Ziprasidone and amisulpride effectively treat negative symptoms of schizophrenia: results of a 12-week, double-blind study

Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia: An Update on Research Assessment and the Current and Upcoming Treatment Landscape

The negative symptoms of schizophrenia include diminished emotional expression, avolition, alogia, anhedonia, and asociality, and due to their low responsiveness to available treatments, are a primary driver of functional disability in schizophrenia. This narrative review has the aim of providing a comprehensive overview of the current research developments in the treatment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia, and begins by introducing the concepts of primary, secondary, prominent, predominant, and broadly defined negative symptoms. We then compare and contrast commonly used research assessment scales for negative symptoms and review the evidence for the specific utility of widely available off-label and investigational treatments that have been studied for negative symptoms. Mechanism of action/putative treatments included are antipsychotics (D2R antagonists), N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) and other glutamatergic modulators, serotonin receptor (5-HTR) modulators, anti-inflammatory agents, antidepressants, pro-dopaminergic modulators (non-D2R antagonists), acetylcholine modulators, oxytocin, and phosphodiesterase (PDE) inhibitors. With the caveat that no compounds are definitively proven as gold-standard treatments for broadly defined negative symptoms, the evidence base supports several potentially beneficial off-label and investigational medications for treating negative symptoms in schizophrenia, such as monotherapy with cariprazine, olanzapine, clozapine, and amisulpride, or adjunctive use of memantine, setrons such as ondansetron, minocycline, and antidepressants. These medications are widely available worldwide, generally tolerable and could be considered for an off-label, time-limited trial for a predesignated period of time, after which a decision to switch or stay can be made based on clinical response. Among investigational medications, NMDAR agonists, muscarinic agonists, and LB-102 remain under study. Suggestions for future research include reducing placebo effects by designing studies with a smaller number of high-quality study sites, potentially increasing the use of more precise rating scales for negative symptoms, and focused studies in people with predominant negative symptoms.

Dampened motivation in schizophrenia: evidence from a novel effort-based decision-making task in social scenarios

Apathy represents a significant manifestation of negative symptoms within individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia (SCZ) and exerts a profound impact on their social relationships. However, the specific implications of this motivational deficit in social scenarios have yet to be fully elucidated. The present study aimed to examine effort-based decision-making in social scenarios and its relation to apathy symptoms in SCZ patients. We initially recruited a group of 50 healthy participants (16 males) to assess the validity of the paradigm. Subsequently, we recruited 45 individuals diagnosed with SCZ (24 males) and 49 demographically-matched healthy controls (HC, 25 males) for the main study. The Mock Job Interview Task was developed to measure effort-based decision-making in social scenarios. The proportion of hard-task choice and a range of subjective ratings were obtained to examine potential between-group differences. SCZ patients were less likely than HC to choose the hard task with strict interviewers, and this group difference was significant when the hard-task reward value was medium and high. More severe apathy symptoms were significantly correlated with an overall reduced likelihood of making a hard-task choice. When dividing the jobs into two categories based on the levels of social engagement needed, SCZ patients were less willing to expend effort to pursue a potential offer for jobs requiring higher social engagement. Our findings indicated impaired effort-based decision-making in SCZ can be generalized from the monetary/nonsocial to a more ecologically social dimension. Our findings affirm the critical role of aberrant effort allocation on negative symptoms, and may facilitate the development of targeted clinical interventions.

Identifying risk factors for predominant negative symptoms from early stages in schizophrenia: A longitudinal and sex-specific study in first-episode schizophrenia patients

BACKGROUND

People with schizophrenia and predominant negative symptoms (PNS) present a different clinical and functional profile from those without such symptomatology. Few studies have examined the risk factors and the incidence of PNS in first-episode schizophrenia patients (FES) and differentiating by sex. This study aims to assess prevalence, demographic and clinical characteristics related to PNS from early stages and to study if there are sex-specific features in terms of developing PNS.

METHODS

In a sample of 121 FES patients derived from a multicentre and naturalistic study, those who developed PNS at 12-months were identified. Environmental, clinical, functional, and cognitive ratings were examined longitudinally. Binary logistic regressions were applied to detect baseline risk factors for developing PNS at one-year follow-up.

RESULTS

In the present FES cohort, 24.8% of the patients (n=30) developed PNS (20% of the women, 27.6% of the men). Compared to non-PNS (75.2%, n=91), at baseline, PNS group had more negative (t=-6.347; p<0.001) and depressive symptoms (t=-5.026; p<0.001), poorer premorbid adjustment (t=-2.791; p=0.006) and functional outcome (t=-2.649; p<0.001), more amotivation (t=-7.333; p<0.001), more expressivity alterations (t=-4.417; p<0.001), worse cognitive reserve (t=2.581; p<0.011), a lower estimated intelligent quotient (t=2.417; p=0.017), worse verbal memory (t=2.608; p=0.011), and worse fluency (t=2.614; p=0.010). Regressions showed that the premorbid adjustment was the main predictor of PNS in females (p=0.007; Exp(B)=1.106) while in males were a worse verbal memory performance (p=0.031; Exp(B)=0.989) and more alterations in the motivation domain (p=0.001; Exp(B)=1.607).

CONCLUSIONS

A different baseline clinical profile and notable risk factors differences in the development of PNS between males and females were found. Results suggest that sex may be an important confounder in studies comparing schizophrenia patients with predominant and non-predominant negative symptomatology.

Adverse effects of antipsychotics on sleep in patients with schizophrenia. Systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse effects on sleep in patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic treatment.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, Toxline, Ebsco, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, SpringerLink, and in Database of abstracts of Reviews of Effects of Randomized Clinical Trials to identify eligible studies published from January 1990 to October 2021. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the CONSORT list, and the Cochrane bias tool. Network meta-analysis was performed using the Bayesian random-effects model, with multivariate meta-regression to assess the association of interest.

Results

87 randomized clinical trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria, and 70 articles were included in the network meta-analysis. Regarding the methodological quality of the studies, 47 had a low or moderate bias risk. The most common adverse effects on sleep reported in the studies were insomnia, somnolence, and sedation. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that ziprasidone was associated with an increased risk of insomnia (OR, 1.56; 95% credible interval CrI, 1.18-2.06). Several of the included antipsychotics were associated with a significantly increased risk of somnolence; haloperidol (OR, 1.90; 95% CrI, 1.12-3.22), lurasidone (OR, 2.25; 95% CrI, 1.28-3.97) and ziprasidone (OR, 1.79; 95% CrI, 1.06-3.02) had the narrowest confidence intervals. In addition, perphenazine (OR, 5.33; 95% CrI, 1.92-14.83), haloperidol (OR, 2.61; 95% CrI, 1.14-5.99), and risperidone (OR, 2.41; 95% CrI, 1.21-4.80) were associated with an increased risk of sedation compared with placebo, and other antipsychotics did not differ. According to the SUCRAs for insomnia, chlorpromazine was ranked as the lowest risk of insomnia (57%), followed by clozapine (20%), while flupentixol (26 %) and perospirone (22.5%) were associated with a lower risk of somnolence. On the other hand, amisulpride (89.9%) was the safest option to reduce the risk of sedation.

