Randomized controlled augmentation trials in clozapine-resistant schizophrenic patients: a critical review

Clozapine resistant schizophrenia: Newer avenues of management

About 40%-70% of the patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia have a poor response to adequate treatment with clozapine. The impact of clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS) is even greater than that of treatment resistance in terms of severe and persistent symptoms, relapses and hospitalizations, poorer quality of life, and healthcare costs. Such serious consequences often compel clinicians to try different augmentation strategies to enhance the inadequate clozapine response in CRS. Unfortunately, a large body of evidence has shown that antipsychotics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, electroconvulsive therapy, and cognitive-behavioural therapy are mostly ineffective in augmenting clozapine response. When beneficial effects of augmentation have been found, they are usually small and of doubtful clinical significance or based on low-quality evidence. Therefore, newer treatment approaches that go beyond the evidence are needed. The options proposed include developing a clinical consensus about the augmentation strategies that are most likely to be effective and using them sequentially in patients with CRS. Secondly, newer approaches such as augmentation with long-acting antipsychotic injections or multi-component psychosocial interventions could be considered. Lastly, perhaps the most effective way to deal with CRS would be to optimize clozapine treatment, which might prevent clozapine resistance from developing. Personalized dosing, adequate treatment durations, management of side effects and non-adherence, collaboration with patients and caregivers, and addressing clinician barriers to clozapine use are the principal ways of ensuring optimal clozapine treatment. At present, these three options could the best way to manage CRS until research provides more firm directions about the effective options for augmenting clozapine response.

Novel Treatment for the Most Resistant Schizophrenia: Dual Activation of NMDA Receptor and Antioxidant

Clozapine has been regarded as the last-line antipsychotic agent for patients with refractory schizophrenia. However, many patients remain unresponsive to clozapine, referred to as "clozapineresistant", "ultra-treatment-resistant", or remain in incurable state. There has been no convincing evidence for augmentation on clozapine so far. Novel treatments including numerous N-methyl-Daspartate (NMDA) receptor (NMDAR) enhancers, such as glycine, D-serine, D-cycloserine, and Nmethylglycine (sarcosine) failed in clinical trials. Earlier, the inhibition of D-amino acid oxidase (DAAO) that may metabolize D-amino acids and activate NMDAR has been reported to be beneficial for patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotics except for clozapine. A recent randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial found that add-on sodium benzoate, a DAAO inhibitor, improved the clinical symptoms in patients with clozapine- resistant schizophrenia, possibly through DAAO inhibition (and thereby NMDAR activation) and antioxidation as well; additionally, sodium benzoate showed no obvious side effects, indicating that the treatment is safe at doses up to 2 g per day for 6 weeks. More studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms of sodium benzoate for the treatment of schizophrenia and the etiology of this severe brain disease. If the finding can be reconfirmed, this approach may bring new hope for the treatment of the most refractory schizophrenia. This review summarizes the current status of clinical trials and related mechanisms for treatmentresistant, especially, clozapine-resistant schizophrenia. The importance of understanding the molecular circuit switches is also highlighted which can restore brain function in patients with schizophrenia. Future directions in developing better treatments for the most difficult to cure schizophrenia are also discussed.

Candidate metabolic biomarkers for schizophrenia in CNS and periphery: Do any possible associations exist?

