in patients transitioning from acute treatment with intramuscular formulations

OBJECTIVE

To report efficacy and safety of transitioning patients receiving intramuscular (IM) formulations of aripiprazole or haloperidol to their respective oral formulations.

METHODS

448 agitated patients with schizophrenia (73%) or schizoaffective disorder (27%) were randomized to receive aripiprazole IM 9.75 mg, haloperidol IM 6.5 mg, or placebo IM within 24 hours. Patients treated with aripiprazole IM or haloperidol IM who completed this 24-hour IM phase were transitioned to the respective blinded oral formulations for 4 days (aripiprazole 10-15 mg/day, n = 153; haloperidol 7.5-10 mg/day, n = 151). Patients treated with placebo IM were transitioned to oral aripiprazole (analysis not included). The primary efficacy measure was mean change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PEC) score from baseline of oral phase (last value from 24-hour IM phase) to endpoint (study day 5, last observation carried forward).

RESULTS

During the oral phase, aripiprazole 15 mg and haloperidol 10 mg were both effective in maintaining responses achieved on all efficacy measures during the 24-hour IM phase. Mean improvements in PEC scores from study day 1 to 5 were -1.37 for aripiprazole and -1.40 for haloperidol (p = NS for aripiprazole versus haloperidol). Oral aripiprazole was well tolerated. Extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events were lower for aripiprazole (1.3%) than haloperidol (8.0%). Nausea and vomiting occurred more frequently in patients receiving aripiprazole (3.9% and 2.6%, respectively) than in those receiving haloperidol (0.7% and 1.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder treated with aripiprazole IM or haloperidol IM demonstrated similar effective and safe transition to their respective oral formulations. Initial benefits of reduced agitation and improved clinical status during the IM phase of the study were maintained throughout the oral phase of the study with good tolerability.

Ziprasidone: a review of its use in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder

Ziprasidone (Geodon, Zeldox) is an atypical antipsychotic agent with a unique neurotransmitter receptor-binding profile. The oral formulation is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia and the intramuscular formulation for the control of acute agitation in these patients. In adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, oral ziprasidone was effective at a dosage of 40-80 mg twice daily in patients experiencing a phase of acute illness, and at a dosage of 20-80 mg twice daily in those with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, including those who were symptomatically stable. Ziprasidone offers the advantage over most other atypical antipsychotic agents of being available in a fast-acting intramuscular formulation for control of acute agitation, thus providing clinicians with the option to safely and effectively transition to longer-term treatment with the oral formulation. Although careful consideration should be given to the propensity for ziprasidone to cause corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation, albeit at a relatively low incidence, the drug generally has a favourable tolerability profile of low extrapyramidal syndrome (EPS) liability, neutral bodyweight gain, and potentially low propensity for metabolic complications. Thus, ziprasidone is an effective option for the management of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with the intramuscular formulation providing a useful option for the treatment of acute agitation in these patients.

Antipsychotic efficacy: relationship to optimal D2-receptor occupancy

Clinically important differences exist between antipsychotic agents and formulations in terms of safety and tolerability. Features of the biochemical interaction between the antipsychotic and the D2-receptor may underlie these differences. This article reviews current information on the relationship between antipsychotic receptor occupancy and clinical response. A literature search was performed using the keywords 'antipsychotic or neuroleptic', 'receptor' and 'occupancy' and 'dopamine' and 'D2' supplemented by the authors' knowledge of the literature. Imaging and clinical data have generally supported the hypotheses that optimal D2-receptor occupancy in the striatum lies in a 'therapeutic window' between approximately 65 and approximately 80%, however, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of a drug should also be taken into account to fully evaluate its therapeutic effects. Additional research, perhaps in preclinical models, is needed to establish D2-receptor occupancy in various regions of the brain and the optimal duration of D2-receptor blockade in order to maximise efficacy and tolerability profiles of atypical antipsychotics and thereby improve treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia.

