Immediate effects of chlorpromazine and perphenazine following neuroleptic washout on word association of schizophrenic patients

Perphenazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Perphenazine is an old phenothiazine antipsychotic with a potency similar to haloperidol. It has been used for many years and is popular in the northern European countries and Japan.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the clinical effects and safety of perphenazine for those with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our original search using the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (September 2013), references of all included studies and contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of included studies in order to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials that compared perphenazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses. We excluded trials of depot formulations of perphenazine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently inspected citations and, where possible, abstracts. We ordered papers, inspected and quality assessed them. We extracted data, again working independently. If loss to follow-up was greater than 50% we considered results as 'prone to bias'. For dichotomous data, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean differences (MD), both with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed quality of data using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluationtool) and assessed risk of bias for included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-one studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, with a total of 4662 participants (of which 4522 were receiving the drugs relevant to our comparison) and presented data that could be used for at least one comparison. The trial centres were located in Europe (especially Scandinavia), Japan and Northern America.When comparing perphenazine with placebo, for our primary outcome of clinical response, results favoured perphenazine with significantly more people receiving placebo rated as either 'no better or deterioration' for global state than people receiving perphenazine (1 RCT, n = 61 RR 0.32 CI 0.13 to 0.78, very low quality evidence). More people receiving placebo relapsed, although not a statistically significant number (1 RCT, n = 48, RR 0.14 CI 0.02 to 1.07, very low quality evidence). Death was not reported in the perphenazine versus placebo comparison. Experiences of dystonia were equivocal between groups (1 RCT, n = 48, RR 1.00 CI 0.07 to 15.08, very low quality evidence); other outcomes not reported in this comparison include serious adverse events, economic outcomes, and service use and hospitalisation.For the comparison of perphenazine versus any other antipsychotic drugs, no real differences in effect between the drugs were found. There was no significant difference between groups for those considered 'no better or deterioration' (17 RCTs, n = 1879, RR 1.04 CI 0.91 to 1.17, very low quality evidence). For mental state outcome of 'no effect' of the study drug, there was again no significant difference between groups (4 RCTs, n = 383, RR 1.24 CI 0.61 to 2.52, very low quality evidence). Death was not reported in any of the included studies. There was no significant difference in rates of dystonia with perphenazine versus any other antipsychotic drugs (4 RCTs, n = 416, RR 1.36 CI 0.23 to 8.16, very low quality evidence), nor was there a significant difference between groups for serious adverse events (2 RCTs, n = 1760, RR 0.98 CI 0.68 to 1.41, very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although perphenazine has been used in randomised trials for more than 50 years, incomplete reporting and the variety of comparators used make it impossible to draw clear conclusions. All data for the main outcomes in this review were of very low quality evidence. At best we can say that perphenazine showed similar effects and adverse events as several of the other antipsychotic drugs. Since perphenazine is a relatively inexpensive and frequently used compound, further trials are justified to clarify the properties of this classical antipsychotic drug.

Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, formulated in the 1950s, remains a benchmark treatment for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of chlorpromazine compared with placebo, for the treatment of schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (15 May 2012). We also searched references of all identified studies for further trial citations. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chlorpromazine with placebo for people with schizophrenia and non-affective serious/chronic mental illness irrespective of mode of diagnosis. Primary outcomes of interest were death, violent behaviours, overall improvement, relapse and satisfaction with care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers, re-inspected and quality assessed these. We analysed dichotomous data using risk ratio (RR) and estimated the 95% confidence interval (CI) around this. We excluded continuous data if more than 50% of participants were lost to follow-up. Where continuous data were included, we analysed this data using mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval. We used a fixed-effect model.