Due to the limitations of analytical techniques and the complicity of schizophrenia, nowadays it is still a challenge to diagnose and stratify schizophrenia patients accurately. Many attempts have been made to identify and validate available biomarkers for schizophrenia from CSF and/or peripheral blood in clinical studies with consideration to disease stages, antipsychotic effects and even gender differences. However, conflicting results handicap the validation and application of biomarkers for schizophrenia. In view of availability and feasibility, peripheral biomarkers have superior advantages over biomarkers in CNS. Meanwhile, schizophrenia is considered to be a devastating neuropsychiatric disease mainly taking place in CNS featured by widespread defects in multiple metabolic pathways whose dynamic interactions, until recently, have been difficult to difficult to investigate. Evidence for these alterations has been collected piecemeal, limiting the potential to inform our understanding of the interactions among relevant biochemical pathways. Taken these points together, it will be interesting to investigate possible associations of biomarkers between CNS and periphery. Numerous studies have suggested putative correlations within peripheral and CNS systems especially for dopaminergic and glutamatergic metabolic biomarkers. In addition, it has been demonstrated that blood concentrations of BDNF protein can also reflect its changes in the nervous system. In turn, BDNF also interacts with glutamatergic, dopaminergic and serotonergic systems. Therefore, this review will summarize metabolic biomarkers identified both in the CNS (brain tissues and CSF) and peripheral blood. Further, more attentions will be paid to discussing possible physical and functional associations between CNS and periphery, especially with respect to BDNF.

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: Updated recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

These updated guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology replace the original version published in 2011. They address the scope and targets of pharmacological treatment for schizophrenia. A consensus meeting was held in 2017, involving experts in schizophrenia and its treatment. They were asked to review key areas and consider the strength of the evidence on the risk-benefit balance of pharmacological interventions and the clinical implications, with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials where available, plus updates on current clinical practice. The guidelines cover the pharmacological management and treatment of schizophrenia across the various stages of the illness, including first-episode, relapse prevention, and illness that has proved refractory to standard treatment. It is hoped that the practice recommendations presented will support clinical decision making for practitioners, serve as a source of information for patients and carers, and inform quality improvement.

Clozapine augmentation strategies - a systematic meta-review of available evidence. Treatment options for clozapine resistance

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for clozapine resistance are diverse whereas, in contrast, the evidence for augmentation or combination strategies is sparse.

AIMS

We aimed to extract levels of evidence from available data and extrapolate recommendations for clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed/MEDLINE database and in the Cochrane database. Included meta-analyses were assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria, with symptom improvement as the endpoint, in order to develop a recommendation grade for each clinical strategy identified.

RESULTS

Our search identified 21 meta-analyses of clozapine combination or augmentation strategies. No strategies met Grade A criteria. Strategies meeting Grade B included combinations with first- or second-generation antipsychotics, augmentation with electroconvulsive therapy for persistent positive symptoms, and combination with certain antidepressants (fluoxetine, duloxetine, citalopram) for persistent negative symptoms. Augmentation strategies with mood-stabilisers, anticonvulsants, glutamatergics, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation or cognitive behavioural therapy met Grades C-D criteria only.

CONCLUSION

More high-quality clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of add-on treatments for symptom improvement in patients with clozapine resistance. Applying definitions of clozapine resistance would improve the reporting of future clinical trials. Augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics and first-generation antipsychotics can be beneficial, but the supporting evidence is from low-quality studies. Electroconvulsive therapy may be effective for clozapine-resistant positive symptoms.

Amisulpride augmentation in clozapine-unresponsive schizophrenia (AMICUS): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

When treatment-refractory schizophrenia shows an insufficient response to a trial of clozapine, clinicians commonly add a second antipsychotic, despite the lack of robust evidence to justify this practice.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the study were to establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of augmentation of clozapine medication with a second antipsychotic, amisulpride, for the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

DESIGN

The study was a multicentre, double-blind, individually randomised, placebo-controlled trial with follow-up at 12 weeks.

SETTINGS

The study was set in NHS multidisciplinary teams in adult psychiatry.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible participants were people aged 18-65 years with treatment-resistant schizophrenia unresponsive, at a criterion level of persistent symptom severity and impaired social function, to an adequate trial of clozapine monotherapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions comprised clozapine augmentation over 12 weeks with amisulpride or placebo. Participants received 400 mg of amisulpride or two matching placebo capsules for the first 4 weeks, after which there was a clinical option to titrate the dosage of amisulpride up to 800 mg or four matching placebo capsules for the remaining 8 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of 'responders', using a criterion response threshold of a 20% reduction in total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 68 participants were randomised. Compared with the participants assigned to placebo, those receiving amisulpride had a greater chance of being a responder by the 12-week follow-up (odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 3.42) and a greater improvement in negative symptoms, although neither finding had been present at 6-week follow-up and neither was statistically significant. Amisulpride was associated with a greater side effect burden, including cardiac side effects. Economic analyses indicated that amisulpride augmentation has the potential to be cost-effective in the short term [net saving of between £329 and £2011; no difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and possibly in the longer term.

