Augmentation with a second antipsychotic in patients with schizophrenia who partially respond to clozapine: a meta-analysis

Underuse of recommended treatments among people living with treatment-resistant psychosis

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend that individuals with treatment-resistant psychosis must be treated with clozapine. ECT has also been reported to improve symptom profiles. Identification of clozapine and/or ECT use in real-world practice enables understanding of the extent to which this evidence-base is implemented.

SETTING

Statewide public health tertiary referral service, the Tertiary Referral Service for Psychosis (TRSP), NSW, Australia.

OBJECTIVES

To (i) describe clinical characteristics of individuals with treatment-resistant psychosis and to detail the proportion who had received a trial of clozapine or ECT at any point during their illness course; (ii) describe the characteristics of the treatment trials in both those currently on clozapine and those previously on clozapine; (iii) document reasons in relevant individuals why clozapine had never been used.

METHODS

All TRSP clients who met the criteria for treatment resistance (TR) were included. A detailed casenote review was conducted to examine whether clozapine and/or ECT had ever been prescribed. Characteristics of clozapine and ECT trials were documented. Tertiary service treatment recommendations are described.

FINDINGS

Thirty-six of 48 individuals had TR. They had marked clinical and functional impairment. A minority were currently receiving clozapine (n = 14/36). Most had received a clozapine trial at some point (n = 32/36). Most experienced persistent clinical symptoms while on clozapine (n = 29/32). Clozapine plasma levels were very rarely reported (4/32). Augmentation and antipsychotic polypharmacy were common among those currently on clozapine. The median clozapine trial duration was 4.0 (IQR: 3.0-20.3) months in individuals previously prescribed clozapine. Reasons for clozapine discontinuation included intolerable side effects (n = 10/18) and poor adherence (n = 7/18). One-quarter of TR individuals had trialed ECT (n = 9/36). Tertiary service recommendations included routine plasma monitoring to optimize dose among people currently on clozapine; clozapine retrial in those previously treated; and clozapine initiation for those who had never received clozapine. ECT was recommended to augment clozapine and as an alternative where clozapine trial/retrial was not feasible.

CONCLUSION

Among people with TR referred to a tertiary service, clozapine and ECT were underutilized. Clozapine trials are typically terminated without an adequate trial. Strategies to optimize the use of clozapine therapy and ECT in clinical settings are needed to increase the therapeutic effectiveness of evidence-based therapies for treatment-resistant psychosis.

Exploring Hidden Issues in the Use of Antipsychotic Polypharmacy in the Treatment of Schizophrenia

The mainstay of schizophrenia treatment is pharmacological therapy using various antipsychotics including first- and second-generation antipsychotics which have different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic property leading to differential presentation of adverse events (AEs) and treatment effects such as negative symptoms, cognitive symptoms and cormorbid symptoms. Major treatment guidelines suggest the use of antipsychotic monotherapy (APM) as a gold standard in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, the effects of APM is inadequate and less potent to achieve symptom remission as well as functional recovery in real practice which has been consistently reported in numerous controlled clinical trials, large practical trials, independent small studies and systematic reviews till today. Therefore anti-psychotic polypharmacy (APP) regardless of the class of antipsychotics has been also commonly utilized for many reasons in real world practice. However, APP has also crucial pitfalls including increase of total psychotics including antipsychotics, high-doses of antipsychotics used, poor compliance, drug-drug interaction and risks for developing AEs, all of which are paradoxically related to poor clinical outcomes, whereas APP has also substantial advantages in reduction of re-hospitalization, severe psychopathology and targeted control of concurrent symptoms. Given currently limited therapeutic options, it is also important to properly utilize APP in order to maximize its clinical utility and minimize its risk for better treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia, based on risk/benefit with full understanding of pharmacological and clinical issues on APP. The present paper intends to address intriguing and important issues in the use of APP in real world practice.

Antipsychotic-induced extrapyramidal side effects: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background

Antipsychotic agents are the basis for the pharmacological management of acute and chronic schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, mood disorders with psychotic feature, and other psychotic disorders. Antipsychotic medication use is frequently associated with unfavorable adverse effects such as extrapyramidal side effects (EPSEs). Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis was aimed to determine the magnitude of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs.