Discussion

Insomnia, sedation, and somnolence were the most frequent adverse effects on sleep among the different antipsychotics administered. The evidence shows that chlorpromazine, clozapine, flupentixol, perospirone, and amisulpride had favorable safety profiles. In contrast, ziprasidone, perphenazine, haloperidol, and risperidone were the least safe for sleep.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017078052, identifier: PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017078052.

The Impact of Antipsychotic Treatment on Neurological Soft Signs in Patients with Predominantly Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a complex and incompletely elucidated pathology that affects sensorimotor function and also produces numerous therapeutic challenges. The aims of this cross-sectional study were to identify the profile of neurological soft signs (NSS) in patients with predominantly negative symptoms of schizophrenia (PNS) compared with patients with schizophrenia who do not present a predominance of negative symptoms (NPNS) and also to objectify the impact of treatment on the neurological function of these patients. Ninety-nine (n = 99; 56 females and 43 males) patients diagnosed with schizophrenia according to DSM-V were included; these patients were undergoing antipsychotic (4 typical antipsychotics, 86 atypical antipsychotics, and 9 combinations of two atypical antipsychotics) or anticholinergic treatment (24 out of 99) at the time of evaluation, and the PANSS was used to identify the patients with predominantly negative symptoms (n = 39), the Neurological Evaluation Scale (NES) was used for the evaluation of neurological soft signs (NSS), and the SAS was used for the objectification of the extrapyramidal side effects induced by the neuroleptic treatment, which was converted to chlorpromazine equivalents (CPZE). The study's main finding was that, although the daily dose of CPZE did not represent a statistically significant variable, in terms of neurological soft signs, patients with PNS had higher rates of NSS.

Negative symptoms correlate with altered brain structural asymmetry in amygdala and superior temporal region in schizophrenia patients

Negative symptoms play an important role in development and treatment of schizophrenia. However, brain changes relevant to negative symptoms are still unclear. This study examined brain structural abnormalities and their asymmetry in schizophrenia patients and the association with negative symptoms. Fifty-nine schizophrenia patients and 66 healthy controls undertook structural brain scans. Schizophrenia patients were further divided into predominant negative symptoms (PNS, n = 18) and non-PNS (n = 34) subgroups. Negative symptoms were assessed by the Negative Symptom Assessment (NSA). T1-weighted images were preprocessed with FreeSurfer to estimate subcortical volumes, cortical thickness and surface areas, asymmetry Index (AI) was then calculated. MANOVA was performed for group differences while partial correlations in patients were analyzed between altered brain structures and negative symptoms. Compared to healthy controls, schizophrenia patients exhibited thinner cortices in frontal and temporal regions, and decreased leftward asymmetry of superior temporal gyrus (STG) in cortical thickness. Patients with PNS exhibited increased rightward asymmetry of amygdala volumes than non-PNS subgroup. In patients, AI of cortical thickness in the STG was negatively correlated with NSA-Emotion scores (r = -0.30, p = 0.035), while AI of amygdala volume was negatively correlated with NSA-Communication (r = -0.30, p = 0.039) and NSA-Total scores (r = -0.30, p = 0.038). Our findings suggested schizophrenia patients exhibited cortical thinning and altered lateralization of brain structures. Emotion and communication dimensions of negative symptoms also correlated with the structural asymmetry of amygdala and superior temporal regions in schizophrenia patients.

EPA guidance on assessment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia

Background

During the last decades, a renewed interest for negative symptoms (NS) was brought about by the increased awareness that they interfere severely with real-life functioning, particularly when they are primary and persistent.

Methods

In this guidance paper, we provide a systematic review of the evidence and elaborate several recommendations for the conceptualization and assessment of NS in clinical trials and practice.

Results

Expert consensus and systematic reviews have provided guidance for the optimal assessment of primary and persistent negative symptoms; second-generation rating scales, which provide a better assessment of the experiential domains, are available; however, NS are still poorly assessed both in research and clinical settings.

This European Psychiatric Association (EPA) guidance recommends the use of persistent negative symptoms (PNS) construct in the context of clinical trials and highlights the need for further efforts to make the definition of PNS consistent across studies in order to exclude as much as possible secondary negative symptoms. We also encourage clinicians to use second-generation scales, at least to complement first-generation ones.

The EPA guidance further recommends the evidence-based exclusion of several items included in first-generation scales from any NS summary or factor score to improve NS measurement in research and clinical settings. Self-rated instruments are suggested to further complement observer-rated scales in NS assessment.

Several recommendations are provided for the identification of secondary negative symptoms in clinical settings.

Conclusions

The dissemination of this guidance paper may promote the development of national guidelines on negative symptom assessment and ultimately improve the care of people with schizophrenia.

Early-Onset Schizophrenia With Predominantly Negative Symptoms: A Case Study of a Drug-Naive Female Patient Treated With Cariprazine

Schizophrenia is a chronic and severe mental disorder characterized by positive, negative, and cognitive symptoms. Negative symptoms are usually present from the prodromal phase; early diagnosis and management of negative symptoms is a major health concern since an insidious onset dominated by negative symptoms is associated with a worse outcome. Antipsychotic medications, which are effective for treating positive symptoms, are generally ineffective for treating negative or cognitive symptoms. We present a 23-year-old woman showing severe symptoms at her first visit to our department. The patient's parents reported that their daughter had experienced several years of psychosocial decline and putative psychiatric symptoms, but no medical attention had been previously sought; as such, the diagnosis of schizophrenia with predominantly negative symptoms was very much delayed. Early onset of schizophrenia, longer duration of untreated psychosis, and severe negative symptoms, which have limited treatment options, suggested a poor prognosis. We initiated monotherapy with cariprazine, a novel antipsychotic that has recently been proven efficacious in treating schizophrenia with predominantly negative symptoms. This report describes a 52-week cariprazine treatment regimen and follows the patient's impressive clinical improvement confirmed by PANSS and CGI scores, and psychological tests.

Use of ziprasidone in patients with schizophrenia in four European countries

Purpose

To characterise patients with schizophrenia from four European countries treated with ziprasidone, and to compare these with patients treated with other second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) included in this survey.

Method

A randomly selected, representative sample of psychiatrists (N = 744), from Germany, Greece, Italy and Spain, collected data on the five last patients with schizophrenia they had seen in consultation (N = 3996), including up to two patients treated with ziprasidone (N = 1096).

Results

Ziprasidone was most frequently prescribed to patients requiring a switch from another antipsychotic. Compared to other surveyed SGAs, ziprasisone was more likely to be prescribed to women than to men (OR: 1.52), to patients with mild disease than to those with severe disease (OR: 1.94) and to outpatients than to inpatients (1.30). The most frequently cited reasons for prescribing ziprasidone were good tolerability and efficacy against positive and negative symptoms. Compared to other SGAs included in this survey, it was more likely to be prescribed due to the low risk of weight gain, metabolic syndrome and extrapyramidal symptoms.

Conclusion

Patients treated by ziprasidone more frequently belong to subgroups composed of more autonomous patients and those with mild to moderate disease severity.

Effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of ziprasidone in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: Results of a multi-centre observational trial

Purpose

The ZEISIG study (Ziprasidone Experience in Schizophrenia in Germany/Austria) investigated the effectiveness of ziprasidone as measured by discontinuation rates and mean changes of the BPRS total. Secondary objectives included quality of life, subjective well-being, tolerability, and safety.

Subjects and methods

Two hundred and seventy-six subjects with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder were treated within an open-label, 12-week, prospective, flexible-dose observational trial of ziprasidone (40–160 mg/day). Baseline and outcome assessments mainly included Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), and Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic treatment (SWN-K).

Results

Study discontinuation due to any cause was evident in 58% of subjects, most of them within the first 4 weeks after study initiation. In study completers, ziprasidone was associated with improvements in BPRS total (44.8 to 33.6; p < 0.001), CGI, SF-12, and SWN-K total scores (80.5 to 89.5). Ziprasidone was related to reduction of weight, fasting glucose, and serum lipids. No cardiovascular adverse event or significant increase of the QTc interval was observed.

Discussion and conclusion

Approximately 60% of subjects discontinued ziprasidone prematurely, probably related to an initial and overall underdose. The present study confirmed previous tolerability and safety data of ziprasidone as well as results of its effectiveness. Independent from reason to switch, previous antipsychotic class, and severity of illness at baseline, the recommended starting dose of 80 mg/day as well as the maximum treatment dose of 160 mg/day may not be sufficient for a selected subgroup of patients.

The remediation effects of working memory training in schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms

Introduction: Negative symptoms, particularly amotivation and anhedonia, are important predictors of poor functional outcome in patients with schizophrenia. There has been interest in the efficacy and mechanism of non-pharmacological interventions to alleviate these symptoms. The present study aimed to examine the remediation effect of working memory (WM) training in patients with schizophrenia with prominent negative symptoms.Methods: Thirty-one schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms were recruited and assigned to either a WM training group or a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control group. The WM training group underwent 20 sessions of training using the dual n-back task over one month. A functional neuroimaging paradigm of the Affective Incentive Delay (AID) task was administered before and after the training intervention to evaluate the remediation effect of the intervention.Results: Our results showed that the WM training group demonstrated significant improvement in the WM training task and inattention symptoms. Compared with the TAU group, increased brain activations were observed at the right insula and the right frontal sub-gyral after WM training in the training group.Conclusions: These findings support the efficacy of WM training in ameliorating hedonic dysfunction in schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms.

Individual factors influencing the duration of untreated psychosis

AIM

Duration of untreated psychosis (DUP), or the time between onset of psychosis and treatment initiation, is a prognostic factor of schizophrenia. However, few studies evaluated the relative influence of individual-related factors on this duration. The objective of this study was to evaluate the influence of socio-demographic, clinical and cannabis use on DUP.

METHODS

This study was part of a large prospective study in help-seeking individuals referred to our specialized early detection / intervention clinic in the Service Hospitalo-Universitaire of Sainte-Anne Hospital in Paris (ICAAR study). We explored 33 consecutive patients who crossed the CAARMS' threshold of psychosis. The DUP and cannabis consumption history were explored during the baseline comprehensive assessment using all available sources (direct interviews of patients, parents, practitioners). Correlations between socio-demographic, clinical and cannabis use, and DUP were studied. A multiple linear regression model was used to determine the variables that could significantly predict DUP.

RESULTS

When considered individually, none of the socio-demographic and disease characteristic factors was associated with DUP, with the exception of level of education. In the multivariate analysis, age at inclusion, negative symptoms and history of cannabis use significantly influenced DUP.

CONCLUSION

The determinants of DUP are multi-factorial and include individual centred factors, such as age, cannabis and negative symptoms. The identification of factors resulting in delayed access to care may promote the development of effective strategies to reduce DUP in early psychosis and target effective early intervention.

Ziprasidone Augmentation of SSRI Antidepressants in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study of Augmentation Therapy

BACKGROUND

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is often a chronic, disabling illness for which antidepressant medications (ie, SSRI) are considered the primary psychopharmacological treatment. However, many patients remain refractory to antidepressants alone or in combination with psychotherapy. Safe and effective treatments for individuals with refractory PTSD are needed. This study aimed to examine ziprasidone augmentation of SSRI treatment of PTSD.

METHODS

This was a 2-phase study. In phase 1, subjects were treated with paroxetine or sertraline for 8 weeks. Individuals refractory to the SSRI treatment then entered into phase II of the study and were randomized, in a double-blind fashion, to 8 weeks of treatment with either ziprasidone or placebo. The primary outcome measure was change in Clinician Administered PTSD Scale total scores with the intent-to-treat sample. Secondary outcome measures included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores, measures of depression and anxiety, and safety measures.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed on the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, or other outcome measures between ziprasidone and placebo groups. No significant differences were observed for safety measures including metabolic profiles, extrapyramidal symptoms/movement disorder rating scales, nor study dropout.

CONCLUSIONS

Although no significant differences were noted in efficacy or safety measures between ziprasidone and placebo in this pilot study, the small sample size prevents definitive conclusions.

Antipsychotic drugs for patients with schizophrenia and predominant or prominent negative symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Negative symptoms are the core of schizophrenia, but whether antipsychotics are efficacious for their treatment is unclear. Moreover, there is debate whether patients in relevant trials should have predominant negative symptoms or whether prominent negative symptoms are also acceptable.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomised, blinded antipsychotic drug trials in patients with schizophrenia and either predominant or prominent negative symptoms (last search Dec 12, 2017). Separate pairwise meta-analyses were conducted in these two populations. The primary outcome was negative symptoms. Depressive, symptoms, positive symptoms, and extrapyramidal side-effects were analysed as causes of secondary negative symptoms.

FINDINGS

We included 21 randomized-controlled trials with 3451 participants which revealed the following significant differences in the primary outcome: in patients with predominant negative symptoms amisulpride was superior to placebo (N = 4; n = 590, SMD 0.47, CI 0.23, 0.71), olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in a small trial (n = 35) and cariprazine outperformed risperidone (N = 1, n = 456, SMD - 0.29, CI - 0.48, - 0.11). In patients with prominent negative symptoms, olanzapine and quetiapine were superior to risperidone in single trials. Overall, studies in prominent negative symptoms were potentially more confounded by improvements of secondary negative symptoms.

INTERPRETATION

Amisulpride is the only antipsychotic that outperformed placebo in the treatment of predominant negative symptoms, but there was a parallel reduction of depression. Cariprazine was better than risperidone in a large trial that was well-controlled for secondary negative symptoms, but the trial was sponsored by its manufacturer. Future trials should apply scientifically developed definitions such as the deficit syndrome and the persistent negative symptoms concept.

