Amisulpride vs. risperidone in the treatment of acute exacerbations of schizophrenia. Amisulpride study group

The effect of second-generation antipsychotics on anxiety/depression in patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Despite the high prevalence of anxiety in schizophrenia, no established guideline exists for the management of these symptoms. We aimed to synthesize evidence on the effect of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) on anxiety in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We systematically searched Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, PubMed, and Cochrane library to identify randomized controlled trials of SGAs that reporting anxiety measures in schizophrenia. The search was limited to English-language articles published before February 2024. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Among 48 eligible studies, 29 (n = 7712) were included in the meta-analyses comparing SGAs to placebo, haloperidol, or another SGAs for their effect on anxiety/depression. SGAs had a small effect on anxiety/depression versus placebo (SMD = -0.28 (95 % CI [-0.34, -0.21], p < .00001, I2 = 47 %, n = 5576)) associated with efficacy for positive (z = 5.679, p < .001) and negative symptoms (z = 4.490, p < .001). Furthermore, SGAs were superior to haloperidol (SMD = -0.44, 95 % CI [-0.75, -0.13], p = .005, n = 1068) with substantial study-level heterogeneity (I2 = 85 %). Excluding one study of quetiapine in first-episode patients (SMD = -3.05, n = 73), SGAs showed a small effect on anxiety/depression versus haloperidol without heterogeneity (SMD = -0.23, 95 % CI [-0.35, -0.12], p = 01; I2 = %0). Risperidone's effect on anxiety/depression was comparable to olanzapine (SMD = -0.02, 95 % CI [-0.24,0.20], p = .87, I2 = 45 %, n = 753) and amisulpride (SMD = 0.27, 95 % CI [-1.08,0.61], p = .13, I2 = 50 %, n = 315).

CONCLUSION

While SGAs showed a small effect on anxiety/depression, the findings are inconclusive due to scarcity of research on comorbid anxiety in schizophrenia, heterogeneity of anxiety symptoms, and the scales used to measure anxiety. Further studies employing specific anxiety scales are required to explore antipsychotics, considering their receptor affinity and augmentation with serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors or benzodiazepines for managing anxiety in schizophrenia.

A pilot study of the safety and efficacy of amisulpride and risperidone in elderly psychotic patients

Objective

The primary objective of this randomised, active–controlled, parallel group, double-blind study was to evaluate the tolerability of treatment with either amisulpride or risperidone in elderly patients with schizophrenia aged over 65 years; evaluation of efficacy was a secondary objective.

Methods

The study included patients of either sex aged 65 years or older fulfilling DSM IV-diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders and who presented psychotic symptoms severe enough to require antipsychotic medication. Subjects were randomly allocated to a flexible dose of either amisulpride (100–400 mg/day) or risperidone (1–4 mg/day) for six weeks following a three- to six-day placebo wash-out period. Safety assessment involved adverse event reporting, physical examination, blood pressure, heart rate and ECG monitoring, and laboratory tests. Extrapyramidal symptoms were evaluated with the Simpson–Angus Scale, Barnes Akathisia Scale and the AIMS. Efficacy parameters were changes in score on the PANSS, BPRS, CDS and MMSE scores.

Results

Thirty-eight patients were randomised, 25 to amisulpride and 13 to risperidone. A total of 26 adverse events were experienced by 10 patients in the amisulpride group and five patients in the risperidone group. One patient in each group discontinued the study due to the emergence of a movement disorder. Changes in scores on the three measures of extrapyramidal symptoms were similar in the two groups. The PANSS total score decreased by 27.8% in the amisulpride group and by 29% in the risperidone group between inclusion and study end.

Conclusion

Amisulpride and risperidone are generally well tolerated in elderly patients with schizophrenia. Both drugs appeared to be efficacious in this study population, with no differences in efficacy being observed. However, the sample size was too low to reveal potential inter-group differences. Both these atypical antipsychotics thus appear to be suitable for the treatment of schizophrenia in the elderly.

Antipsychotic agents. Gradually improving treatment from the traditional oral neuroleptics to the first atypical depot

Relapse is one of the key factors in the long-term outcome of schizophrenia. The consequences of relapse are diverse and often unpredictable, and the time to recovery and degree of recovery worsen with each successive relapse. There is now overwhelming evidence that advances in antipsychotic drug treatment have led to significant reductions in the rate of relapse. This review charts the developments that have taken place in antipsychotic therapy from the introduction of depot formulations, through atypical agents, to the development of the first long-acting atypical antipsychotic. Depot formulations of conventional antipsychotics were developed in the 1960s and led to fewer relapses and episodes of hospitalization, compared with oral equivalents. Meta-analysis has confirmed that patients receiving depot antipsychotics experience significantly greater global improvement than those receiving the respective oral agents. Conventional antipsychotics are, however, associated with a range of potentially serious adverse events. The atypical antipsychotics were introduced in the 1990s and have significant advantages over conventional agents with regard to positive and negative symptoms. There is also evidence that atypical agents can reduce the risk of relapse. Importantly, atypical antipsychotics have an improved safety profile compared with older agents, particularly with regard to extrapyramidal symptoms. One disadvantage of atypical agents has been that they are only available in an oral form. The recent development of a long-acting injectable formulation of risperidone means that a new treatment option is available to physicians.

How Many Patients With Schizophrenia Do Not Respond to Antipsychotic Drugs in the Short Term? An Analysis Based on Individual Patient Data From Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

An important clinical question is how many patients with acute schizophrenia do not respond to antipsychotics despite being treated for adequate time and with an effective dose. However, up to date, the exact extent of the phenomenon remains unclear.

METHODS

We calculated the nonresponse and nonremission percentages using individual patient data from 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Six thousand two hundred twenty-one patients were assigned to one antipsychotic (amisulpride, flupenthixol, haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone) at an adequate dose; the response was assessed at 4-6 weeks. As various definitions of nonresponse have been used in the literature, we applied 4 different cut-offs covering the whole range of percent Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)/Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) reduction (≤0%, <25%, <50%, <75%).For symptomatic remission, we used the definition proposed by Andreasen without employing the time criterion.

RESULTS

The overall nonresponse for the cut-off of ≤0% PANSS/BPRS reduction was 19.8% (18.8%-20.8%); for the cut-off of <25% reduction it was 43% (41.7%-44.3%); for the cut-off of <50% reduction it was 66.5% (65.3%-67.8%); and for the cut-off of <75% reduction it was 87% (86%-87.9%). The overall percentage of no symptomatic remission was 66.9% (65.7%-68.1%). Earlier onset of illness, lower baseline severity and the antipsychotic used were significantly associated with higher nonresponse percentages.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonresponse and nonremission percentages were notably high. Nevertheless, the patients in our analysis could represent a negative selection since they came from short-term RCTs and could have been treated before study inclusion; thus, further response may not have been observed. Observational studies on this important question are needed.

Impact of Drug Induced Long QT Syndrome: A Systematic Review

Background

Drug induced long QT syndrome is quite common in daily clinical practice but its impact is unknown.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE databases (until May 2, 2017) were searched to identify studies reporting drug induced long QT syndrome and followed the PRISMA guidelines. The main outcomes measured in these studies were QTc prolongation, ventricular arrhythmias, torsade de pointes (TdP) and death.