Method

A literature search was conducted using legitimate databases, indexing services, and directories including PubMed/MEDLINE (Ovid^®), EMBASE (Ovid^®), google scholar and WorldCat to retrieve studies. Following screening and eligibility, the relevant data were extracted from the included studies using an Excel sheet and exported to STATA 15.0 software for analyses. The Random effects pooling model was used to analyze outcome measures at a 95% confidence interval. Besides, publication bias analysis was conducted. The protocol has been registered on PROSPERO with ID: CRD42020175168.

Result

In total, 15 original articles were included for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs among patient taking antipsychotic medications was 37% (95% CI: 18–55%, before sensitivity) and 31% (95% CI: 19–44%, after sensitivity). The prevalence of antipsychotic-induced parkinsonism, akathisia, and tardive dyskinesia was 20% (95% CI: 11–28%), 11% (95% CI: 6–17%), and 7% (95% CI: 4–9%), respectively. To confirm a small-study effect, Egger’s regression test accompanied by funnel plot asymmetry demonstrated that there was a sort of publication bias in studies reporting akathisia and tardive dyskinesia.

Conclusion

The prevalence of antipsychotic-induced EPSEs was considerably high. One in five and more than one in ten patients experienced parkinsonism and akathisia, respectively. Appropriate prevention and early management of these effects can enhance the net benefits of antipsychotics.

Clozapine resistant schizophrenia: Newer avenues of management

About 40%-70% of the patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia have a poor response to adequate treatment with clozapine. The impact of clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS) is even greater than that of treatment resistance in terms of severe and persistent symptoms, relapses and hospitalizations, poorer quality of life, and healthcare costs. Such serious consequences often compel clinicians to try different augmentation strategies to enhance the inadequate clozapine response in CRS. Unfortunately, a large body of evidence has shown that antipsychotics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, electroconvulsive therapy, and cognitive-behavioural therapy are mostly ineffective in augmenting clozapine response. When beneficial effects of augmentation have been found, they are usually small and of doubtful clinical significance or based on low-quality evidence. Therefore, newer treatment approaches that go beyond the evidence are needed. The options proposed include developing a clinical consensus about the augmentation strategies that are most likely to be effective and using them sequentially in patients with CRS. Secondly, newer approaches such as augmentation with long-acting antipsychotic injections or multi-component psychosocial interventions could be considered. Lastly, perhaps the most effective way to deal with CRS would be to optimize clozapine treatment, which might prevent clozapine resistance from developing. Personalized dosing, adequate treatment durations, management of side effects and non-adherence, collaboration with patients and caregivers, and addressing clinician barriers to clozapine use are the principal ways of ensuring optimal clozapine treatment. At present, these three options could the best way to manage CRS until research provides more firm directions about the effective options for augmenting clozapine response.

Antipsychotic Polypharmacy for the Management of Schizophrenia: Evidence and Recommendations

Schizophrenia is a debilitating illness with a lifetime prevalence estimate of 0.6% and consists of symptoms from the positive, negative, and cognitive domains. Social support, therapy, psychoeducation, and overall case management are very important aspects of the treatment of schizophrenia. However, as abnormalities in neurotransmission are one of the key findings of schizophrenia pathology, pharmacotherapies are cornerstones of the management of schizophrenia. Antipsychotics have been used as the primary pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia. These agents often have a good effect on reducing positive symptoms, but may not markedly improve negative symptoms or cognitive defects. However, at least 20% of individuals with schizophrenia do not experience a substantial response from monotherapy with antipsychotics. Further, despite evolving treatment protocols and advances in early recognition of the disorder, 70% of patients with schizophrenia require long-term, even lifetime, medication to control their symptoms and do not achieve complete recovery. To address these shortcomings, clinicians and research scientists have explored different combinations of treatments, polypharmacy, to improve the treatment of patients. Antipsychotic polypharmacy has been shown to cause more side effects than monotherapy, which is the main reason why most treatment guidelines caution against it. Antipsychotic monotherapy should be strived for and clozapine should be tried at the latest if two monotherapy trials with other antipsychotics have failed and no absolute contraindications exist. If residual symptoms exist despite trials of adequate dose and duration, other reasons that may reduce treatment effect should be ruled out. Long-acting injectables or blood concentration measurements should be considered to affirm compliance and proper serum levels. Antipsychotic polypharmacy should be considered and discussed with patients from whom the aforementioned procedures do not produce a satisfactory treatment result. In some cases, antipsychotic polypharmacy may produce better results than other forms of treatment augmentation, such as benzodiazepines. In particular, combining aripiprazole with clozapine may be effective in reducing treatment side effects or residual symptoms, and this is likely to hold true for combining other partial dopamine D₂ agonists with clozapine as well, although currently scant data exist. More research is needed, both in controlled but also real-world settings, to define optimal antipsychotic polypharmacy and/or other psychotropic treatment augmentation strategies for specific patient groups and situations.