Dose reduction of high-dose first-generation antipsychotics or switch to ziprasidone in long-stay patients with schizophrenia: A 1-year double-blind randomized clinical trial

Long-stay patients with severe schizophrenia are frequently treated with high doses of first-generation antipsychotics (FGA). Dose reduction or switching to ziprasidone may reduce the severity of negative symptoms and side effects. We investigated in a randomized double-blind trial whether a dose-reduction strategy to achieve an adequate dose of a FGA (5 mg/day haloperidol equivalents, n = 24) or switching to ziprasidone (160 mg/day, n = 24) in treatment resistant patients would decrease negative symptoms after 1 year of treatment. We found that negative symptoms did not change significantly in either condition. Positive symptoms, excited symptoms, and emotional distress worsened over time with ziprasidone, resulting in a significant difference between conditions in favour of FGA dose reduction. Relapse and treatment failure, defined as a prolonged or repeated relapse, occurred more often with ziprasidone than with FGA (45.8% versus 20.8%, and 25.0% versus 16.7%, respectively). Treatment with ziprasidone was superior for extrapyramidal symptoms. Our study establishes that lowering high FGA doses to an equivalent of 5 mg/day haloperidol or switching to ziprasidone is feasible in the vast majority of patients but does not improve negative or other symptoms. Neither FGA dose reduction nor switching to ziprasidone is an adequate alternative to clozapine for long-stay patients with severe treatment resistant schizophrenia.

Primary and persistent negative symptoms: Concepts, assessments and neurobiological bases

Primary and persistent negative symptoms (PPNS) represent an unmet need in the care of people with schizophrenia. They have an unfavourable impact on real-life functioning and do not respond to available treatments. Underlying etiopathogenetic mechanisms of PPNS are still unknown. The presence of primary and enduring negative symptoms characterizes deficit schizophrenia (DS), proposed as a separate disease entity with respect to non-deficit schizophrenia (NDS). More recently, to reduce the heterogeneity of negative symptoms by using criteria easily applicable in the context of clinical trials, the concept of persistent negative symptoms (PNS) was developed. Both PNS and DS constructs include enduring negative symptoms (at least 6months for PNS and 12months for DS) that do not respond to available treatments. PNS exclude secondary negative symptoms based on a cross-sectional evaluation of severity thresholds on commonly used rating scales for positive symptoms, depression and extrapyramidal side effects; the DS diagnosis, instead, excludes all potential sources of secondary negative symptoms based on a clinical longitudinal assessment. In this paper we review the evolution of concepts and assessment modalities relevant to PPNS, data on prevalence of DS and PNS, as well as studies on clinical, neuropsychological, brain imaging electrophysiological and psychosocial functioning aspects of DS and PNS.

Categorizing and assessing negative symptoms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide a review on studies published in the last year relevant to the categorization and assessment of negative symptoms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent research supported the validity of the 'deficit/non-deficit schizophrenia' categorization. Few studies confirmed the validity of the category 'persistent negative symptoms', whereas no recent study explored the validity of the category 'predominant negative symptoms'. The two-factor structure of the negative dimension is supported by studies reporting different correlates for the two subdomains: diminished expression and avolition/apathy. The need to further split avolition/apathy in two distinct components, that is anhedonia and amotivation, is confirmed in recent papers. Additional approaches to the assessment of negative symptoms have been proposed, including the self-assessment of negative symptoms, and the evaluation of negative symptoms in daily life and their assessment by means of computerized analyses.

SUMMARY

Negative symptoms represent an unmet need in the care of schizophrenia, as they are associated to poor response to available treatments and to poor functional outcome. Their accurate categorization and assessment represent a major challenge for research on neurobiological substrates and new treatment strategies.

Cariprazine versus risperidone monotherapy for treatment of predominant negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia can be severe enough to cause persistent impairment, effective treatment options are lacking. We aimed to assess the new generation antipsychotic cariprazine in adult patients with predominant negative symptoms.

METHODS

In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3b trial, we enrolled adults aged 18-65 years with long-term (>2 year), stable schizophrenia and predominant negative symptoms (>6 months) at 66 study centres (mainly hospitals and university clinics, with a small number of private practices) in 11 European countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web response system to 26 weeks of monotherapy with fixed-dose oral cariprazine (3 mg, 4·5 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day) or risperidone (3 mg, 4 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day); previous medication was discontinued over 2 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 26 or end of treatment on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factor score for negative symptoms (PANSS-FSNS) analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population of patients who had follow-up assessments within 5 days after last receipt of study drugs with a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2012-005485-36.

FINDINGS

Between May 27, 2013, and Nov 17, 2014, 533 patients were screened and 461 (86%) patients were randomised to treatment (230 for cariprazine and 231 for risperidone); 460 were included in the safety population (one patient discontinued before study drug intake). 227 (99%) of 230 patients in the cariprazine group and 229 (99%) of 230 patients in the risperidone group were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (178 [77%] in each group completed 26 weeks of treatment). Mean daily doses were 4·2 mg (SD 0·6) for cariprazine and 3·8 mg (0·4) for risperidone. Treatment-emergent adverse events (eg, insomnia, akathisia, worsening of schizophrenia, headache, anxiety) were reported in 123 (54%) patients treated with cariprazine and 131 (57%) patients treated with risperidone. Use of cariprazine led to a greater least squares mean change in PANSS-FSNS from baseline to week 26 than did risperidone (-8·90 points for cariprazine vs -7·44 points for risperidone; least squares mean difference -1·46, 95% CI -2·39 to -0·53; p=0·0022; effect size 0·31). One patient in the risperidone group died of a cause regarded as unrelated to treatment.

INTERPRETATION

Our results support the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

FUNDING

Gedeon Richter Plc.

Anhedonia in schizophrenia: Deficits in both motivation and hedonic capacity

Anhedonia is one of the core negative symptoms of schizophrenia that affect the ultimate outcome of this disorder. It is unclear whether the motivational or the hedonic component of anhedonia is impaired in patients with schizophrenia. This study examined the deficits in motivation and hedonic capacity in patients with schizophrenia using an Effort-based pleasure experience task (E-pet). Twenty-two schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms, 18 schizophrenia patients without prominent negative symptoms and 29 healthy controls participated in the present study. All of them were administered the E-pet task, which required the participants to make decisions on whether to choose a hard or easy task based on probability and reward magnitude. When making the grip effort allocation decision, schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms were significantly less likely to choose a hard task than healthy controls. As the reward magnitude and the estimated reward value increased, unlike healthy controls, schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms did not increase their hard task choices. They were also significantly less likely to choose a hard task than healthy controls in medium and high probability conditions. When anticipating potential rewards, these patients reported significantly less anticipatory pleasure than healthy controls, even when reward probability and magnitude increased. The pleasure experience rating after obtaining the actual reward was positively correlated with two pleasure experience scales in schizophrenia patients. In conclusion, patients with schizophrenia, especially those with prominent negative symptoms, showed deficits in both reward motivation and anticipatory pleasure experience.

Do negative symptoms of schizophrenia change over time? A meta-analysis of longitudinal data

BACKGROUND

Negative symptoms are a core component of schizophrenia which can severely impact quality of life and functional outcomes. These symptoms are understood to be highly stable but this has not been tested in a meta-analysis, despite the wealth of longitudinal data available.