Results

Out of 176 non-duplicate reports, 36 studies satisfied inclusion criteria and provided data on patients exposed to drugs that can potentially cause long QT. Totally, 14,756 patients were exposed and 930 patients (6.3%) were found to have QTc prolongation. The number of males was 6,400 and females were 5,723 patients. The mean age of the patients was 43.8 ± 9.36 years. Ventricular arrhythmias were found in 379 patients (2.6%), 26 patients were found to have premature atrial contractions (PACs) and premature ventricular contractions (PVCs). TdP was found in 49 patients (0.33 %), sudden cardiac death (SCD) was found in five patients and 586 patients were found to have all-cause mortality.

Conclusions

Around 6% of patients have risk of QT prolongation when exposed but only 0.3% developed TdP and 2.6% developed ventricular arrhythmias. Risk of developing arrhythmias is higher with concomitant use of multiple QT prolonging drugs.

rs7968606 polymorphism of ANKS1B is associated with improvement in the PANSS general score of schizophrenia caused by amisulpride

A recent genome-wide pharmacogenomics study showed that the rs7968606 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of the ankyrin repeat and sterile alpha motif domain-containing protein 1B (ANKS1B) gene approached the threshold of statistical significance. The aim of this study was to determine the association between the rs7968606 SNP of ANKS1B and the treatment response to amisulpride in schizophrenia patients. In total, 154 participants were enrolled from six university hospitals in Korea. All the subjects were interviewed before and after 6 weeks of amisulpride treatment with the aid of the positive and negative syndrome scale and the clinical global impression-severity scale. Genotyping for the rs7968606 SNP of ANKS1B was performed in 101 subjects. Both the decrease (t = -2.067, p = 0.041) and improvement rate (t = -1.990, p = 0.049) in the positive and negative syndrome scale general score differed significantly between T-allele carriers and noncarriers of this polymorphism after 6 weeks of amisulpride treatment. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first genetic association study of the relationship between the rs7968606 SNP of ANKS1B and the response of schizophrenia patients to treatment with amisulpride. Future larger-scale studies involving more SNPs of ANKS1B will improve the understanding of the pharmacogenetics underlying the treatment responses to amisulpride.

Α Markov model for longitudinal studies with incomplete dichotomous outcomes

Missing outcome data constitute a serious threat to the validity and precision of inferences from randomized controlled trials. In this paper, we propose the use of a multistate Markov model for the analysis of incomplete individual patient data for a dichotomous outcome reported over a period of time. The model accounts for patients dropping out of the study and also for patients relapsing. The time of each observation is accounted for, and the model allows the estimation of time-dependent relative treatment effects. We apply our methods to data from a study comparing the effectiveness of 2 pharmacological treatments for schizophrenia. The model jointly estimates the relative efficacy and the dropout rate and also allows for a wide range of clinically interesting inferences to be made. Assumptions about the missingness mechanism and the unobserved outcomes of patients dropping out can be incorporated into the analysis. The presented method constitutes a viable candidate for analyzing longitudinal, incomplete binary data.

Effectiveness of amisulpride in Chinese patients with predominantly negative symptoms of schizophrenia: a subanalysis of the ESCAPE study

BACKGROUND

Effective management strategies for the negative symptoms of schizophrenia remain an unmet need, and data on the use of antipsychotics in this population are scarce, particularly in Chinese patients. Therefore, we investigated amisulpride for the treatment of Chinese patients with predominantly negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

METHODS

This post hoc subanalysis of the prospective Effectiveness and Safety of Amisulpride in Chinese Patients with Schizophrenia (ESCAPE) study included adult Chinese patients with an International Classification of Diseases-10 diagnosis of schizophrenia and predominantly negative symptoms, who received amisulpride for 8 weeks. Effectiveness outcomes included ≥50% decrease in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative score, and a reduction in PANSS negative symptom score and Clinical Global Impression Severity Scale (CGI-S). The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01795183).

RESULTS

In total, 26 patients were included in the analysis. A ≥50% decrease in PANSS negative score from baseline to week 8 was achieved by 34.6% of patients. From baseline to week 8, the mean PANSS negative symptom score decreased by 45.2% (31.9 to 20.7) and CGI-S decreased 1.9 points (5.2 to 3.3). The mean week 8 dose of amisulpride was lower for patients who achieved a ≥50% decrease in PANSS negative score at week 8 versus those who did not (481.2 vs 704.1 mg/day). The most common treatment-related adverse events included blood prolactin increase (19.2%) and extrapyramidal disorder (19.2%). Weight gain was reported by one patient.

CONCLUSION

Amisulpride effectively reduced PANSS negative symptom score and CGI-S for Chinese patients with predominantly negative symptoms of schizophrenia. No unexpected adverse events were reported.

The effectiveness and safety of amisulpride in Chinese patients with schizophrenia who switch from risperidone or olanzapine: a subgroup analysis of the ESCAPE study

INTRODUCTION

Second-generation antipsychotics show significant interpatient variability in treatment response and side-effect profiles, and the majority of patients with schizophrenia require multiple treatment changes. This subgroup analysis of the ESCAPE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of amisulpride in Chinese patients with schizophrenia who switched from risperidone or olanzapine.

METHODS

ESCAPE was a prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm Phase IV study in which Chinese patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of schizophrenia received amisulpride for 8 weeks. This analysis included 109 patients who switched to amisulpride from risperidone (n=68) or olanzapine (n=41) and 59 treatment-naïve patients for reference. The primary effectiveness outcome was a ≥50% decrease in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total score from Baseline to Week 8. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01795183).

RESULTS

Of the patients who switched from risperidone and olanzapine, 77.9% and 56.1% achieved ≥50% reduction in PANSS Total score from Baseline to Week 8 and 57.4% and 46.3% achieved ≥20% reduction in PANSS score from Baseline to Week 2, respectively; these end points were achieved by 66.1% and 61.0% of treatment-naïve patients, respectively. No unexpected adverse events (AEs) were reported. Of the most common AEs, extrapyramidal side effects occurred in 32.4% and 14.6%, blood prolactin increase in 32.4% and 39.0%, and ≥7% increase in body weight in 4.4% and 12% of patients switching from risperidone and olanzapine, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results of this subgroup analysis suggest that switching to amisulpride from risperidone and olanzapine is effective and generally well tolerated in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

Quality of life and functioning in first-episode psychosis Chinese patients with different antipsychotic medications

AIM

This study compared the quality of life and functioning of 285 first-episode psychosis Chinese patients with different antipsychotic medications in Hong Kong.

METHOD

Under the Jockey Club Early Psychosis project, a total of 285 patients were recruited from all inpatient and outpatient psychiatric units in Hong Kong between 2009 and 2011. In addition to the medication information, patients were assessed with the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser (UKU), Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS), the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), the Role Functioning Scale, and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 12-Item Health Survey (SF-12) after stabilization of mental condition. Differences between individual antipsychotic medications were compared using anova and multinomial regression model.

RESULTS

The results demonstrated significant differences between different antipsychotic medications in the mean of UKU neurological subscore, BARS total score, SOFAS score and SF-12 Mental Component Summary (MCS) score. Patients with haloperidol had higher mean UKU neurological subscore than patients with olanzapine or amisulpride. Risperidone was associated with higher mean BARS total score than olanzapine, amisulpride or sulpiride. Higher mean MCS was found in patients with amisulpride than patients with risperidone.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that antipsychotics have differential associations with the quality of life and functioning in patients with first-episode psychosis. Future prospective study is warranted to investigate if patients with first-episode psychosis will benefit specific type of antipsychotics more than the others.