LIMITATIONS

The trial under-recruited and, therefore, the power of statistical analysis to detect significant differences between the active and placebo groups was limited. The economic analyses indicated high uncertainty because of the short duration and relatively small number of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk-benefit of amisulpride augmentation of clozapine for schizophrenia that has shown an insufficient response to a trial of clozapine monotherapy is worthy of further investigation in larger studies. The size and extent of the side effect burden identified for the amisulpride-clozapine combination may partly reflect the comprehensive assessment of side effects in this study. The design of future trials of such a treatment strategy should take into account that a clinical response may be not be evident within the 4- to 6-week follow-up period usually considered adequate in studies of antipsychotic treatment of acute psychotic episodes. Economic evaluation indicated the need for larger, longer-term studies to address uncertainty about the extent of savings because of amisulpride and impact on QALYs. The extent and nature of the side effect burden identified for the amisulpride-clozapine combination has implications for the nature and frequency of safety and tolerability monitoring of clozapine augmentation with a second antipsychotic in both clinical and research settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number 2010-018963-40 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68824876.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 49. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Omega-3 fatty acids and the treatment of depression: a review of scientific evidence

Depression is a condition in which an individual feels lethargic, irritable, and guilty, has difficulty and trouble, no enjoyment in life, mood swings, sometimes suicidal ideation and thoughts, and loss of pleasure in activities. There are hundreds of millions of individuals suffering from major depression disorder all over the world. This leads to a considerable portion of the economy going for treatment as large amounts of money are spent on drugs every year. Pharmaceutical drugs are not very effective and they also have side effects that compound the problem. There are number of studies which shows that omega-3 fatty acids are proving to be very effective against the treatment of major depression disorder and other psychiatric disorders. However, the data regarding the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids in depression treatment are conflicted. This article reviews the recent research showing the relation between omega-3 fatty acids and depression. The roles of the omega-3 fatty acids in the treatment of depression are being studied with increased pace in the last decade due to heightened prevalence of depression. It is emphasized that omega-3 fatty acids have no record of associated side effects, which deserves greater attention for further research.

Augmentation strategies in partial responder and/or treatment-resistant schizophrenia patients treated with clozapine

INTRODUCTION

Although clozapine (CLZ) is considered the best evidence-based therapeutic option for treatment of resistant schizophrenia patients, a significant proportion of CLZ-treated patients show a partial or inadequate response to treatment, leading to increased healthcare cost and poor quality of life for affected individuals.

AREAS COVERED

This paper comprises a review of main research in CLZ augmentation strategies for treatment-refractory schizophrenia, with a focus on research conducted between 1990 and 2014. Databases that were searched include: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE PsychINFO, AgeLine and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Primary search terms were 'clozapine augmentation', 'clozapine and add-on' and 'treatment-resistant schizophrenia', with cross reference to specific agents covered in this article. We reviewed the available evidence on CLZ augmentation with antipsychotics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers and other agents.

EXPERT OPINION

Many drugs have been evaluated as CLZ add-on therapies without demonstrating convincing efficacy in treating refractory schizophrenia symptoms. More research is needed to better define outcomes in schizophrenia, the topic of treatment-resistance and more well-designed trials are required to establish true efficacy and safety of CLZ augmentation strategies.

Aripiprazole versus haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a 12-month, randomized, naturalistic trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term studies for patients with resistant schizophrenia are necessary to assess the effectiveness of combination strategies on persisting positive symptoms.