METHOD

A systematic review of the literature was conducted, with eligible studies pooled into a random-effects meta-analysis. Planned meta-regressions were conducted to evaluate the impact of factors known to induce secondary negative symptoms, in addition to other possible sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The main analysis included 89 samples from 41 studies, totalling 5944 participants. Negative symptoms were found to significantly reduce in all treatment interventions, including in placebo and treatment as usual conditions, with a medium effect size (ES) present across all study conditions (ES = 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.56-0.77, I(2) = 94.0%). In a multivariate meta-regression, only the type of scale used was found to significantly influence negative symptom change. No difference in outcome was found between studies that excluded patients with a high level of positive or depressive symptoms, compared to those that did not.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative symptoms were found to reduce in almost all schizophrenia outpatient samples. A reduction was found across all conditions, with effect sizes ranging from small to large depending upon the condition type. These findings challenge the convention that negative symptoms are highly stable and suggest that they may improve to a greater extent than what has previously been assumed.

Restrictive symptomatic inclusion criteria create barriers to clinical research in schizophrenia negative symptoms: an analysis of the CATIE dataset

BACKGROUND

Persistent negative symptoms are an important area of clinical research. However, there is limited consensus on how to define positive and negative symptom severity thresholds for inclusion in clinical trials. From the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) dataset we evaluated the performance of varying baseline negative and positive symptom thresholds on baseline symptom severity, change from baseline, and negative symptom variance attributable to positive symptom change.

METHODS

In CATIE, we first identified the group of subjects lacking an exacerbation prior to study enrollment. Six subsets with varying baseline positive and negative symptom thresholds were then identified. Baseline characteristics were summarized; negative and positive symptom change from baseline through month 3 was calculated both as crude change and change adjusted for corresponding baseline scores. Sensitivity analyses and correlations were calculated to assess the extent to which negative symptom variance was attributable to positive symptom change.

RESULTS

More restrictive baseline symptom severity thresholds yielded a considerably smaller sample size and higher negative and lower positive symptoms at baseline. Unadjusted negative symptom change was greater with more restrictive criteria; when adjusted for baseline severity the magnitude of change was comparable across subsets. The amount of variance in negative symptom change attributed to positive symptom change was also comparable across subsets.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of restrictive positive and negative symptom thresholds yields a marked decrease in eligible sample size with no clear improvement in adjusted negative symptom change or amount of variance associated with positive symptom change.

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.

Negative symptoms in schizophrenia--the remarkable impact of inclusion definitions in clinical trials and their consequences

BACKGROUND

Negative symptoms are an important target for intervention in schizophrenia. There is lack of clarity in defining appropriate patients for negative symptom trials. While regulators, drug developers and academics have expressed positions in this regard, the implications of these definitions are not yet tested in large-scale trials and there is no consensus.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the extent to which various operational criteria for inclusion in negative symptoms in schizophrenia clinical trials can impact patient selection and examined the effectiveness of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in patients with various degrees of negative symptoms.

METHOD

Using anonymized patient data from AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, and Pfizer from 20 placebo-controlled trials of SGAs in schizophrenia from the NewMeds repository, we applied different criteria for negative symptoms: prominent, predominant, and EMA criteria, which require predominant and core negative symptoms to be present and examined the impact of these on inclusion and outcome.

RESULTS

Operational criteria for negative symptoms in trials vary greatly in their inclusion of patients from "typical" trial samples. Of the patients in our studies, 8.1% and 62.3% met criteria for prominent negative symptoms, 10.2% to 50.2% met criteria for predominant negative symptoms and 7.6% to 40.0% met EMA criteria at baseline. After 6weeks of active treatment, 8% and 33.1% of patients met criteria for prominent residual negative symptoms and 14.9% to 65% met criteria for prominent and 12.2% to 45.5% met EMA criteria. Patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms showed marked improvement on second generation antipsychotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying various operational criteria for selecting patients for negative symptoms trials provides a great variability in percentage of suitable patients calling into question the extent to which some definitions may be overly narrow.

Adjunctive lisdexamfetamine dimesylate therapy in adult outpatients with predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia: open-label and randomized-withdrawal phases

Negative symptoms of schizophrenia (NSS), related to hypodopaminergic activity in the mesocortical pathway and prefrontal cortex, are predictive of poor outcomes and have no effective treatment. Use of dopamine-enhancing drugs (eg, psychostimulants) has been limited by potential adverse effects. This multicenter study examined lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a d-amphetamine prodrug, as adjunctive therapy to antipsychotics in adults with clinically stable schizophrenia and predominant NSS. Outpatients with stable schizophrenia, predominant NSS, limited positive symptoms, and maintained on stable atypical antipsychotic therapy underwent a 3-week screening, 10-week open-label adjunctive LDX (20-70 mg/day), and 4-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal. Efficacy measures included a modified Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS-18) and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total and subscale scores. Ninety-two participants received open-label LDX; 69 received double-blind therapy with placebo (n=35) or LDX (n=34). At week 10 (last observation carried forward; last open-label visit), mean (95% confidence interval) change in SANS-18 scores was -12.9 (-15.0, -10.8; P<0.0001). At week 10, 52.9% of participants demonstrated a minimum of 20% reduction from baseline in SANS-18 score. Open-label LDX was also associated with significant improvement in PANSS total and subscale scores. During the double-blind/randomized-withdrawal phase, no significant differences (change from randomization baseline) were found between placebo and LDX in SANS-18 or PANSS subscale scores. In adults with clinically stable schizophrenia, open-label LDX appeared to be associated with significant improvements in negative symptoms without positive symptom worsening. Abrupt LDX discontinuation was not associated with positive or negative symptom worsening. Confirmation with larger controlled trials is warranted.

Rater evaluations for psychiatric instruments and cultural differences: the positive and negative syndrome scale in China and the United States

This article compares Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) data from Chinese and American inpatients with chronic schizophrenia to show how differences in item ratings may reflect cultural attitudes of raters. The Chinese sample (N = 504) came from Beijing Huilongguan Hospital. The American sample came from 268 PANSS assessments of Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness subjects hospitalized for 15 days or more to optimize equivalence of the samples. When controlling for age and sex, the Chinese sample scored significantly lower for total score by 25% (p < 0.0001), for the positive subscale by 35% (p < 0.0001), and on the general subscale by 32% (p < 0.0001) but not significantly different on the negative subscale score (+0.26%; p = 0.76). However, the Chinese sample scored 26% higher on the item on poor rapport (p < 0.0001), 10.2% higher on passive social withdrawal (p = 0.003), and most notably 46% higher on the item on lack of judgment and insight (p < 0.0001). These results remain broadly consistent across sex subgroup analyses. Differences seem to be best explained by both cultural differences in patient clinical presentations and varying American and Chinese cultural values affecting rater judgment.

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.

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.

Comparing the PANSS in Chinese and American inpatients: cross-cultural psychiatric analyses of instrument translation and implementation

This article compares data from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) collected from Chinese and American inpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia to show how patterned differences in item ratings may reflect cultural attitudes of the raters. The Chinese sample (N=553) was based on consecutive admissions to four academic hospitals in Changsha, China. Only patients ill for 3 or more years were included in the analysis to match the chronically ill sample represented in the US CATIE sample. A total of 261 PANSS assessments were completed during a month when CATIE subjects had been hospitalized for 15 days or more to optimize equivalence of the US and Chinese samples. Controlling for age and gender, the total PANSS and the three sub-scores were all significantly lower in the Chinese than in the US CATIE sample by 5-8% (all p<.05). However, on 9 items, the Chinese sample scored 10-30% higher than the US sample (all p<.05) and on 5 items they scored over 20% higher (all p<.0001). These items rated increased hostility, poorer attention, lack of judgment and insight, disturbance of volition, and poorer impulse control. We ascribe these differences to cultural variations in the ways individuals relate to others in their social environment within Chinese and American societies.