WITHDRAWN: Risperidone versus other atypical antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Risperidone is one of a number of 'atypical antipsychotics' which are currently being marketed for the treatment of those with schizophrenia, largely on the basis of claims of improved tolerability and effectiveness compared to much cheaper conventional antipsychotics. The efficacy of risperidone has already been compared to conventional drugs, but it remains unclear how risperidone compares with other atypical antipsychotic drugs such as clozapine.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of risperidone compared with other atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1980-1999), The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2000), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (January 1999), EMBASE (1980-1999), MEDLINE (1966-1999), LILACS (1982-1999), PSYNDEX (1977-1999) and PsycLIT (1974-1999) were undertaken. In addition, pharmaceutical databases on the Dialog Corporation Datastar and Dialog services were searched. References of all identified studies were searched for further trials. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled clinical trials that compared risperidone to other atypical antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses were included by independent assessment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were independently extracted. For homogeneous dichotomous data the risk ratio (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, standardised and weighted mean differences were calculated (SMD, WMD). All data were inspected for heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies were obtained, comparing risperidone with clozapine (five studies - largely amongst treatment resistant patients); olanzapine (three studies); and amisulpiride (one study). The research was beset by problems of high attrition rates and short term follow up.Clozapine does seem equally acceptable to risperidone in the short term (leaving the study early, n=466, RR 1.00 CI 0.73-1.37). For most other outcomes wide confidence intervals were obtained, which meant that it was impossible to judge whether the two compounds were equally effective, or whether one was in fact superior to the other.Olanzapine and risperidone seem broadly similar according to numbers of patients responding to treatment (40% reduction in PANSS scores: n=339, RR 1.14, CI 0.99-1.32). Olanzapine caused fewer people to leave the study early (n=404, RR 1.31 CI 1.06-1.60; NNT 8 CI 4-32) and fewer extrapyramidal side effects (n=339, RR 1.67 CI 1.14-2.46; NNH 8 CI 5-33), although comparative doses of risperidone were higher than those recommended in practice.In one single study (n=228) amisulpiride seemed broadly similar to risperidone in most respects.There were no useful data presented relating to service use and costs. Very few data relating to quality of life were presented.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The equivalence of clozapine and risperidone for treatment resistant schizophrenia cannot yet be assumed and there seems to be little to chose between risperidone and both olanzapine and amisulpiride. The research is limited in many respects, and longer term studies measuring clinically important outcomes, including service use and quality of life are needed to judge the comparative value of the various atypical drugs.

Do patients with paranoid and disorganized schizophrenia respond differently to antipsychotic drugs?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the differential response to amisulpride in patients with paranoid versus disorganized schizophrenia.

METHOD

We reanalyzed the original data from five different randomized drug trials comparing Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores in a database containing 427 paranoid and 296 disorganized patients with schizophrenia.

RESULTS

Both the disorganized and the paranoid group showed a substantial improvement of the BPRS total score within the first 4 weeks. In the paranoid group, mean (±SD) BPRS reduction was 16.9 (±14.6) (t = 24.06, df = 426, P < 0.001) and in the disorganized group 17.0 (±15.9) (t = 18.49, df = 295, P < 0.001). An analysis of covariance (ancova) controlling for BPRS at baseline and the influence of different trial protocols showed significant differences between diagnostic groups (F = 13.47, df = 1, P < 0.001), Cohen's D 0.31 (CI = 0.16-0.46). Paranoid patients improved by 4.8 BPRS points more than disorganized patients (adjusted means 18.90 (CI = 17.33-20.37) for the paranoid and 14.1 (CI = 12.04 - 16.11) for the disorganized group.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that amisulpride is effective in disorganized as well as in paranoid schizophrenia, but that symptom reduction in the disorganized subtype is less pronounced.

Antipsychotic drugs: atypical advantages and typical disadvantages

Atypical antipsychotic drugs are recommended for the first line treatment of all patients with schizophrenia. This is because it has been demonstrated that atypical antipsychotic drugs are more effective across a broader range of symptoms of schizophrenia than typical antipsychotic drugs and because they are dramatically less likely to cause the extrapyramidal and endocrine side effects that greatly impair quality of life for patients and reduce their willingness to adhere to maintenance treatment. Atypical antipsychotic drugs are not perfect but they are the most effective and the safest treatment for schizophrenia presently available. The atypical antipsychotic drugs currently marketed in Ireland for the first line treatment of schizophrenia include amisulpride, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. These agents differ somewhat in chemical class, indications, daily dose range, need for titration, daily dosing regimen and available formulations (see Table 1). Clozapine is marketed for patients unresponsive to, or intolerant of, other antipsychotic drugs and must thus be regarded as a second line treatment for schizophrenia. Zotepine is not yet available in Ireland while the marketing of sertindole has been suspended following reports of arrhythmias and sudden cardiac deaths.

Almost all antipsychotics result in weight gain: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Antipsychotics (AP) induce weight gain. However, reviews and meta-analyses generally are restricted to second generation antipsychotics (SGA) and do not stratify for duration of AP use. It is hypothesised that patients gain more weight if duration of AP use is longer.

Method

A meta-analysis was conducted of clinical trials of AP that reported weight change. Outcome measures were body weight change, change in BMI and clinically relevant weight change (7% weight gain or loss). Duration of AP-use was stratified as follows: ≤6 weeks, 6–16 weeks, 16–38 weeks and >38 weeks. Forest plots stratified by AP as well as by duration of use were generated and results were summarised in figures.

Results

307 articles met inclusion criteria. The majority were AP switch studies. Almost all AP showed a degree of weight gain after prolonged use, except for amisulpride, aripiprazole and ziprasidone, for which prolonged exposure resulted in negligible weight change. The level of weight gain per AP varied from discrete to severe. Contrary to expectations, switch of AP did not result in weight loss for amisulpride, aripiprazole or ziprasidone. In AP-naive patients, weight gain was much more pronounced for all AP.

Conclusion

Given prolonged exposure, virtually all AP are associated with weight gain. The rational of switching AP to achieve weight reduction may be overrated. In AP-naive patients, weight gain is more pronounced.

Treatment of acute schizophrenia with paliperidone ER: predictors for treatment response and benzodiazepine use

The Paliperidone ER Treatment in Acute Intervention (PERTAIN) study was designed to explore treatment response, tolerability, and safety of flexible doses of paliperidone ER in patients with schizophrenia admitted for an acute exacerbation. This paper addresses a secondary analysis of PERTAIN data designed to explore predictors for treatment response, flexible dosing, and concomitant benzodiazepine use. This prospective, multicenter, phase 3b, open-label, single-arm, 6-week study used flexible doses of paliperidone ER (3 to 12mg once daily) to treat patients hospitalized for an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia, reflecting more closely daily clinical practice. Predictive models were evaluated for paliperidone ER flexible dosing, treatment response, and concomitant treatment with benzodiazepines as distinct independent variables. For the analysis of explanatory variables, a stepwise logistic regression was used, taking into account patient age, gender, body mass index, diagnosis and duration of schizophrenia, number of prior hospitalizations, psychotic symptoms (PANSS), disease severity (CGI-S), and patient functioning (PSP) at baseline. Early response (defined as response within 2weeks of treatment initiation) was also used as a predictor. Clinical response (defined as ≥30% decrease in PANSS total score and ≥1 point decrease in CGI-S from baseline to endpoint) was predicted by early clinical response (p<0.001) and there was a trend for the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia vs. other types of schizophrenia to predict clinical response (p=0.0525). High response (defined as ≥50% decrease in PANSS total score and ≥2 points decrease in CGI-S from baseline to endpoint) was predicted by early high response, higher baseline CGI-S, or female gender. More severely ill patients with a higher baseline CGI-S were twice likely to be treated concomitantly with a benzodiazepine.