AIMS AND METHODS

This multicenter, naturalistic, randomized, superiority study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00395915) aimed to compare clinical efficacy and tolerability of haloperidol versus aripiprazole as combination treatment with clozapine in patients with resistant schizophrenia.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were followed up for 12 months. After 12 months, the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment was not significantly different between aripiprazole and haloperidol (37% vs 28%, respectively; P = 0.431). The change in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score was similar in the aripiprazole and haloperidol groups (-7.0 vs -7.9, respectively; P = 0.389), whereas the tolerability total score decreased significantly more in the aripiprazole group (-7.2 vs -2.3; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

While the effectiveness of clozapine augmentation with a second antipsychotic agent is not clearly demonstrated yet, results from this study suggest that augmentation with aripiprazole offers no substantial benefit over haloperidol in efficacy. Aripiprazole was perceived more tolerable than haloperidol, but it is uncertain how this finding may translate into the real world of clinical practice.

Intracellular pathways of antipsychotic combined therapies: implication for psychiatric disorders treatment

Dysfunctions in the interplay among multiple neurotransmitter systems have been implicated in the wide range of behavioral, emotional and cognitive symptoms displayed by major psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression. The complex clinical presentation of these pathologies often needs the use of multiple pharmacological treatments, in particular (1) when monotherapy provides insufficient improvement of the core symptoms; (2) when there are concurrent additional symptoms requiring more than one class of medication and (3) in order to improve tolerability, by using two compounds below their individual dose thresholds to limit side effects. To date, the choice of drug combinations is based on empirical paradigm guided by clinical response. Nonetheless, several preclinical studies have demonstrated that drugs commonly used to treat psychiatric disorders may impact common intracellular target molecules (e.g. Akt/GSK-3 pathway, MAP kinases pathway, postsynaptic density proteins). These findings support the hypothesis that convergence at crucial steps of transductional pathways could be responsible for synergistic effects obtained in clinical practice by the co-administration of those apparently heterogeneous pharmacological compounds. Here we review the most recent evidence on the molecular crossroads in antipsychotic combined therapies with antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines, as well as with antipsychotics. We first discuss clinical clues and efficacy of such combinations. Then we focus on the pharmacodynamics and on the intracellular pathways underpinning the synergistic, or concurrent, effects of each therapeutic add-on strategy, as well as we also critically appraise how pharmacological research may provide new insights on the putative molecular mechanisms underlying major psychiatric disorders.

Medical needs in the treatment of psychotic disorders

Schizophrenia and psychotic disorders represent psychiatric disease patterns characterized by remarkable impairment arising from alterations in cognition, perception, and mood. Although these severe illnesses have been known for more than 100 years, psychopharmacological treatment of their characteristically broad spectrum of symptoms as well as patients' quality of life, compliance, and time to relapse still remain a challenge in everyday clinical practice. In the following, we will provide a brief synopsis of first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) followed by a detailed description of current second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) along with their effects and side effects to evaluate unmet needs in the treatment of schizophrenia and psychotic disorders.Overall, drug profiles differ concerning their efficacy, associated side effects, cost, and mechanism of action. Thus, a shared decision-making process taking all these factors into account is necessary to develop an effective treatment based on currently approved compounds. To date, however, the spectrum of options is limited and only serves a limited proportion of patients. In addition, certain symptoms do not respond well to currently available strategies or respond only at the price of considerable side effects leading to reduced compliance and adherence in a substantial number of cases.Unmet needs in the field of antipsychotic treatment are found in a wide range of areas starting from efficacy, safety and tolerability, compliance and adherence, and continuing to stage-dependent and more personalized approaches.

Clozapine resistance: augmentation strategies

BACKGROUND

Clozapine (CLZ) is not effective in more than 50% of treatment-resistant schizophrenic patients. In these cases, several pharmacological strategies are used in clinical practice, with different levels of evidence for both safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

In the present paper we critically reviewed literature data regarding the efficacy and safety of adjunctive agents in CLZ-resistant schizophrenics. The following classes of agents were considered: 1) antipsychotics, 2) antidepressants, 3) mood stabilizers, 4) other agents (e.g. fatty acid supplement and glutamatergic agents), 5) electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). For lamotrigine and risperidone sufficient data were available to perform a meta-analysis.