Efficacy of iloperidone in schizophrenia: a PANSS five-factor analysis

BACKGROUND

The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score is widely used to assess antipsychotic efficacy, however schizophrenia is a multi-dimensional disorder. We conducted a 5-factor analysis for evaluating the efficacy of iloperidone vs. placebo across these different domains in the treatment of schizophrenia.

METHOD

The 5-factor model was determined from pooled data from 7 clinical trials (4 placebo- and active-controlled and 3 non-inferiority active-comparator trials of iloperidone) in schizophrenia (N=3580).Five factors were derived (excitement/hostility [P4,P7,G8,G14], depression/anxiety [G1,G2,G3,G4,G6], cognition [P2,N5,N7,G5,G10,G11,G12,G13,G15], positive [P1,P3,P5,P6,G9], and negative [N1,N2,N3,N4,N6,G7,G16]) from a factor analysis on the covariance matrix of 30 baseline PANSS items using a varimax rotation; factors retained had eigenvalues of ≥ 0.5. These newly derived 5 factors differ only slightly from other 5-factor analyses published by others using different datasets. The analysis of covariance model was then applied to assess these efficacy outcomes from the 4-6 week double-blind placebo and active controlled clinical trials of iloperidone.

RESULTS

Based on the placebo-controlled trials, iloperidone improvements from baseline (least squared mean change ± standard error) were as follows: excitement/hostility, 0.4 ± 0.21 for 10-16 mg, 0.6 ± 0.43 for 20-24 mg vs. -1.0 ± 0.23 for placebo; P<0.001 for both iloperidone doses vs. placebo; depression/anxiety, 1.9 ± 0.21 for 10-16 mg, 1.9 ± 0.41 for 20-24 mg vs. 1.1 ± 0.22 for placebo; P<0.05 for 10-16 mg dose vs. placebo; cognition, 2.8 ± 0.35 for 10-16 mg, 3.9 ± 0.69 for 20-24 mg vs. 1.6 ± 0.38 for placebo; P<0.05 for both iloperidone doses vs. placebo; positive, 3.7 ± 0.26 for 10-16 mg, 4.1 ± 0.53 for 20-24 mg vs. 2.7 ± 0.29 for placebo; P<0.05 for both iloperidone doses vs. placebo; and negative, 2.2 ± 0.29 for 10-16 mg, 2.5 ± 0.58 for 20-24 mg vs. 1.3 ± 0.32 for placebo; P<0.05 for 10-16 mg vs. placebo. Active controls validated iloperidone efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Iloperidone demonstrated positive treatment effects on these newly derived PANSS factors. The 10-16 mg and 20-24 mg dose groups had similar efficacy on the PANSS factors, with the exception of the depression/anxiety and negative factors, on which the 10-16 mg dose group showed statistical separation from placebo and the 20-24 mg dose group did not. At 6 weeks, the lack of separation from placebo for the higher dose group may have been due to the much smaller sample size in that group.

Ziprasidone hydrocloride: what role in the management of schizophrenia?

Background

Since schizophrenia is considered one of the top ten causes of disease-related disability in the world, the development of second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics (SGAs) has increased the hopes of psychiatrists. SGAs, however, cannot be considered a unique pharmacological class since each SGA has many complex pharmacologic actions, only some of which are shared with other SGAs. Even though manyantipsychotics have similar efficacy on average, prescribers may be able to achieve better than average results by considering differences in selecting a specific drug for a specific patient. Clinicians know that each patient is unique. In order to achieve best outcomes for the individual patient, the better therapy is the therapy tailored for the single patient.

Objectives

With this article, we provide information on a relatively new antipsychotic ziprasidone released in 2001 by Pfizer for the treatment of schizophrenia. Compared with other first line atypical antipsychotics ziprasidone has a unique profile due to potent interaction with serotonergic receptors and lesser action upon α1 adrenergic, H1 and M1 antagonist activities. This paper describes the development of ziprasidone, its unique properties and its metabolically-friendly profile including its receptor binding affinities, pharmacokinetics, CNS activity results of clinical efficacy and relevant clinical trials. Safety, efficacy and patient preference are also examined. The available literature on ziprasidone of the last five years is reviewed.

Safety of the electroconvulsive therapy-ziprasidone combination

In clinical practice, a nonnegligible proportion of patients with mood or psychotic disorders undergo electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) concomitantly with pharmacotherapy. Ziprasidone, a combined serotonin and dopamine receptor antagonist, is a second-generation antipsychotic agent with a lower incidence of extrapyramidal motor symptoms and prolactin elevation and a safer profile of adverse effects on plasma lipids, glucose levels, and body weight than other antipsychotics. To the best of our knowledge, there are as yet no available reports on the safety of the ECT-ziprasidone combination. We report here on a series of 8 female inpatients who underwent ECT while receiving ziprasidone (20-80 mg/d) as part of their regimen. Seven patients were treated for major depressive episode in the context of unipolar major depressive disorder (n = 5) or of bipolar disorder I (n = 2), whereas 1 patient was treated for exacerbation of schizophrenic symptoms. In all cases, the combination was well tolerated with only minimal adverse effects and unremarkable changes in corrected QT interval.

Antipsychotic medication, functional outcome and quality of life in schizophrenia: focus on amisulpride

BACKGROUND

Restoration of quality of life is considered as the ultimate treatment goal in the management of schizophrenia and is important for destigmatising the disease. However, few studies, including the most recent, have collected quality of life data prospectively or evaluated the relationship of treatment with quality of life.

SCOPE

Amisulpride is an atypical antipsychotic drug which has been described to have potency in improving negative symptoms of chronic schizophrenia and whose use is associated with a relatively low rate of emergence of extrapyramidal side-effects. These properties may contribute to a beneficial effect on quality of life. A systematic literature review of functional outcome in clinical trials with amisulpride was performed in order to assess the effect of this drug on quality of life and social functioning in patients. The Medline database was searched for all studies of amisulpride in schizophrenia which reported functional and quality of life outcomes up until 30 September 2009.

FINDINGS

Only one dedicated study assessing functional outcome or quality of life as a primary outcome criterion was identified. This demonstrated significant improvement in subjective well-being in patients with schizophrenia initiating treatment with amisulpride, and a correlation between this improvement and amelioration of psychopathology. In addition, functional outcome rating scales were used as secondary outcome measures in eight randomised clinical trials, and two naturalistic observational studies. Amisulpride treatment was associated with improvement in functional outcome, with effect sizes that were comparable between studies. Improvements in functional outcome are consistently greater than those observed in patients treated with haloperidol and similar in magnitude to those seen with three other atypical antipsychotics, namely olanzapine, ziprasidone and risperidone. A patient-reported outcome measure was used in only one comparative study, and demonstrated perception of a superior benefit with amisulpride compared to haloperidol. These findings could to some extent be replicated in several large naturalistic studies under standard conditions of care.