Imputation of response rates from means and standard deviations in schizophrenia

Missing outcome data is a major threat in meta-analytical studies of schizophrenia. Most clinical trials in psychiatry report only continuous outcome measures and express the effect of an intervention as a difference of means. However, these results are difficult to interpret for clinicians. Converting continuous data to binary response rates is one possible solution to the problem. Based on means and standard deviations for a continuous outcome, we examined the performance of an imputation method to define a dichotomous outcome using original individual patients' data from 16 randomized trials (6276 participants) comparing antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia. We concluded that the imputed values re-captured in a reasonable degree the observed values providing a simple and practical alternative methodological choice for imputation of missing binary data in schizophrenia trials; nevertheless, the imputation method tended to introduce biases, especially for extreme risks and large treatment differences.

Current use of atypical antipsychotics

In terms of the phenomenology of schizophrenia, there are four targets for drug treatments: positive symptoms, negative symptoms, affective dysfunction, and cognitive dysfunction. Because of the side-effects of both conventional antipsychotics and the new atypicals, there still is a need to search for better-tolerated antipsychotics. Conventional antipsychotics have two principal limitations: 30-40% of patients have an insufficient response to them, and they have a large variety of adverse effects. Side-effects will reduce patients' compliance with treatment, as well as their immediate quality of life, and may therefore unfavorably affect rehabilitation. Four principal features differentiate atypical from conventional antipsychotics, yet have not been established for all atypicals: fewer extrapyramidal side-effects, greater efficacy in the treatment of negative symptoms, specific pharmacological receptor binding profiles, and greater selective effect on the mesolimbic dopamine neurons than on nigrostriatal neurons. The pharmacological profile of amisulpride is completely different to that of other atypical antipsychotics. It has a high selectivity for D2 and D3 dopamine receptors, and thus would be expected to be devoid of unwanted side-effects associated with action on other neurotransmitter systems. It acts preferentially on the mesocortical and mesolimbic systems. It has an earlier onset of action than haloperidol. Amisulpride is a compound with a dual mode of action. At low doses it blocks presynaptic dopamine autoreceptors, inducing an increased dopaminergic neurotransmission, and at high doses it blocks postsynaptic dopaminergic activity. It is at least as effective as haloperidol, flupenthixol, and risperidone in controlling positive symptoms, as well as having efficacy for negative symptoms. It has less propensity to induce weight gain than do other atypical antipsychotics. For the 60-80% of patients with schizophrenia who require long-term treatment, drug tolerability is crucially important, as it will improve compliance, and therefore reduce relapse rate.

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.

[Response and remission in schizophrenic subjects]

BACKGROUND

This naturalistic study investigates in detail symptom reduction during acute inpatient treatment (response), long-term symptom improvement in the post-acute phase (remission) and the rate of re-hospitalisations.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 183 patients were enrolled. Criteria for response were PANSS total score and syndrome reductions of 20, 30, 40 and 50%. Remission criteria employed were based on recommendations from Andreasen et al.

RESULTS

The average length of stay was 45.6 days (SD 42.7). PANSS total score response rates were found to be 63.9% for the 20% level and were reduced in the following consecutive levels by approximately 15%. Only 10.3% of the patients remitted during a 1-year follow-up period. At least one re-hospitalisation was reported for 43.9% of the subjects.

CONCLUSION

Compared to previous randomised and controlled trials, the rates of response and remission are significantly lower. In daily inpatient care, the chronic course of schizophrenia is far commoner than expected from previous reports.

The acute and long-term effectiveness of amisulpride in patients with schizophrenia: results of a 12-month open-label prospective follow-up study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of amisulpride in acute (up to 8 weeks) and maintenance (week 8 to 12 months) phases of a 12-month course of treatment in a heterogeneous group of patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We conducted a 12-month, open-label clinical trial with flexible doses of amisulpride among 129 Korean patients with schizophrenia. The Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) and several other scales measuring efficacy and tolerability were analyzed during the acute and maintenance phases.

RESULTS

The completion rates were 78.3% by week 8 and 55.8% by month 12. Total PANSS scores and scores on the negative-symptom and general-symptom subscales improved significantly during both acute and maintenance periods, but scores on the positive-symptom subscale improved only during the acute phase. Improvement during both treatment phases was significant in all other scales except for the Drug Attitude Inventory. The negative-symptom and mixed-symptom groups showed significant improvement in the PANSS negative subscale, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and the Global Assessment of Functioning during the maintenance period. Hyperprolactinemia and related events were commonly reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the significant effectiveness and a good safety profile of amisulpride for treating acute and 12-month phases of schizophrenia under natural conditions.

The use of amisulpride in the treatment of acute psychosis

The management of acute episodes in schizophrenia is frequently initiated in the psychiatric emergency department and requires rapid intervention to relieve distress and psychiatric symptoms. Both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions are needed to calm the patient and prevent potential harm to the patient or others. Treatment is a step-by-step process including management of behavioral symptomatology, diagnosis of potential organic causes, and evaluation of potential substance abuse. Better care is delivered if predefined standard operating procedures are adopted systematically. The ultimate goal of treatment is to establish a therapeutic alliance with the patient. Atypical antipsychotics given orally are recommended as a first-line treatment. As the treatment endpoint is calmness rather than sleep, a non-sedative antipsychotic agent is usually preferred. Drug tolerance is a major issue for the patient. Amisulpride is an effective atypical antipsychotic agent in this context. The optimal dose is 800 mg/day, which is effective on positive and negative symptoms and can be given from the first day with a low risk of extrapyramidal symptoms. Since drug-drug interactions are limited, agitation and anxiety may be controlled by short-term adjunctive therapy with benzodiazepines. In conclusion, amisulpride is an appropriate first-line treatment for the management of acute psychosis.

Effects on prolongation of Bazett's corrected QT interval of seven second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: a meta-analysis

The use of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for the treatment of schizophrenia has surged worldwide. Amisulpride, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole and ziprasidone have now been commonly prescribed. Their effects on QT interval differ but evidence remains sparse and mostly inconclusive. Since prolongation of heart-rate corrected QT interval has been implicated as an useful surrogate marker to predict drug-related cardiac mortality and pro-arrhythmic potentials, it is timely and necessary to compare the effects of Bazett's corrected QT interval (QT(Bc)) prolongation for the commonly prescribed SGAs. A meta-analysis was conducted according to suggestions by the Quality of Reporting of Meta-analysis group with literature identified using various databases and augmented with hand-searching to assess the magnitude and risk on QT(Bc) prolongation by these seven SGAs for treatments in adult subjects with schizophrenia. Because of incomplete QT(Bc) data reporting, quetiapine could not be assessed by the meta-analytical approach in this study. Aripiprazole was the only SGA associated with both statistically significant lower risk and mean change in QT(Bc), with sertindole giving a statistically significant worsening effect on mean QT(Bc). Other analyses did not demonstrate any statistically significant pooled effects for the studied SGAs, neither on the magnitude over mean or mean change, nor the risk on QT(Bc) prolongation.

Elaboration on the early-onset hypothesis of antipsychotic drug action: treatment response trajectories

BACKGROUND

To extend the early treatment response literature, this article aims to quantify the extent of heterogeneity and describe the characteristics of treatment response trajectories in schizophrenia.

METHODS

Data were extracted from two double-blind, randomized clinical trials that compared amisulpride with risperidone in schizophrenia (n = 538). Available Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) administrations from baseline to Week 8 were used to assess treatment response. Trajectories were calculated with mixed-mode latent class regression modeling from which groups were derived. These groups were compared on clinical and background characteristics.