METHODS

A Medline literature search covering a 20-year period was performed. For the meta-analysis, data were entered and analyzed with the Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager Software (RevMan version 5).

RESULTS

62 pertinent studies were identified, including 1556 schizophrenic or schizoaffective patients. Among treatments investigated, there is evidence for CLZ augmentation with 1) amisulpride and aripiprazole, 2) mirtazapine and 3) ethyl eicosapentaenoic acid (E-EPA). Although promising, ECT augmentation needs further validation. The meta-analyses did not support either the use of risperidone or lamotrigine as CLZ adjunct.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there is scarce evidence of efficacy and safety as regards adjunctive strategies for CLZ-resistant patients. However, several limitations do not allow to draw any definitive conclusion; among these we underline the small sample size of clinical trials, the variable definitions of CLZ resistance, the heterogeneity of outcome measures and methodological designs.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia: benefits and risks

Antipsychotic polypharmacy refers to the co-prescription of more than one antipsychotic drug for an individual patient. Surveys of prescribing in psychiatric services internationally have identified the relatively frequent and consistent use of combined antipsychotics, usually for people with established schizophrenia, with a prevalence of up to 50% in some clinical settings. A common reason for prescribing more than one antipsychotic is to gain a greater or more rapid therapeutic response than has been achieved with antipsychotic monotherapy. However, the evidence on the risks and benefits for such a strategy is equivocal, and not generally considered adequate to warrant a recommendation for its use in routine clinical practice in psychiatry. Combined antipsychotics are a major contributor to high-dose prescribing, associated with an increased adverse effect burden, and of limited value in helping to establish the optimum maintenance regimen for a patient. The relatively widespread use of antipsychotic polypharmacy identified in cross-sectional surveys reflects not only the addition of a second antipsychotic to boost therapeutic response, but also the use of as-required antipsychotic medication (mainly to treat disturbed behaviour), gradual cross-titration while switching from one antipsychotic to another, and augmentation of clozapine with a second antipsychotic where the illness has failed to respond adequately to an optimized trial of clozapine. This review addresses the clinical trial data and other evidence for each of these pharmacological approaches. Also reviewed are examples of systematic, practice-based interventions designed to reduce the prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, most of which have met with only modest success. Guidelines generally agree that if combined antipsychotics are prescribed to treat refractory psychotic illness, this should be after other, evidence-based, pharmacological treatments such as clozapine have been exhausted. Further, their prescription for each patient should be in the context of an individual trial, with monitoring of the clinical response and adverse effects, and appropriate physical health monitoring.

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

These guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology address the scope and targets of pharmacological treatment for schizophrenia. A consensus meeting, involving experts in schizophrenia and its treatment, reviewed key areas and considered the strength of evidence and clinical implications. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from the participants and interested parties, and cover the pharmacological management and treatment of schizophrenia across the various stages of the illness, including first-episode, relapse prevention, and illness that has proved refractory to standard treatment. The practice recommendations presented are based on the available evidence to date, and seek to clarify which interventions are of proven benefit. It is hoped that the recommendations will help to inform clinical decision making for practitioners, and perhaps also serve as a source of information for patients and carers. They are accompanied by a more detailed qualitative review of the available evidence. The strength of supporting evidence for each recommendation is rated.

Nervous system effects of antituberculosis therapy

Nervous system toxicity with current antituberculosis pharmacotherapy is relatively uncommon, although the frequency of the usage of antituberculosis therapy requires that physicians be aware of such toxicity. Antituberculosis therapy manifests both central and peripheral nervous system effects, which may compromise patient compliance. Among the traditional forms of first-line antituberculosis therapy, isoniazid is most often associated with nervous system effects, most prominently peripheral neuropathy, psychosis and seizures. Adverse events are reported with other antituberculosis therapies, the most prominent being optic neuropathy with ethambutol and ototoxicity and neuromuscular blockade with aminoglycosides. The second-line agent with the most adverse effects is cycloserine, with psychosis and seizures, the psychosis in particular limiting its usage. Fluoroquinolones are rare causes of seizures and delirium. Newer forms of therapy are under development, but to date no significant neurotoxicity is documented with these agents. Future needs include the development of surveillance mechanisms to increase recognition of nervous system toxicities. It is also hoped that the development of new pharmacogenomic assays will help with the identification of patients at risk for these toxicities.

