Clinical Outcomes after Clozapine Discontinuation in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

When, Why and How to Re-challenge Clozapine in Schizophrenia Following Myocarditis

Clozapine-induced myocarditis (CIM) is among the most important adverse events limiting the use of clozapine as the most effective treatment for schizophrenia. CIM necessitates the immediate termination of clozapine, often resulting in its permanent discontinuation with considerable detrimental effects on patients' psychopathology and long-term outcome. Consequently, a clozapine re-challenge after CIM is increasingly regarded as a viable alternative, with published reports indicating a success rate of approximately 60%. However, published cases of re-challenges after CIM remain limited. Here, we provide a narrative review of the current state of research regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, diagnosis and clinical management of CIM as well as a synthesis of current recommendations for re-challenging patients after CIM. This includes a step-by-step guide for this crucial procedure based on the current evidence regarding the pathophysiology and risk factors for CIM. Slow dose titration regimes and addressing risk factors including concomitant valproate and olanzapine are crucial both to prevent CIM and to ensure a safe and successful re-challenge. Furthermore, we discuss the utility of C-reactive protein, troponin, N-terminal-pro hormone and brain natriuretic peptide, therapeutic drug-monitoring and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for CIM screening and diagnosis as well as for post-CIM re-challenges.

A review on side effect management of second-generation antipsychotics to treat schizophrenia: a drug safety perspective

INTRODUCTION

Effective side effects management present a challenge in antipsychotic treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). In recent years, most of the commonly used SGAs, except for clozapine, have been shown to differ only slightly in their effectiveness, but considerably regarding perceived side effects, safety profiles, and compatibility to preexisting medical conditions.

AREAS COVERED

The current state of available evidence on side-effect management in SGA treatment of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) is reviewed. In addition, current guideline recommendations are summarized, highlighting evidence gaps.

EXPERT OPINION

SGA safety and side effects needs to be considered in treatment planning. Shared decision-making assistants (SDMA) can support patients, practitioners and relatives to orient their decisions toward avoiding side effects relevant to patients' adherence. Alongside general measures like psychosocial and psychotherapeutic care, switching to better tolerated SGAs can be considered a relatively safe strategy. By contrast, novel meta-analytical evidence emphasizes that dose reduction of SGAs can statistically increase the risk of relapse and other unfavorable outcomes. Further, depending on the type and severity of SGA-related side effects, specific treatments can be used to alleviate induced side effects (e.g. add-on metformin to reduce weight-gain). Finally, discontinuation should be reserved for acute emergencies.

Real-World Effectiveness of High-Dose Olanzapine and Clozapine for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia in Japan: A Retrospective Bidirectional Mirror-Image Study

BACKGROUND

Clozapine is considered the gold standard medication for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). However, given that clozapine treatment is associated with the burden of regular blood monitoring and the risk of life-threatening adverse effects, high-dose olanzapine can serve as an alternative treatment. We conducted a bidirectional mirror-image study to evaluate the effectiveness of high-dose olanzapine compared with clozapine.

METHODS

We included patients with TRS who switched from olanzapine to clozapine or switched from clozapine to olanzapine, and received high-dose (>20 mg/d) olanzapine treatment for ≥4 weeks at Yamanashi Prefectural Kita Hospital. We obtained data on hospitalization, seclusion, and modified electroconvulsive therapy (mECT) during the clozapine phase and the olanzapine phase.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients were included. When patients switched from high-dose olanzapine to clozapine (n = 32), significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When patients switched from clozapine to high-dose olanzapine (n = 12), a significant reduction was found in the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When data from both directions of treatment were combined, significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once in favor of clozapine.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that high-dose olanzapine may not be as effective as clozapine for patients with TRS in real-world practice. However, it should be noted that there are unique circumstances that restrict the use of clozapine in Japan.

Second to none: rationale, timing, and clinical management of clozapine use in schizophrenia

Despite its enduring relevance as the single most effective and important evidence-based treatment for schizophrenia, underutilization of clozapine remains considerable. To a substantial degree, this is attributable to a reluctance of psychiatrists to offer clozapine due to its relatively large side-effect burden and the complexity of its use. This underscores the necessity for continued education regarding both the vital nature and the intricacies of clozapine treatment. This narrative review summarizes all clinically relevant areas of evidence, which support clozapine's wide-ranging superior efficacy - for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and beyond - and make its safe use eminently feasible. Converging evidence indicates that TRS constitutes a distinct albeit heterogeneous subgroup of schizophrenias primarily responsive to clozapine. Most importantly, the predominantly early onset of treatment resistance and the considerable decline in response rates associated with its delayed initiation make clozapine an essential treatment option throughout the course of illness, beginning with the first psychotic episode. To maximize patients' benefits, systematic early recognition efforts based on stringent use of TRS criteria, a timely offer of clozapine, thorough side-effect screening and management as well as consistent use of therapeutic drug monitoring and established augmentation strategies for suboptimal responders are crucial. To minimize permanent all-cause discontinuation, re-challenges after neutropenia or myocarditis should be considered. Owing to clozapine's unique efficacy, comorbid conditions including substance use and most somatic disorders should not dissuade but rather encourage clinicians to consider clozapine. Moreover, treatment decisions need to be informed by the late onset of clozapine's full effects, which for reduced suicidality and mortality rates may not even be readily apparent. Overall, the singular extent of its efficacy combined with the high level of patient satisfaction continues to distinguish clozapine from all other available antipsychotics.

Third-generation antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and non-responsivity or intolerance to clozapine regimen: What is the evidence?

Clozapine is considered « the golden standard » for the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia, but many patients do not present adequate responsivity even to this antipsychotic. If we add the need to strictly monitor the hematologic and cardiometabolic adverse events during each clozapine trial and the difficulty of preserving therapeutic adherence in patients with low insight, residual negative/positive symptoms, or economic challenges, then the necessity of exploring alternative interventions for these patients becomes obvious. Also, in case of intolerance to clozapine or where clozapine did not induce remission, clinicians have to find new ways to help their patients. Switching to other antipsychotics or using these agents as add-ons to clozapine are the main interventions explored in this review, for patients with schizophrenia resistant to clozapine (ultra-resistant schizophrenia, URS). When clozapine intolerance is detected, conversion to another antipsychotic with distinct pharmacologic properties or formulation (e.g., long-acting intramuscular injectable agents, LAI) may be a useful option. Third-generation antipsychotics (TGA) have been selected for their distinct pharmacodynamically profile, which allows, at a theoretical level, their use in combination with clozapine. This narrative review is based on searching four electronic databases, that retrieved 19 primary and secondary reports on aripiprazole (seven case reports or case series presenting 24 patients; nine clinical trials, and three systematic reviews/meta-analyses), two primary reports on brexpiprazole (case report and case series, N = 3 patients), and six primary reports on cariprazine (case reports and case series, N = 14 patients). Based on the information collected from these reports, which included oral and LAI formulations, the TGA most supported by evidence for the augmentation of clozapine is aripiprazole (high-and medium-quality data), followed by cariprazine (low-quality data). Brexpiprazole has not yet been systematically explored for this indication, and in the case of lumateperone, no report could be found. The efficacy of aripiprazole and cariprazine was supported in the domains of positive, negative, and general symptoms, and aripiprazole may positively impact the metabolic profile in patients with URS. Also, adding TGA may lead to a decrease in the dose of clozapine concomitantly administered. More data derived from good quality research are needed in order to confirm the circumstances of TGAs recommendation in patients with URS, either as monotherapy, or added to clozapine.