Clinical Usefulness of Amisulpride Add-on Therapy in Schizophrenia Patients without Treatment Response to Second-generation Antipsychotics

Objective

The response to antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia is still unsatisfactory. Therefore, augmentation with other antipsychotics is common in clinical situations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the improvement of psychiatric symptoms and side effects after amisulpride add-on therapy.

Methods

Forty patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder without treatment response to second-generation antipsychotics were included in this study. Psychotic symptoms were evaluated using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Korean version of Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks after the addition of amisulpride.

Results

Among the 29 subjects who completed the 8-week study, 34.5% were responders according to PANSS total score. At week 8, the mean positive (p < 0.001), negative (p < 0.001), general (p < 0.001), and total (p < 0.001) PANSS scores and CDSS scores (p = 0.002) showed significant improvement compared to baseline. There was no increase in extrapyramidal side effects according to Simpson Angus Scale (p = 0.379) and Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (p = 0.070) and no weight gain (p = 0.308) after the add-on treatment.

Conclusion

The addition of amisulpride for schizophrenia patients without therapeutic response to second-generation antipsychotics is considered an effective and safe treatment. This study's results suggested that augmentation of second-generation antipsychotics with amisulpride could be a useful option for patients with schizophrenia unresponsive to second-generation antipsychotics. Further studies investigating the efficacy of amisulpride add-on therapy using placebo control are necessary to confirm these results.

Antipsychotic Polypharmacy and Metabolic Syndrome in Schizophrenia: A Review of Systematic Reviews

(Reprinted with permission from BMC Psychiatry (2018) 18:275).

Polypharmacy in schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder characterized by a heterogeneous symptom profile which comprises a clinical platform for widespread use of polypharmacy even though antipsychotic monotherapy is the recommended treatment regimen. This narrative review provides a summary of the current gap between evidence and practice for use of antipsychotic combination therapy in patients with schizophrenia. Antipsychotic polypharmacy is frequently prescribed instead of following international consensus of clozapine monotherapy in treatment-resistant patients. Antipsychotic-benzodiazepine combination therapy clearly has a role in the treatment of acute agitation whereas there is no evidence to support an effect on core schizophrenia symptoms when chronically prescribed. Antidepressants are typically added to antipsychotic treatment in case of persistent negative symptoms. Available evidence suggests that antidepressants may improve negative symptom control in schizophrenia. Combining an antipsychotic with an antiepileptic is not supported by any firm evidence, but individual mood stabilizers have come out positively in single trials. Generally, the evidence base for polypharmacy in schizophrenia maintenance treatment is sparse but may be warranted in certain clinical situations. Therapeutic benefits and side effects should be carefully monitored and considered to ensure a beneficial risk-benefit ratio if prescribing polypharmacy for specific clinical indications.

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: Updated recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

These updated guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology replace the original version published in 2011. They address the scope and targets of pharmacological treatment for schizophrenia. A consensus meeting was held in 2017, involving experts in schizophrenia and its treatment. They were asked to review key areas and consider the strength of the evidence on the risk-benefit balance of pharmacological interventions and the clinical implications, with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials where available, plus updates on current clinical practice. The guidelines cover the pharmacological management and treatment of schizophrenia across the various stages of the illness, including first-episode, relapse prevention, and illness that has proved refractory to standard treatment. It is hoped that the practice recommendations presented will support clinical decision making for practitioners, serve as a source of information for patients and carers, and inform quality improvement.