Intramuscular aripiprazole or haloperidol and transition to oral therapy in patients with agitation associated with schizophrenia: sub-analysis of a double-blind study

OBJECTIVE

A sub-population analysis of 325 patients with agitation (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component [PEC] score > or = 15 and < or = 32; score of > or = 4 on > or = 2 items) associated with schizophrenia in a randomized, double-blind study investigating the efficacy and tolerability of intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole 9.75 mg, IM haloperidol 6.5 mg, or IM placebo and the transition to oral therapy.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Over 24 h, patients could receive up to three IM injections; the second and third administered > or = 2 and > or = 4 h, respectively, after the first, if deemed clinically necessary. Following IM treatment, oral aripiprazole or haloperidol was administered for 4 days. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in PEC score from baseline at 2 h.

RESULTS

At 2 h, mean improvements in PEC scores with IM aripiprazole (-8.0) were significantly greater versus IM placebo (-5.7; p < or = 0.01), and similar versus IM haloperidol (-8.3). Secondary efficacy measures also significantly improved with active IM treatment versus IM placebo. Continuation with oral treatment provided continued efficacy with both active treatments. The safety profiles of IM and oral aripiprazole were similar. The incidence of extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events was 0% with IM aripiprazole, 1.6% with IM placebo and 16.5% with IM haloperidol.

CONCLUSION

Intramuscular aripiprazole is effective in patients with acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, comparable to IM haloperidol, and enables convenient transfer to oral aripiprazole therapy.

Intramuscular aripiprazole for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison with intramuscular haloperidol

INTRODUCTION

This double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated the efficacy and safety of intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole and IM haloperidol for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four-hundred and forty-eight patients were randomized (2:2:1 ratio) to IM aripiprazole 9.75 mg, IM haloperidol 6.5 mg, or IM placebo. Patients could receive up to three injections over the first 24 h, with second and third injections administered > or =2 and > or =4 h, respectively, after the first if deemed clinically necessary. Primary efficacy measure was mean change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Excited Component (PEC) score from baseline to 2 h.

RESULTS

Mean improvement in PEC at 2 h was significantly greater for IM aripiprazole (-7.27) vs placebo (-4.78; p<0.001); IM aripiprazole was noninferior to IM haloperidol (-7.75) on PEC. All secondary efficacy measures showed significantly greater improvements at 2 h for IM aripiprazole and IM haloperidol over placebo. Mean number of injections/patient and percentage of patients requiring benzodiazepines were significantly lower for IM aripiprazole vs placebo (p<0.01). IM aripiprazole was well tolerated. Extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events were similar for aripiprazole (1.7%) and placebo (2.3%) and lower than with haloperidol (12.6%).

CONCLUSION

These results show that IM aripiprazole is an effective treatment, comparable to IM haloperidol, and well-tolerated for acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia.

Ziprasidone and amisulpride effectively treat negative symptoms of schizophrenia: results of a 12-week, double-blind study

We compared the efficacy of ziprasidone and amisulpride in the treatment of negative symptoms and overall psychopathology in subjects who had chronic schizophrenia with predominantly negative symptoms. This multicentre, 12-week, double-blind study randomly assigned subjects with predominantly negative-symptom schizophrenia [i.e. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Negative Subscale score >or=6 points greater than Positive Subscale score] to ziprasidone (40-80 mg b.i.d.; n=60) or amisulpride (50-100 mg b.i.d.; n=63). The primary efficacy variable was the change from baseline in PANSS Negative Subscale score. Secondary efficacy variables included change in scores for PANSS Total, Global Assessment of Functioning, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale derived from PANSS Total and Core, Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity and CGI-Improvement. For the change in PANSS Negative Subscale score, a ratio to assess the equivalence of the treatment groups was calculated from the least squares mean changes from baseline, with equivalence claimed if the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of the ratio exceeded 0.60. Mean daily dose, adjusted for differential numbers of subjects and differential days between visits, was 118.0 mg for ziprasidone and 144.7 mg for amisulpride. Mean PANSS Negative Subscale scores improved over the 12-week treatment period for intent-to-treat subjects, evaluable subjects (subjects with >or=4 weeks of double-blind treatment and no protocol deviations) and completers in both treatment groups. Ziprasidone demonstrated efficacy comparable to amisulpride in improving negative symptoms and global psychopathology. The groups demonstrated comparable improvements in secondary efficacy variables. Both agents were generally well tolerated, with comparably low incidences of movement disorders. In subjects with negative symptom-prominent schizophrenia, ziprasidone in mean daily doses of 118 mg was equivalent to amisulpride in mean daily doses of 148 mg in ameliorating negative symptoms and comparable in improving overall psychopathology and global illness severity.