CONCLUSIONS

The data from studies on functional outcome and subjective well-being provide consistent information supporting the use of amisulpride for the treatment of schizophrenia in order to improve social functioning, integration into the community and autonomy, which are critical for the overall quality of life of patients with schizophrenia.

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.

Ziprasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialised Register (April 2007) and 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, at least single-blind, controlled trials comparing oral ziprasidone with oral forms of amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone 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 nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 3361 participants. The overall rate of premature study discontinuation was very high (59.1%). Data for the comparisons of ziprasidone with amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone were available. Ziprasidone was a less acceptable treatment than olanzapine (leaving the studies early for any reason: 5 RCTs, n=1937, RR 1.26 CI 1.18 to 1.35, NNH 7 CI 5 to 10) and risperidone (3 RCTs, n=1029, RR 1.11 CI 1.02 to 1.20, NNH 14 CI 8 to 50), but not than the other second generation antipsychotic drugs. Ziprasidone was less efficacious than amisulpride (leaving the study early due to inefficacy: 1 RCT, n=123, RR 4.72 CI 1.06 to 20.98, NNH 8 CI 5 to 50) olanzapine (PANSS total score: 4 RCTs, n=1291, MD 8.32 CI 5.64 to 10.99) and risperidone (PANSS total score: 3 RCTs, n=1016, MD 3.91 CI 0.27 to 7.55). Based on limited data there were no significant differences in tolerability between ziprasidone and amisulpride or clozapine. Ziprasidone produced less weight gain than olanzapine (5 RCTs, n=1659, MD -3.82 CI -4.69 to -2.96), quetiapine (2 RCTs, n=754, RR 0.45 CI 0.28 to 0.74) or risperidone (3 RCTs, n=1063, RR 0.49 CI 0.33 to 0.74). It was associated with less cholesterol increase than olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone. Conversely ziprasidone produced slightly more extrapyramidal side-effects than olanzapine (4 RCTs, n=1732, RR 1.43 CI 1.03 to 1.99, NNH not estimable) and more prolactin increase than quetiapine (2 RCTs, n=754, MD 4.77 CI 1.37 to 8.16), but less movement disorders (2 RCTs, n=822, RR 0.70 CI 0.51 to 0.97, NNT not estimable) and less prolactin increase (2 RCTs, n=767, MD -21.97 CI -27.34 to -16.60) than risperidone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Ziprasidone may be a slightly less efficacious antipsychotic drug than amisulpride, olanzapine and risperidone. Its main advantage is the low propensity to induce weight gain and associated adverse effects. However, the high overall rate of participants leaving the studies early limits the validity of any findings.

Second-generation antipsychotics for schizophrenia: can we resolve the conflict?

The initial enthusiasm about the second-generation or atypical antipsychotic drugs soon changed into criticism and debate, culminating in the controversial CATIE (Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness), CUtLASS (Cost Utility of the Latest Antipsychotic Drugs in Schizophrenia Study) and EUFEST (European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial) effectiveness trials. This review summarizes the results of three recent meta-analyses that compared second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) with placebo, with conventional antipsychotics, and with SGAs head-to-head. We compare the meta-analyses with previous reviews and put them in the perspective of CATIE, CUtLASS and EUFEST. The data show that the SGAs are not a homogeneous group and that this confusing classification should be abandoned. We find that, overall, the data are consistent but experts interpret the same results differently. The debate seems to be driven more by values than by data; some place an emphasis on cost, others focus on extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS), weight gain, or efficacy. In our opinion, the SGAs are not the breakthrough that industry would like to maintain. They have different properties, so a clinician may individualize a treatment plan to a given patient's problems, a decision that should be shared with the patient. However, these drugs are important contributions to treatment, and most psychiatrists, let alone patients, would probably not want to do without them.

Paliperidone extended-release for schizophrenia: effects on symptoms and functioning in acutely ill patients with negative symptoms

BACKGROUND

Most patients with schizophrenia exhibit negative symptoms, even during acute episodes. These difficult-to-treat symptoms are often associated with poor functioning and outcomes.

METHODS

A post-hoc analysis of pooled data from three 6-week double-blind studies included patients in an acute episode of schizophrenia who received paliperidone extended-release (ER) (3, 6, 9, or 12 mg) or placebo. Based on criteria developed by the authors, patients were stratified by the presence or absence of predominant negative symptoms at baseline (>or=40% of the maximum negative factor score and <40% of the maximum positive factor score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]).

RESULTS

Although these studies were not designed to examine patients with predominant negative symptoms, the criteria identified 23% of acutely ill patients (270/1193). The mean (SD) baseline PANSS negative symptoms factor score, 27.4 (3.3), was 49% of the maximum; the positive symptoms factor score, 23.7 (2.8), was 33% of the maximum. Completion rates with paliperidone ER (n=195) and placebo (n=75) were 64.6% and 44.0%, respectively. Greater improvements occurred with paliperidone ER vs placebo on PANSS (total, negative and other factors), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and Personal and Social Performance scores at endpoint (all P values <0.05). Adverse events reported in >or=10% of patients were (paliperidone ER vs placebo): headache (14.4% vs 6.7%), insomnia (13.8% vs 21.3%) and sinus tachycardia (10.3% vs 1.3%). Paliperidone ER treatment was associated with a similar response profile in patients without predominant negative symptoms (paliperidone ER, n=647; placebo, n=276).

CONCLUSIONS

Schizophrenia patients with predominant negative symptoms were identified in a population of acutely ill patients. Findings of this post-hoc analysis suggest that acutely ill patients with or without predominant negative symptoms respond similarly to treatment with paliperidone ER. No unexpected tolerability findings were observed.

Cognitive remediation in schizophrenia

Cognitive deficits are routinely evident in schizophrenia, and are of sufficient magnitude to influence functional outcomes in work, social functioning and illness management. Cognitive remediation is an evidenced-based non-pharmacological treatment for the neurocognitive deficits seen in schizophrenia. Narrowly defined, cognitive remediation is a set of cognitive drills or compensatory interventions designed to enhance cognitive functioning, but from the vantage of the psychiatric rehabilitation field, cognitive remediation is a therapy which engages the patient in learning activities that enhance the neurocognitive skills relevant to their chosen recovery goals. Cognitive remediation programs vary in the extent to which they reflect these narrow or broader perspectives but six meta-analytic studies report moderate range effect sizes on cognitive test performance, and daily functioning. Reciprocal interactions between baseline ability level, the type of instructional techniques used, and motivation provide some explanatory power for the heterogeneity in patient response to cognitive remediation.

Weight effects associated with antipsychotics: a comprehensive database analysis

BACKGROUND

Available data on atypical antipsychotic-induced weight gain are limited by a number of methodological factors. The objective of this report is to evaluate short-term (N=1742) and long-term (N=1649) weight effects in patients receiving standard doses of amisulpride, haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, and placebo based on 21 randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies from an integrated clinical trial database.

METHOD

Analyses of the integrated ziprasidone schizophrenia trials database were performed to estimate the weighted average of weight change and the percentage of subjects experiencing weight gain (or weight loss) across studies for each agent studied, based on fixed- and random-effects models. Durations of treatment exposure in long-term trials were controlled by well-defined time windows (6 month: 150 to 210 days; 1 year: 330 to 390 days). Weight gain or loss was defined using a 7% change from baseline threshold.