RESULTS

At Week 8, five treatment response trajectories were identified, undifferentiated by medication received, and characterized by varied amelioration levels. Three trajectory groups (n = 414, 76.9%) showed a treatment response trend of amelioration. Of these, two trajectory groups had similar dropout rates (22%, 25%), and two did not significantly differ on BPRS % reduction (approximately 55%, approximately 58%). Trajectory Group 2 (n = 44, 8.2%) was characterized by being oldest, a 21.3 BPRS % reduction, the highest BPRS severity scores, the highest dropout rate (61.4%), and 11.8% meeting Andreasen's remission criterion. Among Trajectory Group 4 (n = 80, 14.9%) symptom reduction was considerable during the first 2 weeks and then gradual. This trajectory group was characterized by being youngest, male, suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, the lowest dropout rate (6.3%), average BPRS baseline scores, an 88.9% BPRS reduction, and 96% meeting Andreasen's remission criterion.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, amelioration characterizes early treatment response, such that approximately 77% are moderate responders, approximately 15% are rapid treatment responders, and approximately 8% are poor responders.

Amisulpride versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

In many countries of the industrialised world second generation (atypical) antipsychotics have become first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. The question as to whether, and if so how much, the effects of the various second generation antipsychotics differ is a matter of debate. In this review we examine how the efficacy and tolerability of amisulpride differs from that of other second generation antipsychotics.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of amisulpride compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (April 2007) which is based on regular searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised, at least single-blind, trials comparing oral amisulpride with oral forms of aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine in people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For continuous data we calculated weighted mean differences (MD), for dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random effects model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

The review currently includes ten short to medium term trials with 1549 participants on three comparisons: amisulpride versus olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. The overall attrition rate was considerable (34.7%) with no significant difference between groups. Amisulpride was similarly effective as olanzapine and risperidone and more effective than ziprasidone (leaving the study early due to inefficacy: n=123, 1 RCT, RR 0.21 CI 0.05 to 0.94, NNT 8 CI 5 to 50). Amisulpride induced less weight gain than risperidone (n=585, 3 RCTs, MD -0.99 CI -1.61 to -0.37) or olanzapine (n=671, 3 RCTs, MD -2.11 CI -2.94 to -1.29). Olanzapine was also associated with a higher increase of glucose (n=406, 2 RCTs, MD -7.30 CI -7.62 to -6.99). There was no difference in terms of cardiac effects and extra pyramidal symptoms (EPS) compared with olanzapine (akathisia: n= 587, 2 RCTs, RR 0.66 CI 0.36 to 1.21), compared with risperidone (akathisia: n=586, 3 RCTs, RR 0.80 CI 0.58 to 1.11) and compared with ziprasidone (akathisia: n=123, 1 RCT, RR 0.63, CI 0.11 to 3.67).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is little randomised evidence comparing amisulpride with other second generation antipsychotic drugs. We could only find trials comparing amisulpride with olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. We found amisulpride may be somewhat more effective than ziprasidone, and more tolerable in terms of weight gain and other associated problems than olanzapine and risperidone. These data, however, are based on only ten short to medium term studies and therefore too limited to allow for firm conclusions.

Safety and tolerability of antipsychotics: focus on amisulpride

The introduction of the atypical antipsychotic drugs represents an important advance in the treatment of schizophrenia, because the therapeutic efficacy, tolerability, and safety profiles of these agents seem to be superior to that of the classical neuroleptics. As would be predicted from the pharmacologic profile of a pure D(2)/D(3) receptor blocker, amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic agent, effective for positive and negative symptoms, which can bring about additional improvement in the social functioning and quality of life of patients with schizophrenia. Amisulpride is effective in acute schizophrenia as determined by Clinical Global Impression scores. The major concern regarding the safety of the atypical antipsychotics is related to their propensity to induce weight gain and alter glucose and lipid metabolism. Amisulpride has one of the lowest potentials for weight gain of all the antipsychotic agents, and is associated with clearly lower use of antiparkinsonian medication and with fewer dropouts due to adverse events than conventional antipsychotics. Amisulpride is well tolerated with regard to anxiety and insomnia, and not notably different from placebo. Amisulpride has a pronounced prolactin-elevating effect which appears to be independent of dosage and duration of administration. Hyperprolactinemia rapidly reverses following amisulpride discontinuation. Amisulpride benefits patients with negative symptoms, and is the only antipsychotic to demonstrate efficacy in patients with predominantly negative symptoms. Amisulpride maintains its efficacy when used for medium/long-term treatment, as demonstrated in studies of up to 12 months. In terms of relevance of the effects, superiority is observed for quality of life, social adaptation, and functioning, as measured by the Quality of Life and Functional Status Questionnaire scales. In conclusion, amisulpride is an antipsychotic agent with proven efficacy and good tolerability. Moreover, this drug can help people with schizophrenia to attain social reinsertion.

Improved body weight and metabolic outcomes in overweight or obese psychiatric patients switched to amisulpride from other atypical antipsychotics

Switching to a different second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) with a lower risk of weight gain is recommended for overweight or obese psychiatric patients undergoing SGA treatment. However, there have been no complete reports regarding the long-term metabolic effects of switching to amisulpride. In this open-label 1-year study, we investigated the effects on body weight and other metabolic profiles when psychiatric patients treated with another SGA were switched to amisulpride treatment. Forty-six schizophrenia or schizoaffective inpatients with a body mass index greater than 27 kg/m were enrolled in the switch group. These patients were cross-titrated to amisulpride treatment and followed up for 1 year prospectively. Another 46 inpatients matched with the baseline body mass index of those in the switch group were enrolled as the control group retrospectively. The results showed that the switch group had greater weight loss than the control group (7.80 +/- 6.67 vs 2.60 +/- 6.23 kg, respectively; repeated-measure analysis of variance, P < 0.0005). During the treatment course, the amisulpride-treated patients showed significantly decreased fasting triglyceride, total cholesterol, glucose, and insulin resistance levels; decreased diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate; and a significant increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels after switching to amisulpride (all with a P < 0.05). The prevalence of metabolic syndrome in amisulpride-treated patients also decreased significantly from 65.2% to 30.4% (McNemar test, P < 0.0005). These findings suggest that switching to amisulpride could be an effective treatment of overweight or obese psychiatric patients treated previously with other SGAs.

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

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

Upcoming agents for the treatment of schizophrenia: mechanism of action, efficacy and tolerability