The combined use of risperidone long-acting injection and clozapine in patients with schizophrenia non-adherent to clozapine: a case series

Poor adherence to clozapine treatment represents an important problem in clinical practice because additional useful treatment options are unavailable. Although switching to risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI) has been recommended for those with compliance problems, this medication has been found to be less suitable for patients who previously received clozapine. Based on the suggested beneficial effects of RLAI, such as higher rates of treatment continuation and patient satisfaction, and the possible effectiveness of oral risperidone augmentation, it seems worthwhile to try RLAI augmentation for clozapine non-adherence. In this article, we present the cases of four patients with schizophrenia undergoing combined treatment with RLAI and clozapine for more than one year after multiple relapses related to clozapine non-adherence. Durations and frequencies of hospitalizations markedly declined after RLAI augmentation. Indeed, three patients receiving RLAI and clozapine for 1.2-3.5 years were never hospitalized during this period. The lengths of hospitalizations before and after augmenting with RLAI were 54.7 +/- 33.1 and 4.2 +/- 4.2 days/year, respectively. Participants also showed great improvements in social skills. These findings suggest the possible beneficial effects of RLAI augmentation in cases of clozapine nonadherence. However, controlled clinical trials are necessary to confirm whether RLAI augmentation represents a useful treatment option for patients who have not adhered to clozapine treatment.

Sulpiride augmentation for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Sulpiride may be used in combination with other antipsychotic drugs in the hope of augmenting effectiveness - especially for those whose schizophrenia has proved resistant to treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of sulpiride augmentation versus monotherapy for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (July 2009) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised clinical trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on a fixed-effect model. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) again based on a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three short-term and one long-term trial (total N=221). All participants had schizophrenia that was either treatment-resistant or with prominent negative symptoms. All studies compared sulpiride plus clozapine with clozapine (+/- placebo), were small and at considerable risk of bias.Short-term data of 'no clinically significant response' in global state tended to favour sulpiride augmentation of clozapine compared with clozapine alone (n=193, 3 RCTs, RR 0.58 CI 0.3 to 1.09).People allocated to sulpiride plus clozapine had more movement disorders (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 48.24 CI 3.05 to 762.56) and an increase in serum prolactin (skewed data, 1 RCT), but less incidence of hypersalivation (n=162, 3 RCTs, RR 0.49 CI 0.29 to 0.83) and less weight gain (n=64, 1 RCT, RR 0.30 CI 0.09 to 0.99). The augmentation of clozapine by sulpiride also caused less appetite loss (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 0.09 CI 0.01 to 0.70, NNT 4 CI 4 to 12, Z=2.31, P=0.02) and less abdominal distension (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 0.10 CI 0.01 to 0.78, NNT 5 CI 4 to 19, Z=2.20, P=0.03).Long-term data showed no significant difference in global state (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 0.67 CI 0.42 to 1.08) and relapse (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 0.85 CI 0.5 to 1.3).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Sulpiride plus clozapine is probably more effective than clozapine alone in producing clinical improvement in some people whose illness has been resistant to other antipsychotic drugs including clozapine. However, much more robust data are needed.