From clinical research to clinical practice: a 4-year review of ziprasidone

Ziprasidone is a second-generation antipsychotic that received Food and Drug Administration approval in February 2001. It has a unique receptor profile that includes high-affinity antagonist activity at dopamine D2 receptors, inverse agonist activity at serotonin (5-HT)2A receptors, agonist activity at 5-HTlA receptors, and a relatively high affinity for the serotonin and norepinephrine transporters. The 5-HTIA affinity, together with the inhibitory effect on mono-amine reuptake, may underlie the hypothesized beneficial effects on comorbid affective and cognitive abnormalities in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. The short-term efficacy of ziprasidone for core positive symptoms of schizophrenia appears to be comparable to other conventional and atypical antipsychotics. The short-term efficacy of ziprasidone in acute mania has been established based on two 3-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.Open-label treatment for up to 52 weeks confirms the sustained efficacy and safety of ziprasidone in bipolar disorder. Maintenance studies in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder indicate that long-term ziprasidone therapy is effective in preventing relapse, while maintaining cognitive and psychosocial benefits. The safety database suggests that the overall cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk associated with ziprasidone is lower than with other atypicals, with notably lower risk of drug-related increases in weight, glucose, or lipids. The data also suggest a modestly increased risk of QTc prolongation that is not dose related or linked to torsades de pointes. Switching to ziprasidone from other atypicals appears to improve both clinical symptoms and metabolic parameters, though more studies are needed to fully characterize these benefits. This monograph summarizes the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of oral ziprasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar mania.

Best clinical practice with ziprasidone IM: update after 2 years of experience

Acute agitation is a common psychiatric emergency often treated with intramuscular (i.m.) medication when rapid control is necessary or the patient refuses to take an oral agent. Conventional i.m. antipsychotics are associated with side effects, particularly movement disorders, that may alarm patients and render them unreceptive to taking these medications again. Ziprasidone (Geodon) is the first second-generation, or atypical, antipsychotic to become available in an i.m. formulation. Ziprasidone IM was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2002 for the treatment of agitation in patients with schizophrenia. In October 2004, a roundtable panel of physicians with extensive experience in the management of acutely agitated patients met to review the first 2 years of experience with this agent. This monograph, a product of that meeting, discusses clinical experience to date with ziprasidone IM and offers recommendations on its use in various settings. In clinical trials, patients treated with ziprasidone IM demonstrated significant and rapid (within 15-30 minutes) reduction in agitation and improvement in psychotic symptoms, agitation, and hostility to an extent greater than or equal to that attained with haloperidol i.m. Tolerability of ziprasidone IM was superior to that of haloperidol IM, with a lower burden of movement disorders. Clinical trials have also shown that ziprasidone IM can be administered with benzodiazepines without adverse consequences. Transition from i.m. to oral ziprasidone has been well tolerated, with maintenance of symptom control. The most common adverse events associated with ziprasidone IM were insomnia, headache, and dizziness in fixed-dose trials and insomnia and hypertension in flexible-dose trials. No consistent pattern of escalating incidence of adverse events with escalating ziprasidone doses has been observed. Changes in QTc interval associated with ziprasidone at peak serum concentrations are modest and comparable to those seen with haloperidol IM. Results of randomized clinical trials of ziprasidone IM have been corroborated in studies in real-world treatment settings involving patients with extreme agitation or a recent history of alcohol or substance abuse. In these circumstances, clinically significant improvement was seen within 30 minutes of ziprasidone IM administration, without regard to the suspected underlying etiology of agitation. Agents with a good safety/tolerability profile, such as ziprasidone IM, may be more cost effective long term than older agents, due to reduced incidence of acute adverse effects (eg, acute dystonia) that often require extended periods of observation. Additional trials of ziprasidone IM in agitated patients in a variety of clinical setting are warranted to generate comparative risk/benefit data with conventional agents and other second-generation antipsychotics.