Since the introduction of a group of atypical antipsychotics in the 1990s, there has been a decline in the rate of new antipsychotics being introduced into clinical practice. However, with increasing safety and efficacy concerns over currently available drugs and a dearth of options available for atypical depot formulations, there is a considerable need for the development of new formulations and agents. This review examines the profile of seven antipsychotic drugs currently in the premarketing stage of development and summarizes their mechanism of action, clinical potential and safety.Asenapine is an antipsychotic with activity for multiple receptors and has potential to improve negative and cognitive symptoms of schizophrenia. Bifeprunox is a partial dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-HT(1A) receptor agonist showing a less than convincing efficacy profile, but which may offer safety advantages over available agents by means of a reduced risk of metabolic complications. Iloperidone is a D2 and 5-HT(2A) receptor antagonist requiring further studies to establish its effectiveness. It has a high affinity for alpha(1)-adrenoceptors, which can lead to associated haemodynamic adverse effects. Nemonapride is essentially a typical antipsychotic drug, similar in structure to sulpiride, which has been available for some time in Japan. It has efficacy against positive symptoms and has shown some antidepressant and anxiolytic properties, although efficacy data for it are somewhat limited. Norclozapine (N-desmethylclozapine) is a major metabolite of clozapine formed by its demethylation. Its partial agonist activity at D2 receptors has raised interest in it as an antipsychotic in its own right. In addition, it appears to have muscarinic agonist activity, which is believed to be responsible for the observed positive effects it has on cognition. It was envisaged to be effective as an adjunct to other agents or at high doses in the treatment of refractory schizophrenia, although a recent randomized, controlled study showed that it was no more effective than placebo in patients with schizophrenia experiencing an acute psychotic episode. Olanzapine pamoate depot injection has shown comparable efficacy to oral olanzapine in several studies. However, it has provoked considerable safety concerns by its association with inadvertent intravascular injection events in numerous patients. This accidental intravascular administration of olanzapine pamoate leads to excessive sedation, confusion, dizziness and altered speech. Post-injection observation periods and postmarketing surveillance are planned following the introduction of the depot. Paliperidone palmitate is the palmitate ester of paliperidone, the major metabolite of risperidone, and is formulated as a long-acting injection for intramuscular use. Its pharmacology is comparable to risperidone, having D2 and 5-HT(2A) receptor antagonist activity. Efficacy studies have shown positive results, and because paliperidone has no antagonistic activity at cholinergic receptors, it has low potential for anticholinergic adverse effects, including cognitive dysfunction. However, with higher doses, the frequency of extrapyramidal side effects and orthostatic hypotension have been shown to be greater than with placebo.

Update on the management of symptoms in schizophrenia: focus on amisulpride

Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic drug with a unique receptor pharmacology which is dose dependent. It is a standard treatment in dysthymia as well as in psychosis. Amisulpride is efficacious, effective and well tolerated in positive symptoms of schizophrenia: there is extensive evidence that it treats negative symptoms when given in low doses, although relative lack of EPS and an antidepressant effect may contribute. In first-episode patients amisulpride is an option, although there is little comparative work available. Amisulpride has the best evidence as an effective adjunct to clozapine treatment. Regarding intellectual function, amisulpride appears cognitive sparing but the clinical relevance of this remains obscure. There is evidence that amisulpride can improve social function but again there is little comparative work to demonstrate any particular advantages. Regarding the current conventional versus atypical antipsychotic controversy, amisulpride did better in switching studies and meta-analyses than in the single large pragmatic randomized trial reported to date. It is a versatile drug, and may offer advantages over other atypical antipsychotic drugs in the treatment of negative and depressive symptoms, and tolerability advantages such as the avoidance of weight gain. Essentially it rests with the treating clinician to employ a rational psychopharmacological approach towards the individual patient: there will be few circumstances in which amisulpride will not be a likely contender as a treatment choice.

Practical issues with amisulpride in the management of patients with schizophrenia

Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic with a significantly greater effect size than first-generation, typical antipsychotics, and efficacy at least similar to that of olanzapine and risperidone in large-scale clinical trials in schizophrenia. Amisulpride provides greater improvement in positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, a better long-term outcome than typical antipsychotics, and distinct tolerability advantages over typical antipsychotics, which are reported to cause extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) in 20-50% of patients. In addition, amisulpride is associated with significantly less weight gain than olanzapine and risperidone, does not increase body mass index, and favourably influences lipid profiles. In many patients with schizophrenia, adverse events impair adherence to treatment, and switching from typical or atypical antipsychotic therapy to amisulpride may be clinically appropriate. Observational drug-utilization studies suggest that many physicians switch to amisulpride because of fewer EPS and/or less weight gain and improved patient adherence. Cross-tapering (over 4 weeks), rather than abrupt cessation of pre-switch treatment, is preferred. Amisulpride has a low risk of drug-drug interactions, and, during cross-tapering, patients can remain on concurrent treatments (e.g. anticholinergics and antiparkinsonian agents) until the effective dosage has been reached. An appropriate amisulpride starting dose is 800 mg/day for patients with acute psychotic exacerbations, 400-800 mg/day for patients with predominantly positive symptoms, and 100-300 mg/day for predominantly negative symptoms. Amisulpride may be particularly suitable for clozapine-augmentation therapy in patients with refractory schizophrenia. Indeed, amisulpride is more effective than quetiapine as augmentation therapy in patients partially responsive to clozapine, and several prospective open-label studies and case series have reported promising results for amisulpride/clozapine combination therapy. In three prospective studies, addition of amisulpride 200-800 mg/day to clozapine significantly reduced mean scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total (-33% to -35%), Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity scale (-31%), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total (-22%), and Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (-34%). The proportion of responders (CGI score > or =3 or BPRS improvement >20%) was 71-86%. Retrospective case-series analyses have also reported improved psychopathological state, reduced adverse events, and lower clozapine dosage requirement with use of this combination. The pharmacological and clinical profiles of amisulpride suggest that this agent is a viable clinical option when a change of antipsychotic therapy is required in patients with schizophrenia because of lack of efficacy, adverse events and poor adherence to treatment, or for augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant illness.

Antipsychotic-induced weight gain in chronic and first-episode psychotic disorders: a systematic critical reappraisal

Antipsychotic-induced weight gain is an important issue in the treatment of psychotic illnesses, and affects 80% of individuals being treated with antipsychotic drugs. However, the true dimension of weight gain and many accepted 'facts' in this area remain unclear as most research has been conducted in short-term trials and has included individuals receiving prolonged antipsychotic treatment. This review aims to systematically and critically review the evidence on weight gain induced by the two leading second-generation antipsychotics (olanzapine and risperidone) and the most widely researched first-generation antipsychotic (haloperidol) in patients with chronic and first-episode psychotic disorders. Weight gain was 3- to 4-fold greater in studies that included young patients with limited previous exposure to antipsychotic agents in both short-term studies (7.1-9.2 kg for olanzapine, 4.0-5.6 kg for risperidone and 2.6-3.8 kg for haloperidol vs 1.8-5.4 kg, 1.0-2.3 kg and 0.01-1.4 kg, respectively, in studies that included patients with chronic psychotic disorders) and long-term trials (10.2-15.4 kg for olanzapine, 6.6-8.9 kg for risperidone and 4.0-9.7 kg for haloperidol vs 2.0-6.2 kg, 0.4-3.9 kg and -0.7 to 0.4 kg, respectively). The same disparity was observed regarding the proportion of patients increasing their baseline weight by > or =7% (the cut-off for clinically significant weight gain). Recent studies carried out in young patients with first-episode psychosis (FEP), along with methodological artefacts in studies of chronic populations, suggest that the magnitude of weight gain reported by much of the literature could in fact be an underestimation of the true magnitude of this adverse effect. Although antipsychotics present idiosyncratic patterns of weight gain, they may also generate similar absolute gains.