Clozapine augmentation strategies - a systematic meta-review of available evidence. Treatment options for clozapine resistance

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for clozapine resistance are diverse whereas, in contrast, the evidence for augmentation or combination strategies is sparse.

AIMS

We aimed to extract levels of evidence from available data and extrapolate recommendations for clinical practice.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed/MEDLINE database and in the Cochrane database. Included meta-analyses were assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria, with symptom improvement as the endpoint, in order to develop a recommendation grade for each clinical strategy identified.

RESULTS

Our search identified 21 meta-analyses of clozapine combination or augmentation strategies. No strategies met Grade A criteria. Strategies meeting Grade B included combinations with first- or second-generation antipsychotics, augmentation with electroconvulsive therapy for persistent positive symptoms, and combination with certain antidepressants (fluoxetine, duloxetine, citalopram) for persistent negative symptoms. Augmentation strategies with mood-stabilisers, anticonvulsants, glutamatergics, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation or cognitive behavioural therapy met Grades C-D criteria only.

CONCLUSION

More high-quality clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of add-on treatments for symptom improvement in patients with clozapine resistance. Applying definitions of clozapine resistance would improve the reporting of future clinical trials. Augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics and first-generation antipsychotics can be beneficial, but the supporting evidence is from low-quality studies. Electroconvulsive therapy may be effective for clozapine-resistant positive symptoms.

Dandy-Walker Malformation-Like Condition Revealed by Refractory Schizophrenia: A Case Report and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Dandy-Walker malformation is a rare congenital malformation involving cystic dilatation of the fourth ventricle, enlarged posterior fossa, complete or partial agenesis of the cerebellar vermis, elevated tentorium cerebelli, and hydrocephalus. Previous research highlighted a possible role for the cerebellum in schizophrenia as well as the contribution of underlying brain malformations to treatment resistance. Here, we present a case of a Dandy-Walker malformation-like condition revealed by a refractory schizophrenia in a 24-year-old male patient. We also conduct a literature review of all previously published case reports or case series of co-occurring posterior fossa abnormalities and schizophrenia or psychosis using a PubMed search query to better understand the potential link between these two disorders.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 9-month hospital stay was needed to address the treatment-resistant psychotic symptoms, and the patient continued to experience moderate symptoms despite the prescription of various antipsychotic and antidepressant medications. After an irregular initial medical follow-up, the patient is currently treated with 350 mg daily clozapine and 20 mg daily prazepam and still exhibits moderate anxiety without delirious thoughts, however allowing him to re-enroll at the university. Regarding the literature, 24 cases published between 1996 and 2017 were identified, reviewed and compared to the present case report.

DISCUSSION

This case report and literature review further illuminates the pathophysiology of psychotic disorders including the potential role of the cerebellum, reinforces the importance of a multidisciplinary approach for the neurological and psychiatric management of patients with schizophrenia, and highlights optimal pharmacological management strategies for treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy and metabolic syndrome in schizophrenia: a review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence on the association between antipsychotic polypharmacy and metabolic syndrome in schizophrenia. We conducted a review of published systematic reviews to evaluate evidence on the association between metabolic syndrome (diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidaemia) and exposure to antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia.

METHODS

We searched five electronic databases, complemented by reference screening, to find systematic reviews that investigated the association of antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia with hypertension, diabetes, or hyperlipidaemia. Selection of reviews, data extraction and review quality were conducted independently by two people and disagreements resolved by discussion. Results were synthesised narratively.

RESULTS

We included 12 systematic reviews, which reported heterogeneous results, mostly with narrative syntheses and without pooled data. The evidence was rated as low quality. There was some indication of a possible protective effect of drug combinations including aripiprazole for diabetes and hyperlipidaemias, compared to other combinations and/or monotherapy. Only one review reported the association between APP and hypertension. The most frequently reported combinations of medication included clozapine, possibly representing a sample of patients with treatment resistant illness. No included review reported results separately by setting (primary or secondary care).

CONCLUSIONS

Further robust studies are needed to elucidate the possible protective effect of aripiprazole. Long-term prospective studies are required for accurate appraisal of diabetes risk, hypertension and hyperlipidaemia in patients exposed to antipsychotic polypharmacy.

