Clotiapine compared with chlorpromazine in chronic schizophrenia

1,5-Benzoxazepines as a unique and potent scaffold for activity drugs: A review

Benzoxazepines constitute a huge number of organic compounds widely described in the literature. Many of them are distinguished by their biological properties. Among them, our attention was drawn to 1,5-benzoxazepine derivatives due to their interesting pharmacological properties. As is reported in the literature, these compounds are not only good building blocks in organic synthesis but also have interesting biological and pharmacological properties. This article is the first review publication to describe the synthesis methods and unique properties of 1,5-benzoxazepines. Literature reports widely describe the biological properties of 1,5-benzoxazepine, like anticancer, antibacterial, or antifungal activities. 1,5-Benzoxazepine derivatives can also interact with G-protein-coupled receptors and could be incorporated into new potential drugs, among others, in treating neuronal disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease.

Chlorpromazine versus clotiapine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Development and Validation of a GC-MS Method for the Detection and Quantification of Clotiapine in Blood and Urine Specimens and Application to a Postmortem Case

Introduction. Clotiapine is an atypical antipsychotic of the dibenzothiazepine class introduced in a few European countries since 1970, efficient in treatment-resistant schizophrenic patients. There is little published data on the therapeutic and toxic concentrations of this drug. Aims. The aim of the present study is the development and validation of a method that allows the detection and quantification of clotiapine in blood and urine specimens by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Methods. Validation was performed working on spiked postmortem blood and urine samples. Samples were extracted with liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) technique at pH 8.5 with n-hexane/dichloromethane (85/15 v/v) and analysis was followed by GC-MS. Methadone-d9 was used as internal standard. Results. The limit of detection (LOD) was 1.2 and 1.3 ng/mL for urine and blood, respectively, while the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) was 3.9 and 4.3 ng/mL, respectively. Linearity, precision, selectivity, accuracy, and recovery were also determined. The method was applied to a postmortem case. The blood and urine clotiapine concentrations were 1.32 and 0.49 μg/mL, respectively. Conclusions. A reliable GC-MS method for the detection and quantification of clotiapine in blood and urine samples has been developed and fully validated and then applied to a postmortem case.

Chlorpromazine versus every other antipsychotic for schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis challenging the dogma of equal efficacy of antipsychotic drugs

It is one of the major psychiatric dogmas that the efficacy of all antipsychotic drugs is same. This statement originated from old, narrative reviews on first-generation antipsychotics, but this old literature has never been meta-analysed. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on the efficacy of chlorpromazine versus any other antipsychotic in the treatment of schizophrenia. If the benchmark drug chlorpromazine were significantly more or less effective than other antipsychotics, the notion of equal efficacy would have to be rejected. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group׳s specialized register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and reference lists of relevant articles. The primary outcome was response to treatment. We also analyzed mean values of schizophrenia rating scales at endpoint and drop-out rates. 128, mostly small, RCTs with 10667 participants were included. Chlorpromazine was compared with 43 other antipsychotics and was more efficacious than four (butaperazine, mepazine, oxypertine and reserpine) and less efficacious than other four antipsychotics (clomacran, clozapine, olanzapine and zotepine) in the primary outcome. There were no statistically significant efficacy differences between chlorpromazine and the remaining 28 antipsychotics. The most important finding was that, due to low numbers of participants (median 50, range 8-692), most comparisons were underpowered. Thus we infer that the old antipsychotic drug literature was inconclusive and the claim for equal efficacy of antipsychotics was never evidence-based. Recent meta-analyses on second-generation antipsychotics were in a better position to address this question and small, but consistent differences between drugs were found.

Simultaneous analysis of classical neuroleptics, atypical antipsychotics and their metabolites in human plasma

A high-performance liquid chromatographic method has been developed for the simultaneous determination of classical neuroleptics (chlorpromazine, haloperidol, loxapine and clotiapine), atypical antipsychotics (clozapine, quetiapine and risperidone) and their active metabolites (N-desmethylclozapine, clozapine N-oxide and 9-hydroxyrisperidone) in human plasma. Separation was obtained by using a C8 reversed-phase column and a mobile phase composed of 70% aqueous phosphate buffer containing triethylamine at pH 3.0 and 30% acetonitrile. The UV detector was set at 238 nm and amitriptyline was used as the internal standard. A careful pre-treatment procedure of plasma samples was developed, using solid-phase extraction with cyanopropyl cartridges, which gives high extraction yields (>or=93%). The limits of quantitation (LOQ) were always lower than 2.6 ng mL-1 and the limits of detection (LOD) were always lower than 0.9 ng mL-1 for all analytes. The method was applied with success to plasma samples from schizophrenic patients undergoing polypharmacy with two or more different antipsychotics. Precision data and accuracy results were satisfactory and no interference from other central nervous system (CNS) drugs was found. Hence the method is suitable for the therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of the analytes in psychotic patients' plasma.

Clotiapine for acute psychotic illnesses

BACKGROUND

Acute psychotic illnesses, especially when associated with agitated or violent behaviour, require urgent pharmacological tranquillisation or sedation. Clotiapine, a dibenzothiazepine neuroleptic, is being used for this purpose in several countries.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effects of clotiapine when compared to other 'standard' or 'non-standard' treatments for acute psychotic illnesses in controlling disturbed behaviour and reducing psychotic symptoms.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We updated previous searches by searching the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (April 2004)

SELECTION CRITERIA

The review included randomised clinical trials comparing clotiapine with any other treatment for people with acute psychotic illnesses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Relevant studies were selected for inclusion, their quality was assessed and data extracted. Data were excluded where more than 50% of participants in any group were lost to follow up. For binary outcomes we calculated a standard estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous outcomes, endpoint data were preferred to change data. Non-skewed data from valid scales were summated using a weighted mean difference (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five relevant trials. None compared clotiapine with placebo, but control drugs were either antipsychotics (chlorpromazine, perphenazine, trifluoperazine and zuclopenthixol acetate) or benzodiazepines (lorazepam). Versus the antipsychotics, the results for 'no important global improvement' did not suggest clotiapine to be superior, or inferior, to chlorpromazine, perphenazine, or trifluoperazine (n = 83, 3 RCTs, RR 0.82 CI 0.22 to 3.05, I-squared 58%). Use of clotiapine when compared with chlorpromazine did change the proportion of people ready for hospital discharge by the end of the study (n = 49, 1 RCT, RR 1.04 95%CI 0.96 to 2.12). Overall, attrition rates were low. No significant difference was found for those allocated to clotiapine compared with people randomised to other antipsychotics (n = 121, RR 2.26 95%CI 0.40 to 13). Weak data suggests that clotiapine may result in less need for antiparkinsonian treatment compared with zuclopenthixol acetate (n = 38, RR 0.43 95%CI 0.02 to 0.98). Compared with lorazepam, clotiapine, when used to control aggressive/violent outbursts for people already treated with haloperidol, did not significantly improve mental state (WMD -3.36 95%CI -8.09 to 1.37). We could not pool much data due to skew or inadequate presentation of results. Economic outcomes and satisfaction with care were not addressed.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence to support the use of clotiapine in preference to other 'standard' or 'non-standard' treatments for management of people with acute psychotic illness. All trials in this review have important methodological problems. We do not wish to discourage clinicians from using clotiapine in the psychiatric emergency, but well-designed, conducted and reported trials are needed to properly determine the efficacy of this drug.