MAIN RESULTS

We inspected over 1100 electronic records. The review currently includes 315 excluded studies and 55 included studies. The quality of the evidence is very low. We found chlorpromazine reduced the number of participants experiencing a relapse compared with placebo during six months to two years follow-up (n = 512, 3 RCTs, RR 0.65 CI 0.47 to 0.90), but data were heterogeneous. No difference was found in relapse rates in the short, medium or long term over two years, although data were also heterogeneous. We found chlorpromazine provided a global improvement in a person's symptoms and functioning (n = 1164, 14 RCTs, RR 0.71 CI 0.58 to 0.86). Fewer people allocated to chlorpromazine left trials early ( n = 1831, 27 RCTs, RR 0.64 CI 0.53 to 0.78) compared with placebo. There are many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is clearly sedating (n = 1627, 23 RCTs, RR 2.79 CI 2.25 to 3.45), it increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders (n = 942, 5 RCTs, RR 3.47 CI 1.50 to 8.03) and parkinsonism (n = 1468, 15 RCTs, RR 2.11 CI 1.59 to 2.80). Akathisia did not occur more often in the chlorpromazine group than placebo. Chlorpromazine clearly causes a lowering of blood pressure with accompanying dizziness (n = 1488, 18 RCTs, RR 2.38 CI 1.74 to 3.25) and considerable weight gain (n = 165, 5 RCTs, RR 4.92 CI 2.32 to 10.43).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review confirm much that clinicians and recipients of care already know but aim to provide quantification to support clinical impression. Chlorpromazine's global position as a 'benchmark' treatment for psychoses is not threatened by the findings of this review. Chlorpromazine, in common use for half a century, is a well-established but imperfect treatment. Judicious use of this best available evidence should lead to improved evidence-based decision making by clinicians, carers and patients.

Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, formulated in the 1950s, remains a benchmark treatment for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of chlorpromazine for schizophrenia in comparison with placebo.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We updated previous searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (October 1999), Biological Abstracts (1982-1995), the Cochrane Library (1999, Issue 2), EMBASE (1980-1995), MEDLINE (1966-1995), PsycLIT (1974-1995), and the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (June 2002), by searching The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (January 2007). We searched references of all identified studies for further trial citations. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chlorpromazine with placebo for people with schizophrenia and non-affective serious/chronic mental illness irrespective of mode of diagnosis. Primary outcomes of interest were death, violent behaviours, overall improvement, relapse and satisfaction with care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers, re-inspected and quality assessed these. BT and JR extracted data. CEA and GA independently checked a 10% sample for reliability. We analysed dichotomous data using fixed effects relative risk (RR) and estimated the 95% confidence interval (CI) around this. Where possible we calculated the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm (NNH) statistics. We excluded continuous data if more than 50% of participants were lost to follow up; where continuous data were included, we analysed this data using fixed effects weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval.

MAIN RESULTS

We inspected over 1000 electronic records. The review currently includes 302 excluded studies and 50 included studies. We found chlorpromazine reduces relapse over the short (n=74, 2 RCTs, RR 0.29 CI 0.1 to 0.8) and medium term (n=809, 4 RCTs, RR 0.49 CI 0.4 to 0.6) but data are heterogeneous. Longer term homogeneous data also favoured chlorpromazine (n=512, 3 RCTs, RR 0.57 CI 0.5 to 0.7, NNT 4 CI 3 to 5). We found chlorpromazine provided a global improvement in a person's symptoms and functioning (n=1121, 13 RCTs, RR 'no change/not improved' 0.80 CI 0.8 to 0.9, NNT 6 CI 5 to 8). Fewer people allocated to chlorpromazine left trials early (n=1780, 26 RCTs, RR 0.65 CI 0.5 to 0.8, NNT 15 CI 11 to 24) compared with placebo. There are many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is clearly sedating (n=1404, 19 RCTs, RR 2.63 CI 2.1 to 3.3, NNH 5 CI 4 to 8), it increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders (n=942, 5 RCTs, RR 3.5 CI 1.5 to 8.0, NNH 32 CI 11 to 154), parkinsonism (n=1265, 12 RCTs, RR 2.01 CI 1.5 to 2.7, NNH 14 CI 9 to 28). Akathisia did not occur more often in the chlorpromazine group than placebo (n=1164, 9 RCTs, RR 0.78 CI 0.5 to 1.1). Chlorpromazine clearly causes a lowering of blood pressure with accompanying dizziness (n=1394, 16 RCTs, RR 2.37 CI 1.7 to 3.2, NNH 11 CI 7 to 21) and considerable weight gain (n=165, 5 RCTs, RR 4.92 CI 2.3 to 10.4, NNH 2 CI 2 to 3).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review confirm much that clinicians and recipients of care already know but aim to provide quantification to support clinical impression. Chlorpromazine's global position as a 'benchmark' treatment for psychoses is not threatened by the findings of this review. Chlorpromazine, in common use for half a century, is a well established but imperfect treatment. Judicious use of this best available evidence should lead to improved evidence-based decision making by clinicians, carers and patients.