Clozapine combined with different antipsychotic drugs for treatment resistant schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Although clozapine has been shown to be the treatment of choice in people with schizophrenia that are resistant to treatment, one third to two thirds of people still have persistent positive symptoms despite clozapine monotherapy of adequate dosage and duration. The need to provide effective therapeutic interventions to patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine is the most common reason for simultaneously prescribing a second antipsychotic drug in combination with clozapine.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of various clozapine combination strategies with antipsychotics in people with treatment resistant schizophrenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (March 2008) and MEDLINE (up to November 2008). We checked reference lists of all identified randomised controlled trials and requested pharmaceutical companies marketing investigational products to provide relevant published and unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials recruiting people of both sexes, aged 18 years or more, with a diagnosis of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (or related disorders) and comparing clozapine plus another antipsychotic drug with clozapine plus a different antipsychotic drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and resolved disagreement by discussion with third member of the team. When insufficient data were provided, we contacted the study authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Three small (range of number of participants 28 to 60) randomised controlled trials were included in the review. Even though results from individual studies did not find that one combination strategy is better than the others, the methodological quality of included studies was too low to allow authors to use the collected data to answer the research question correctly.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In this review we considered the risk of bias too high because of the poor quality of the retrieved information (small sample size, heterogeneity of comparisons, flaws in the design, conduct and analysis). Although clinical guidelines recommend a second antipsychotic in addition to clozapine in partially responsive patients with schizophrenia, the present systematic review was not able to show if any particular combination strategy was superior to the others. New, properly conducted, randomised controlled trials independent from the pharmaceutical industry need to recruit many more patients to give a reliable estimate of effect or of no effect of antipsychotics as combination treatment with clozapine in patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine monotherapy.

Rationale and design of an independent randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of aripiprazole or haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

One third to two thirds of people with schizophrenia have persistent psychotic symptoms despite clozapine treatment. Under real-world circumstances, the need to provide effective therapeutic interventions to patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine has been cited as the most common reason for simultaneously prescribing a second antipsychotic drug in combination treatment strategies. In a clinical area where the pressing need of providing therapeutic answers has progressively increased the occurrence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, despite the lack of robust evidence of its efficacy, we sought to implement a pre-planned protocol where two alternative therapeutic answers are systematically provided and evaluated within the context of a pragmatic, multicentre, independent randomised study.

METHODS/DESIGN

The principal clinical question to be answered by the present project is the relative efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with clozapine plus aripiprazole compared with combination treatment with clozapine plus haloperidol in patients with an incomplete response to treatment with clozapine over an appropriate period of time. This project is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial that follow patients over a period of 12 months. Withdrawal from allocated treatment within 3 months is the primary outcome.

DISCUSSION

The implementation of the protocol presented here shows that it is possible to create a network of community psychiatric services that accept the idea of using their everyday clinical practice to produce randomised knowledge. The employed pragmatic attitude allowed to randomly allocate more than 100 individuals, which means that this study is the largest antipsychotic combination trial conducted so far in Western countries. We expect that the current project, by generating evidence on whether it is clinically useful to combine clozapine with aripiprazole rather than with haloperidol, provides physicians with a solid evidence base to be directly applied in the routine care of patients with schizophrenia.

Combined antipsychotic treatment involving clozapine and aripiprazole

Treatment resistance is considered a challenging problem of antipsychotic pharmacotherapy. In such cases, combination approaches are commonly used, for instance the add-on of aripiprazole to clozapine. This review aims at giving an overview of the present knowledge on this strategy. We performed a keyword-based screening of databases (including November 2007) and evaluated the data in a systematic manner. The courses of 94 patients were reported in 11 publications. At a mean dosage of 20.5 mg/day, aripiprazole achieved clinical improvement of psychotic symptoms and facilitated a dose reduction of clozapine from 476.7 to 425.1 mg/day. In parallel, clozapine serum levels decreased from 611 to 523 ng/ml. No pharmacokinetic interactions were reported, and clozapine-induced side effects ameliorated. However, single cases of extrapyramidal side effects occurred. The combination of clozapine and aripiprazole follows a neurobiological rationale and appears to be effective and tolerable. The results of placebo-controlled trials might allow further insight into the benefits and risks of this strategy.