World Psychiatric Association Pharmacopsychiatry Section statement on comparative effectiveness of antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia

Data from two major government-funded studies of comparative antipsychotic effectiveness in schizophrenia contradict the widely prevalent belief that the newer second-generation medications are vastly superior to the older first-generation drugs. This has caused uncertainty among patients, clinicians and policy-makers about the relative utility of first- and second- generation antipsychotic agents in its treatment. To reduce confusion and provide a contextual understanding of the new data, the World Psychiatry Association Section on Pharmacopsychiatry comprehensively reviewed the literature on the comparative effectiveness of different antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia and developed this update. Utilizing data from the approximately 1,600 randomized controlled trials of antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia, we applied the two indirect and one direct method to comparing the effectiveness of 62 currently-available antipsychotic agents. The subclasses of 51 first-generation and 11 second-generation antipsychotics were both found to be very heterogeneous, with substantial differences in side-effect profiles among members. Second-generation antipsychotic agents were found to be inconsistently more effective than first-generation agents in alleviating negative, cognitive, and depressive symptoms and had a lower liability to cause tardive dyskinesia; these modest benefits were principally driven by the ability of second-generation antipsychotics to provide equivalent improvement in positive symptoms along with a lower risk of causing extrapyramidal side-effects. Clozapine was found to be more efficacious than other agents in treatment-refractory schizophrenia. There were no consistent differences in efficacy among other second-generation antipsychotic agents; if such differences exist, they are likely small in magnitude. Dosing was found to be a key variable in optimizing effectiveness of both first- and second- generation antipsychotic agents. There was enormous individual variability in antipsychotic response and vulnerability to various adverse effects. In contrast to their relatively similar efficacy in treating positive symptoms, there were substantial differences among both first- and second- generation antipsychotic agents with regard to their propensity to cause extrapyramidal, metabolic and other adverse effects; second-generation agents have a lower liability to cause acute extrapyramidal symptoms and tardive dyskinesia along with a tendency to cause greater metabolic side-effects than first-generation agents. Based on these data about the comparative effectiveness of different antipsychotic treatment options, we summarize elements of current best antipsychotic practice for the treatment of schizophrenia and discuss the role of government and the pharmaceutical industry in obtaining and disseminating information which can facilitate best practice.

Atypical antipsychotics for people with both schizophrenia and depression

BACKGROUND

Many people (up to 50%) with schizophrenia also have co-morbid depression. It has been suggested that new atypical antipsychotic drugs are beneficial for people with the two diagnoses.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of atypical antipsychotic drugs on people who have a diagnosis of both schizophrenia and depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia's Group Register (to March 2006). We supplemented this by citation searching and personal contact with authors and relevant pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials of atypical antipsychotic drugs used specifically for the treatment of people with a diagnosis of both schizophrenia and depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

We found 878 citations but were only able to include three studies (five reports). One trial found no significant difference between quetiapine and haloperidol for the outcome of 'less than 50% reduction in PANSS score' (n=180, RR 0.91 CI 0.8 to 1.0). Those allocated sulpiride had significantly lower depression scores compared with people given chlorpromazine (1 RCT, n=36, WMD CPRS -0.70 CI -1.2 to -0.2). Again, however, in the quetiapine versus haloperidol comparison, the continuous scoring did not highlight differences (1 RCT, n=180, WMD PANSS depression change -0.57 CI -1.4 to 0.30). When clozapine was compared with any other antipsychotic drug plus an antidepressant or placebo, clozapine constantly scored better on Hamilton scores (1 RCT, n=29, WMD vs antipsychotic + mianserin -5.53 CI -8.23 to -2.8; 1 RCT, n=32, WMD vs antipsychotic + meclobemide -4.35 CI -6.7 to -2.03; 1 RCT, n=33, WMD vs antipsychotic + placebo -6.35 CI -8.6 to -4.1).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are too few data to guide patients, carers, clinicians or policy makers. Current practice has to be guided by evidence other than that derived from randomised trials and more trials in this important area are indicated.

Effects of amisulpride on the cognitive function of patients with schizophrenia who switched from risperidone

Objectives. The aims of this 13-week study were to examine the efficacy and safety of amisulpride, and effects on cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia after they switched from risperidone. Methods. Twenty-three patients with schizophrenia whose antipsychotic was switched from risperidone to amisulpride were recruited. The efficacy, safety, and cognitive function were assessed. Results. Significant improvements were noted in the PANSS, CGI-S, and MADRS. The prolactin level, but not any of the remaining laboratory variables, increased significantly. The cognitive function improved significantly, particularly in memory subtests. Conclusions. Switching antipsychotic from risperidone to amisulpride in schizophrenia might have significantly improved not only the efficacy, but also various domains of cognitive function. However, hyperprolactinemia existed and was sometimes even worse.

Social functioning as an outcome measure in schizophrenia studies

OBJECTIVE

Deficits in social functioning are a core feature of schizophrenia.

METHOD

A literature search of English language articles published between January 1990 and December 2006 was undertaken to identify: i) scales used most frequently to assess social functioning in schizophrenia; and ii) the most frequently used social functioning scales in randomized, controlled trials of antipsychotics. A further search (without time limits) examined their psychometric properties.

RESULTS

A total of 301 articles employed social functioning scales in the assessment of schizophrenia. These contained 87 potentially relevant measures. Only 14 randomized, controlled studies of antipsychotic agents were identified that examined social functioning. Scales varied greatly in terms of measurement approach, number and types of domains covered and scoring systems. A striking lack of data on psychometric properties was observed.

CONCLUSION

Limited consensus on the definition and measurement of social functioning exists. The Personal and Social Performance Scale is proposed as a useful tool in future research.

On the concept of remission in schizophrenia

RATIONALE

Criteria for remission in schizophrenia have recently been presented. It is unclear how many acutely ill patients meet these criteria and how they compare with previously suggested definitions.

OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

We re-analysed seven anti-psychotic drug trials (n = 1,708) of patients with schizophrenia to find out how many met the new remission criteria and their single components, how many met two previously used remission criteria, and how many met simpler measures of response (at least 50% Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [BPRS] reduction, a Clinical Global Impressions [CGI] improvement score of at least 'much better' or a CGI severity score of 'mild or better').

RESULTS

Thirty-seven percent/41% (last observation carried forward [LOCF]/completer analysis [CO]) of the initially acutely ill patients with positive symptoms met the severity criteria of remission at 4 weeks, and 27%/52% (worst case/CO) met the severity and time criteria at 1 year. Only 13%/21% (LOCF) met the severity criteria at 4 weeks/1 year when an item threshold 'at best very mild symptoms' was applied, and almost no patients were absolutely symptom-free. The psychotic symptoms component was more difficult to achieve than the negative component. The criteria were more stringent than 'at least 50% BPRS reduction' and than 'CGI improvement score of at least much better.' However, the definition 'CGI severity score mild or better' was of a stringency similar to the new remission criteria, which probably explains why fewer patients met previously defined criteria that included this scale.

CONCLUSION

The new remission criteria proved to be an achievable goal for clinical trials. A consensus on the application of their time component is still needed.

Defining 'response' in antipsychotic drug trials: recommendations for the use of scale-derived cutoffs

Scale-derived cutoff points are frequently used to define 'response' in antipsychotic drug trials. This procedure is useful, because responder rates can be understood more intuitively than a difference in means of rating scales. As various definitions of response have been used, we examined original participant data to assess whether the choice of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-based response cutoff had an impact on the results of seven (n=1870) antipsychotic drug trials in schizophrenia. We also analyzed whether the chronicity of the illness has an impact on the question of which cutoff is most sensitive in detecting differences between drugs. The results in terms of p-values and response rate differences varied substantially in dependence on the cutoff chosen. The use of response rate ratios attenuated the variability. In contrast to a widely held belief, low response cutoffs were not more sensitive in detecting differences between drugs than higher cutoffs. In more chronic, less responsive participants, there was a trend for higher cutoffs to be less sensitive in detecting differences between drugs than lower ones. The results of clinical trials depend considerably on the response cutoff chosen. Therefore, the cutoff should never be chosen post hoc, a large range of cutoffs should be presented and the a priori choice of the primary cutoff should be based on clinical relevance. The use of ratios rather than differences attenuates the variability. Cutoffs need to be calculated on the basis of 0-6 rather than on 1-7 scoring systems. We suggest a table presenting responder rates in 25 percent steps covering the whole range up to 100% reduction from baseline, which could be displayed together with recently presented criteria for remission.