RESULTS

During long-term therapy with 1-year treatment duration, incidence of weight gain for subjects treated with ziprasidone (17%) was not significantly different from the placebo (13%) or haloperidol (41%) groups based on 95% confidence interval. In contrast, significantly greater weight gain incidence was observed for the olanzapine (57%) and risperidone (39%) groups compared to placebo. Median weight change of +0.49, -0.18, +1.50 and +0.55 lb/month was observed for haloperidol, ziprasidone, olanzapine and risperidone subjects, respectively, indicating differential weight change patterns compared to placebo (-0.32). Similar results were observed for the short-term (4-12 weeks) and 6-month treatment exposure cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm significant differences in long-term weight effects among atypical antipsychotics, consistent with findings from prior meta-analysis of antipsychotic-induced weight gain [Allison, D.B., Mentore, J.L., Heo, M., Chandler, L.P., Capelleri, J.C., Infante, M.C., Weiden, P.J., 1999. Antipsychotic induced weight gain: a comprehensive research synthesis. Am J Psychiatry 156, 1686-1696] and the CATIE schizophrenia study [Lieberman, J.A., Stroup, T.S., McEvoy, J.P., et al., 2005. Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs in patients with chronic schizophrenia. N Engl J Med 353, 1209-1223].

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.

Methodological issues in current antipsychotic drug trials

Every year numerous reports on antipsychotic drug trials are being published in neuropsychiatric journals, adding new information to our knowledge in the field. The information however is often hard for the reader to interpret, sometimes contradictory to comparable available studies and leaves more questions open than it actually answers. Although the overall quality of the studies is rather good, there are manifold options for further improvement in the conception, conduct, and reporting of antipsychotic drug trials. In this survey, we address methodological challenges such as the limited generalizability of outcomes due to patient selection and sample size; the vague or even lacking definition of key outcome parameters such as response, remission or relapse, insufficient blinding techniques, the pitfalls of surrogate outcomes and their assessment tools; the varying complex statistical approaches; and the challenge of balancing various ways of reporting outcomes. The authors present practical examples to highlight the current problems and propose a concrete series of suggestions on how to further optimize antipsychotic drug trials in the future.

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.

Ziprasidone: clinical properties and therapeutic promise

Ziprasidone is a second-generation antipsychotic with combined dopamine and serotonin receptor antagonistic activity. The initial evidence suggests an effective dosage range of 120–160 mg/day. Clinical trials have demonstrated that the drug is an effective antipsychotic in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders with some beneficial effect on negative symptoms and on symptoms of depression in schizophrenia. In addition, ziprasidone is efficacious in the manic phase of bipolar disorder. Ziprasidone has relatively few side effects, while its efficacy for florid positive symptoms is at least equivalent to conventional antipsychotics. The main adverse effects are somnolence and nausea. It has a better effect on cognitive deficiencies than conventional antipsychotics. The almost complete lack of weight gain or metabolic side effects makes ziprasidone an attractive second-generation antipsychotic agent.

Ziprasidone for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: a review of the clinical trials

Ziprasidone is a newer "atypical" or "second-generation" antipsychotic. Oral ziprasidone (ziprasidone hydrochloride) is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of schizophrenia, and acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar disorder (with or without psychotic features). Ziprasidone intramuscular (ziprasidone mesylate) is FDA-approved for acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia. Oral ziprasidone appears efficacious, and has been shown to have some limited clinical advantages over chlorpromazine and haloperidol in ameliorating negative symptoms of schizophrenia. In Phase 2 of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) for schizophrenia, ziprasidone did not match the clinical performance of olanzapine and risperidone, appearing closer in overall effectiveness to quetiapine. The rate of dose titration and the dose achieved may have an important bearing on ziprasidone's efficacy profile. In studies of usage for acute agitation in individuals with schizophrenia, intramuscular ziprasidone has been shown to be efficacious and relatively well tolerated. Regarding tolerability, ziprasidone, has important advantages in that it is not associated with clinically significant weight gain or adverse changes in cholesterol, triglycerides, or glycemic control, and patients may experience moderate improvement in these measures when switching to ziprasidone from a different antipsychotic agent. It also lacks significant persistent effects on prolactin levels, is not anticholinergic, and only infrequently causes extrapyramidal side effects or postural hypotension, although it can be associated with somnolence. This tolerability profile may be quite valuable in the treatment of some patients. Ziprasidone may prolong the electrocardiogram (ECG) QTc interval (QT interval corrected for heart rate by a standard algorithm), but after 5 years' clinical availability ziprasidone (by itself) does not appear to pose a substantial clinical problem in this regard. Therefore, ziprasidone may be considered a first-line drug option in the treatment of schizophrenia or manic episodes, but, in view of the differences among antipsychotic medications, drug selection should be guided by the patient's individual characteristics and situation.

Ziprasidone: a review of its use in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder

Ziprasidone (Geodon, Zeldox) is an atypical antipsychotic agent with a unique neurotransmitter receptor-binding profile. The oral formulation is indicated for the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia and the intramuscular formulation for the control of acute agitation in these patients. In adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, oral ziprasidone was effective at a dosage of 40-80 mg twice daily in patients experiencing a phase of acute illness, and at a dosage of 20-80 mg twice daily in those with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, including those who were symptomatically stable. Ziprasidone offers the advantage over most other atypical antipsychotic agents of being available in a fast-acting intramuscular formulation for control of acute agitation, thus providing clinicians with the option to safely and effectively transition to longer-term treatment with the oral formulation. Although careful consideration should be given to the propensity for ziprasidone to cause corrected QT (QTc) interval prolongation, albeit at a relatively low incidence, the drug generally has a favourable tolerability profile of low extrapyramidal syndrome (EPS) liability, neutral bodyweight gain, and potentially low propensity for metabolic complications. Thus, ziprasidone is an effective option for the management of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with the intramuscular formulation providing a useful option for the treatment of acute agitation in these patients.

Bifeprunox: a novel antipsychotic agent with partial agonist properties at dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptors

Most second-generation, atypical, dopamine (DA) D2/5-HT2 blocking antipsychotics still induce extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) in higher doses. Weight gain and metabolic disturbances are also a problem, and negative and cognitive symptoms have not been sufficiently addressed. The current brain DA mesolimbic hyperactive/mesocortical hypoactive hypothesis of schizophrenia suggests that DA D2/5-HT1A receptor partial agonist properties may be more efficacious with less side effects. DA D2 receptor partial agonists may stabilize a hyperactive/hypoactive DA condition. Additional 5-HT1A stimulation may enhance therapeutic efficacy and also improve EPS liability profile. In clinical trials in schizophrenic patients, the novel DA D2/5-HT1A partial agonist bifeprunox indeed demonstrates therapeutic efficacy, a safe EPS profile and appears beneficial regarding weight gain, prolactin, blood lipid and glucose levels and cardiac rhythm. The data on bifeprunox are promising and suggest that combined DA D2/5-HT1A partial agonism may well be important properties for future-generation antipsychotics.

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.