Cessation of medication for people with schizophrenia already stable on chlorpromazine

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, one of the first generation of antipsychotic drugs, is effective in the treatment of schizophrenia. For most people schizophrenia is a life-long disorder but about a quarter of those who have a first psychotic breakdown do not go on to experience further breakdowns. Most people with schizophrenia are prescribed antipsychotic drugs, although use is often intermittent. The effects of stopping medication are not well researched in the context of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the effects of stopping chlorpromazine for people with schizophrenia stable on this drug.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We supplemented an electronic search of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (March 2006) with reference searching of all identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised clinical trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers and re-inspected and quality assessed these. We independently extracted data and resolved disputes during regular meetings. We analysed dichotomous data using fixed effects relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, where possible, we calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD). We excluded the data where more than 40% of people were lost to follow up.

MAIN RESULTS

We included ten trials involving 1042 people with schizophrenia stable on chlorpromazine. Even in the short term, those who remained on chlorpromazine were less likely to experience a relapse compared to people who stopped taking chlorpromazine (n=376, 3 RCTs, RR 6.76 CI 3.37 to 13.54, NNH XX CI XX to XX). Medium term (n=850, 6 RCTs, RR 4.04 CI 2.81 to 5.8, NNH 4 CI 3 to 7) and long term data were similar (n=510, 3 RCTs, RR 1.70 CI 1.44 to 2.01, NNH XX CI XX to XX). People allocated to chlorpromazine withdrawal were not significantly more likely to stay in the study compared with those continuing chlorpromazine treatment (n=374, 1 RCT, RR 1.14 CI 0.55 to 2.35). In sensitivity analyses, there was a significant difference in the 'relapse' outcome between trials for those diagnosed according to checklist criteria compared to those with a clinical diagnosis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review confirms clinical experience and quantifies the risks of stopping chlorpromazine medication for a group of people with schizophrenia who are stable on this drug. With its moderate adverse effects, chlorpromazine is likely to remain one of the most widely prescribed treatments for schizophrenia.

Perphenazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Perphenazine is an old phenothiazine antipsychotic with a potency similar to haloperidol. It has been used for many years and is popular in the northern European countries and Japan.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the clinical effects and safety of perphenazine for those with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (June 2001), references of all included studies and contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of included studies in order to identify further trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials that compared perphenazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses. We excluded trials of depot formulations of perphenazine.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently inspected citations and, where possible, abstracts. We ordered papers, inspected and quality assessed them. We extracted data, again working independently. If loss to follow up was greater than 50% we considered results as 'prone to bias'. For dichotomous data we calculated the relative risk (RR), the 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat/harm (NNT/H) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

The review currently includes 25 studies with 2478 patients, 2285 of whom had been randomised to interventions that were relevant for the review such as perphenazine, other antipsychotic drugs or placebo. The trials were carried out between 1961 and 1993. All but one trial were short term with a duration of between ten days and 12 weeks. Descriptions of allocation and blinding were usually incomplete. Six studies (n=300) compared perphenazine with placebo. Perphenazine was associated with fewer participants leaving the trials early due to relapse or worsening of symptoms (n=84, RR 0.1 CI 0.03 - 0.4, NNT 2 CI 1 to 20). Twenty studies compared perphenazine (n=738) with other antipsychotics (n=1278). Perphenazine seemed as effective as other antipsychotics ('global state unimproved or worse' n=1327, RR 1.0 CI 0.9 to 1.2). We found no clear differences in terms of specific aspects of efficacy, behaviour or tolerability. However, interpretation of findings of the review was limited by poor reporting and the use of 24 different comparator antipsychotics in the 20 trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although perphenazine has been randomised for more than 40 years, incomplete reporting and the variety of comparators used make it impossible to draw clear conclusions. At best we can say that perphenazine showed similar effects and adverse events as several of the other pooled antipsychotic drugs. Since perphenazine is a relatively inexpensive and frequently used compound, further trials are justified to clarify the properties of this classical antipsychotic drug.

A meta-analysis and critical review of the effects of conventional neuroleptic treatment on cognition in schizophrenia: opening a closed book

BACKGROUND

In recent years, numerous studies have examined whether new-generation antipsychotic agents impact cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia when compared with conventional antipsychotic treatment. The working assumption of such studies, supported by narrative reviews, is that the conventional antipsychotic medications have little or no effect on cognition. The studies concerning the effects of conventional neuroleptics on cognition, however, have never been analyzed quantitatively. In this meta-analysis, we revisit the question of whether typical agents might have enhancing effects on cognition.