Amisulpride versus risperidone treatment for behavioral and psychological symptoms in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type: a randomized, open, prospective study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and tolerability of both amisulpride and risperidone for treating the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in patients with dementia of the Alzheimer type (DAT). Twenty-eight patients with DAT were randomly assigned to treatment with either amisulpride or risperidone for 8 weeks. The effectiveness of the treatments was assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) scale. The Simpson-Angus Rating Scale, the Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale and the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale were used for the assessment of side effects. The NPI and CGI-S scores were significantly decreased over time in both treatment groups without any significant group difference and time by treatment group interaction effect (F=71.85, p<0.0001). There were no serious adverse events in both groups. This study showed that either amisulpride or risperidone would be effective and tolerable for treating patients with DAT. Adequately powered studies with a head-to-head comparison design will be mandatory to draw any definite conclusion.

Management of acutely ill patients in the hospital setting: focus on quetiapine

We have considered published work and clinical experience focusing on the atypical antipsychotic quetiapine in order to form a consensus on the most appropriate treatment strategies for hospitalised patients with acute schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. It is important to consider the specific treatment needs of these patients and these are discussed in the context of current treatment guidelines. We will review the efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics versus conventional antipsychotics and/or benzodiazepines as a first-line treatment, and examine the suitability of oral versus intramuscular formulations in the acute setting. The potentially beneficial properties of specific atypical agents are also considered. Appropriate dosing is particularly important in acutely ill patients as it can help achieve rapid improvement. We will discuss emerging data which show that rapid initiation of quetiapine in patients with acute psychosis or mania is not only as effective as standard initiation, but is also well tolerated. This may be important for treatment in the long term as a positive initial treatment experience can determine patient compliance and treatment adherence. In conclusion, this review recommends that oral atypical antipsychotics should be a first-choice medication for acutely ill cooperative patients in the hospital setting.

Pharmacological treatment of primary negative symptoms in schizophrenia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Optimal treatment of primary negative symptoms is important because their presence is associated with poor outcome.

AIMS

To systematically review all studies dealing with the efficacy of pharmacological agents on primary negative symptoms.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of the relevant literature was undertaken using electronic database, reference lists and personal contact.

RESULTS

There is a lack of standardized research designs. Amisulpride is the most extensively studied drug with respect to efficacy against primary negative symptoms. At low doses it demonstrates a consistent, modest effect compared to placebo, though not to conventional antipsychotics and has yet to be tested against other atypicals. Evidence from multiple studies that used simple statistical analyses and inclusion criteria for patients with primary negative symptoms does not support a direct effect for clozapine. Path-analysis studies support the direct effects of risperidone, olanzapine, sertindole and aripiprazole, however, different statistical analyses of the same risperidone study produced conflicting results and the direct effects of olanzapine were not confirmed in selected patients with primary negative symptoms. There are no studies supporting the use of ziprasidone or quetiapine. The effects of typical antipsychotics on primary negative symptoms are inconclusive and likely to depend on drug dosages. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), mirtazepine and NMDA agonists show early promise but require further study. Novel agents such as selegiline, naltrexone, dehydroepiandrosterone, galantamine, Ginkgo, nitric oxide, L-deprenyl and pergolide show positive effects on general negative symptoms but remain untested against primary negative symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Further studies using standardized selective inclusion criteria and controlling for chronicity are needed. Research guidelines are discussed.

Linking the PANSS, BPRS, and CGI: clinical implications

To understand what given scores of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) mean from a clinical point of view is important for the translation of research results into practice. We therefore (a) compared the absolute change of the BPRS/PANSS with the Clinical Global Impressions Ratings (CGI) -improvement score and the change of the CGI severity score, (b) analyzed whether the severity of illness at baseline had an impact on the latter association, and (c) attempted to replicate previous BPRS findings using a completely different data set based upon the PANSS-derived BPRS. The method used was equipercentile linking of BPRS and CGI ratings from 14 drug trials in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia (n=5970). An absolute reduction of the BPRS/PANSS by approximately 10/15 points corresponded to a CGI change of 'minimally improved' and to a change of the CGI severity score by one severity step. However, the latter associations depended on the severity of symptoms at baseline. Less severely ill patients required less BPRS/PANSS total score reduction to achieve the same CGI-improvement score than more severely ill patients. This effect of initial severity was attenuated using percentage rather than absolute BPRS/PANSS reduction scores. The linking analysis between the absolute BPRS/PANSS reduction and the CGI may have an implication for the interpretation of efficacy differences found in clinical trials, and for sample size estimations. Clinicians seem to base CGI ratings on relative change rather than on absolute change of symptoms.

Amisulpride in the treatment of behavioural disturbances among patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to evaluate the effects of amisulpride on the behavioural and psychiatric symptoms of patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this open-label study, we observed 18 outpatients affected by moderate to severe AD, complicated with agitation and disruptive behaviours. Behavioural, cognitive and motor effects of amisulpride at baseline and after 12 weeks were rated by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), Mini Mental State Examination, Clinical Dementia Rating Scale, activities of daily living, and the motor score of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale.

RESULTS

After treatment with amisulpride (200 mg/day), the patients showed a significant decrease in NPI total scores, particularly for the subitem 'agitation'. Cognitive and motor variables did not worsen significantly over the 12-week period.

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary observation suggests that amisulpride can be useful to control agitation and disruptive behaviours in AD patients without significantly effecting vigilance and motor activity.

Acute weight gain induced by amisulpride monotherapy in a first-episode schizophrenic patient

The introduction of atypical antipsychotics into clinical practice has lead to an increase of adverse metabolic effects in psychotic patients. Amisulpride is a substituted benzamide derivative, and its use is associated with a lower risk of weight gain compared to other atypical antipsychotics. The case of an acute and excessive weight increase in a female first-episode schizophrenic patient who was treated with amisulpride monotherapy is reported. The improvement in psychopathology was remarkable. However, the patient gained 12.9 kg of body weight in the first 2 months of amisulpride administration and a total of 17.3 kg, 6 months after initiation of the treatment. Glucose and insulin levels, as well as a glucose tolerance test, remained normal throughout the observation period.

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.

Risperidone: a review

When the risk of agranulocytosis associated with clozapine, the prototype of the second-generation neuroleptics, became apparent, its prescription was restricted to patients refractory to classical neuroleptics such as chlorpromazine and haloperidol. This stimulated the development of several novel second-generation antipsychotics with a clinical profile similar to that of clozapine. These novel antipsychotics, which include risperidone, olanzapine and others, are characterised by different pharmacological structures, and also to a certain degree by different pharmacological mechanisms. Following the increased research on the novel second-generation antipsychotics, it became apparent that they not only have the advantage of better extrapyramidal tolerability than the classical neuroleptics, but also have a broader efficacy spectrum (i.e., advantages in the treatment of negative and depressive symptoms and cognitive disturbances in the context of schizophrenia). Risperidone was specifically designed by Paul Janssen as a combined 5-HT2A and D2 receptor antagonist, thus following the pharmacological mechanism thought to be responsible for the antipsychotic effects of clozapine. After its advent in the 1990s as the first novel second-generation antipsychotic, risperidone achieved worldwide acceptance. The following review gives an overview of the huge clinical database available for risperidone in the field of schizophrenia.