Rapid-acting IM ziprasidone in a psychiatric emergency service: a naturalistic study

Atypical antipsychotics have gained acceptance as first-line treatment for psychotic disorders. Rapid-acting intramuscular (IM) atypicals may supplant benzodiazepine and/or neuroleptic alternatives. IM atypical ziprasidone studies excluded severe psychiatric agitation (PSYCH), or that due to the abuse of alcohol (ETOH) or other substances (SUBS). We report Behavioral Activity Rating Scale agitation scores (range, 1-7) and duration of physical restraints in a naturalistic study in a psychiatric emergency service using IM ziprasidone 20 mg and various doses for conventional antipsychotics. Baseline scores were high for PSYCH, ETOH and SUBS patients (mean, 6.5, 6.9 and 6.6, respectively). Agitation decreased rapidly from baseline with ziprasidone [mean, 5.6, 5.3 and 5.8, respectively, at 15 min (P<.05 for all), and 4.2, 4.1 and 4.1, respectively, at 30 min (P<.01 for all)]. At 2 h, scores were 2.6, 2.1 and 2.3 (P<.01 for all versus baseline). For 9 patients receiving conventional IM antipsychotics, scores were 6.6 (baseline), 5.7 (15 min), 4.2 (30 min) and 2.9 (2 h) (P<.02 versus ziprasidone). Compared with restraint durations from 80 patients receiving conventional IM agents 1 month prior to this study, restraint duration decreased from 91+/-4 to 54+/-3 min with ziprasidone (n=77; P<.01) and varied with conventional IM agents (mean, 60+/-12 min; n=4; P=NS). None of the 19 ziprasidone patients who received electrocardiograms showed prolonged QTc; one had a dystonic reaction. IM ziprasidone appears effective for severe agitation, including agitation associated with alcohol or substance intoxication, and may reduce time in restraints.

Pharmacokinetics and Therapeutics of Acute Intramuscular Ziprasidone

Patients with acute psychosis often exhibit agitation, which can be distressing and hazardous to others as well as to the patient. In such psychiatric emergencies, intramuscular antipsychotic agents can be easier to administer than oral formulations, and they have the added advantage of more rapid absorption and a faster onset of action. However, intramuscular formulations of conventional antipsychotics, which have been the standard treatment, are associated with acute dystonia and other movement disorder-related adverse events. Ziprasidone is the first atypical antipsychotic to be clinically available in both intramuscular and oral formulations in the US. The intramuscular formulation of ziprasidone, ziprasidone mesylate, uses sulfobutylether beta-cyclodextrin to solubilise the drug by complexation. The pharmacokinetics of intramuscular ziprasidone include rapid attainment of therapeutic drug level (time to reach peak serum concentration [tmax]<or=60 minutes postdose), a mean terminal elimination half-life ranging from 2 to 5 hours, bioavailability of approximately 100%, exposure to drug that increases in a dose-related manner and little drug accumulation even after 3 days of repeated intramuscular administration. The metabolism and elimination of intramuscular ziprasidone have not been extensively evaluated. The principal difference between any oral versus intramuscular formulations of a drug is in first-pass metabolism. Oral ziprasidone is eliminated mainly via the hepatic route and <1% is eliminated in urine and <4% in faeces as unchanged drug. That would not be expected to change with the intramuscular route of administration. Low concentrations of ziprasidone are seen 12-18 hours after the last intramuscular injection. The rapid clearance of ziprasidone from plasma after an intramuscular administration results in little to no persistence of plasma drug level when switching from intramuscular to oral drug administration. No clinically significant age-, sex- or race-related effects on the pharmacokinetics of intramuscular or oral ziprasidone have been noted, and the tolerability and cardiovascular safety profiles of intramuscular ziprasidone have been well characterised in clinical trials.