Factors affecting outcome in schizophrenia and their relevance for psychopharmacological treatment

A major focus of current treatment research in schizophrenia is the determinants of long-term outcome, including functional outcome and general medical well being, rather than just specific domains of psychopathology such as positive and negative symptoms, mood symptoms, and cognitive impairment. This focus does not negate the importance of the latter issues but sees them as factors contributing to long-term outcome to variable extents. A long-term treatment focus facilitates a more clinically relevant assessment of benefits versus risks of available treatments. For instance, atypical antipsychotic drugs as a group have clear advantages for several important domains of efficacy that may influence long-term outcome, but are also more expensive over the long term. Use of some agents may also result in deleterious physical health consequences as well as large additional costs over the long term owing to metabolic adverse effects. The present paper focuses on several key issues in schizophrenia which are important determinants of long-term outcome in schizophrenia, or influence choice of antipsychotic drugs, or both, including: (i) duration of untreated psychosis; (ii) impact of relapse on long-term outcome; (iii) limited efficacy for specific domains of psychopathology of current treatments; (iv) mortality owing to suicide; and (v) mortality owing to other causes (e.g. cardiovascular disease).

Is clozapine-aripiprazole combination a useful regime in the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia?

Around 40-70% patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia fail to respond to clozapine. Though combining antipsychotics is commonly practised with non-responders, there is little evidence for its use.We carried out a retrospective review of case notes of patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia on clozapine-aripiprazole combination at our clozapine clinic. We report changes in psychotic symptoms, social function, weight, total cholesterol, serum glucose, HDL, CGI and GAF score pre- and post-aripiprazole augmentation. Clozapine-aripiprazole combination was associated with 22% reduction of clozapine dose. Eighteen out of 24 (75%) lost a mean weight of 5.05 kg. There was improvement in positive and negative symptoms, social functions, weight loss and a moderate increase in HDL. Our findings suggest that clozapine-aripiprazole is a safe and tolerable combination; however, control trials are needed to validate our findings.

Augmentation with a second antipsychotic in patients with schizophrenia who partially respond to clozapine: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of clozapine augmentation with another antipsychotic drug in patient with schizophrenia who partially respond to clozapine and compare the results with the findings of relevant open studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify eligible RCTs. All baseline, posttreatment, and change scores in these trials were included in the meta-analysis. For change in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale/Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total scores, the effect size was calculated, and for the proportion of patients with a reduction in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale/Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores of 20% or more, the relative risk was calculated.

RESULTS

There was a total of 166 participants in the 4 eligible RCTs. Pooling effect sizes across these studies revealed clinically important heterogeneity (I = 63.5%). Analyzing by duration accounted for the heterogeneity (I = 0%), whereas analyzing by drug did not (I = 57.5%). The 2 RCTs lasting 10 weeks or more gave an odds ratio of response to treatment of 4.41 (95% confidence interval, 1.38 to 14.07). In 8 open studies identified, the same pattern of response was seen. The main treatment-emergent side effects reported were extrapyramidal side effects and raised serum prolactin.

CONCLUSIONS

Augmentation of clozapine with another antipsychotic drug in patients with schizophrenic illness that has partially responded to clozapine is worthy of an individual clinical trial. This trial may need to be longer than the 4 to 6 weeks usually recommended for acute antipsychotic monotherapy.

Somatic augmentation strategies in clozapine resistance--what facts?

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy without evidence-based support is sometimes needed for patients treated with 40% to 70% clozapine who are clozapine nonresponders. Several somatic augmentation strategies are proposed in the scientific literature, with different levels of evidence for safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the present study is to review the available literature on the efficacy and safety of clozapine augmentation with somatic agents other than antipsychotics. The following classes of agents are considered: (1) mood stabilizers, (2) antidepressants, (3) electroconvulsive therapy and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, (4) glutamatergic agents, (5)fatty acids supplements, and (6) benzodiazepines.

RESULTS

Case controls and small-size clinical trials largely dominate the literature, limiting the power to draw conclusions concerning safety issues and the meaning of negative studies. Moreover, variable definitions of clozapine resistance, heterogeneous outcome measures, and short duration of treatment trials are additional limitations.

CONCLUSION

Generally, adjunctive strategies for clozapine-resistant patients remain based on scarce evidence of efficacy and significant safety concerns. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, fatty acids supplements, and mirtazapine showed good tolerability and some efficacy, but the results need replication.