METHODS

The meta-analysis included studies that 1) compared the effects of typical neuroleptic agents with those of placebo or no medication on cognition; 2) examined adult patients identified as having schizophrenia; and 3) produced adequate data to estimate an effect size. Studies were identified by searches of computerized literature databases and by cross-referencing included studies. The effect size calculated was d, the difference between the means in cognitive measures of patients with schizophrenia taking and not taking conventional neuroleptic medication, divided by the pooled SD. Critically, when multiple measures were reported in a single article, effect sizes were combined so as to minimize the possibility that one study had undue weight simply because of the number of cognitive outcome variables that it contained. These results were corrected for bias due to sample size, with each of the effect sizes weighted by the reciprocal of its variance. The final sample after exclusion of outliers comprised 208 effect sizes from 34 studies.

RESULTS

With a random-effects model, effect sizes from the primary studies were weighted according to sample size and averaged. The resulting mean effect size was.22 (95% confidence interval =.10,.34). The result is positive, in that the range did not include zero and was of low moderate size. No moderating effects of study design or patient qualities were found to be significant. With the same procedures, effect sizes for individual neurocognitive domains were computed. Effect sizes were generally in the.13-.29 range for the majority of cognitive functions, whereas motor function was impacted negatively (-.11). Unexpectedly, medication dose did not correlate with effect size.

CONCLUSIONS

Typical antipsychotic medication provides modest-to-moderate gains in multiple cognitive domains. Given unavoidable methodologic limitations of the primary studies, current findings suggest that the impact of conventional medication on cognitive function should be re-evaluated.

Chlorpromazine versus placebo for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Chlorpromazine, formulated in the 1950s, remains a benchmark treatment for people with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of chlorpromazine for schizophrenia in comparison with placebo.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We updated previous searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (October 1999), Biological Abstracts (1982-1995), the Cochrane Library (1999, Issue 2), EMBASE (1980-1995), MEDLINE (1966-1995) and PsycLIT (1974-1995), by searching Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Register (June 2002). References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chlorpromazine with placebo relevant to people with schizophrenia, and non-affective serious/chronic mental illness irrespective of mode of diagnosis. Primary outcomes of interest were death, violent behaviours, overall improvement, relapse and satisfaction with care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were inspected independently by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were extracted by BT and JR. CA and GA independently checked a 10% sample for reliability. Dichotomous data were analysed using random effects relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) around this was estimated. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm statistics (NNH) were calculated. Continuous data were excluded if more than 50% of people were lost to follow up, but, where possible, weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Over 1000 electronic records were inspected. The review currently mentions 302 papers in its Excluded Studies table and 50 studies in its Included Studies table. Four papers are awaiting translation. Chlorpromazine reduces relapse over six months to two years (n=512, 3 RCTs, RR 0.65 CI 0.5 to 0.9, NNT 3 CI 2.5 to 4) and promotes a global improvement in a person's symptoms and functioning (n=1121, 13 RCTs, RR 0.76 CI 0.7 to 0.9, NNT 7 CI 5 to 10) although the placebo response is also considerable. Fewer people allocated to chlorpromazine leave trials early (n=1755, 25 RCTs, RR 0.77 CI 0.6 to 1.1) but the difference iss not statistically significant. There are many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is clearly sedating (n=1242, 18 RCTs, RR 2.3 CI 1.7 to 3.1, NNH 6 CI 5 to 8), it increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders (n=780, 4 RCTs, RR 3.1 CI 1.3 to 7.7, NNH 24 CI 15 to 57), parkinsonism (n=1265, 12 RCTs, RR 2.6 CI 1.2 to 5.4, NNH 10 CI 8 to 16) and, perhaps, fits (n=695, 3 RCTs, RR 2.4 CI 0.4 to 16). Amongst other things it clearly causes a lowering of blood pressure with accompanying dizziness (n=1232, 15 RCTs, RR 1.9 CI 1.4 to 27, NNH 12 CI 8 to 19) and considerable increases in weight (n=165, 5 RCTs, RR 4.4 CI 2.1 to 9, NNH 3 CI 2 to 5).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

This review will confirm much that clinicians and recipients of care already know, but provides quantification to support clinical impression. Chlorpromazine's global position as a 'benchmark' treatment for psychoses is not threatened by this review. Chlorpromazine, in common use for half a century, is a well established but imperfect treatment. Judicious use of this best available evidence should lead to improved evidence-based decision making by clinicians, carers and patients.