Amisulpride augmentation of clozapine for treatment-refractory schizophrenia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A second antipsychotic is commonly added to clozapine to treat refractory schizophrenia, notwithstanding the limited evidence to support such practice.

METHODS

The efficacy and adverse effects of this pharmacological strategy were examined in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, 12-week randomized trial of clozapine augmentation with amisulpride, involving 68 adults with treatment-resistant schizophrenia and persistent symptoms despite a predefined trial of clozapine.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between the amisulpride and placebo groups on the primary outcome measure (clinical response defined as a 20% reduction in total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale score) or other mental state measures. However, the trial under recruited and was therefore underpowered to detect differences in the primary outcome, meaning that acceptance of the null hypothesis carries an increased risk of type II error. The findings suggested that amisulpride-treated participants were more likely to fulfil the clinical response criterion, odds ratio 1.17 (95% confidence interval 0.40-3.42) and have a greater reduction in negative symptoms, but these numerical differences were not statistically significant and only evident at 12 weeks. A significantly higher proportion of participants in the amisulpride group had at least one adverse event compared with the control group (p = 0.014), and these were more likely to be cardiac symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment for more than 6 weeks may be required for an adequate trial of clozapine augmentation with amisulpride. The greater side-effect burden associated with this treatment strategy highlights the need for safety and tolerability monitoring, including vigilance for indicators of cardiac abnormalities, when it is used in either a clinical or research setting.

Amisulpride augmentation in clozapine-unresponsive schizophrenia (AMICUS): a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

When treatment-refractory schizophrenia shows an insufficient response to a trial of clozapine, clinicians commonly add a second antipsychotic, despite the lack of robust evidence to justify this practice.

OBJECTIVES

The main objectives of the study were to establish the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of augmentation of clozapine medication with a second antipsychotic, amisulpride, for the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

DESIGN

The study was a multicentre, double-blind, individually randomised, placebo-controlled trial with follow-up at 12 weeks.

SETTINGS

The study was set in NHS multidisciplinary teams in adult psychiatry.

PARTICIPANTS

Eligible participants were people aged 18-65 years with treatment-resistant schizophrenia unresponsive, at a criterion level of persistent symptom severity and impaired social function, to an adequate trial of clozapine monotherapy.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions comprised clozapine augmentation over 12 weeks with amisulpride or placebo. Participants received 400 mg of amisulpride or two matching placebo capsules for the first 4 weeks, after which there was a clinical option to titrate the dosage of amisulpride up to 800 mg or four matching placebo capsules for the remaining 8 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the proportion of 'responders', using a criterion response threshold of a 20% reduction in total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 68 participants were randomised. Compared with the participants assigned to placebo, those receiving amisulpride had a greater chance of being a responder by the 12-week follow-up (odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 0.40 to 3.42) and a greater improvement in negative symptoms, although neither finding had been present at 6-week follow-up and neither was statistically significant. Amisulpride was associated with a greater side effect burden, including cardiac side effects. Economic analyses indicated that amisulpride augmentation has the potential to be cost-effective in the short term [net saving of between £329 and £2011; no difference in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and possibly in the longer term.

LIMITATIONS

The trial under-recruited and, therefore, the power of statistical analysis to detect significant differences between the active and placebo groups was limited. The economic analyses indicated high uncertainty because of the short duration and relatively small number of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk-benefit of amisulpride augmentation of clozapine for schizophrenia that has shown an insufficient response to a trial of clozapine monotherapy is worthy of further investigation in larger studies. The size and extent of the side effect burden identified for the amisulpride-clozapine combination may partly reflect the comprehensive assessment of side effects in this study. The design of future trials of such a treatment strategy should take into account that a clinical response may be not be evident within the 4- to 6-week follow-up period usually considered adequate in studies of antipsychotic treatment of acute psychotic episodes. Economic evaluation indicated the need for larger, longer-term studies to address uncertainty about the extent of savings because of amisulpride and impact on QALYs. The extent and nature of the side effect burden identified for the amisulpride-clozapine combination has implications for the nature and frequency of safety and tolerability monitoring of clozapine augmentation with a second antipsychotic in both clinical and research settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number 2010-018963-40 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN68824876.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 49. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Polypharmacy and high-dose antipsychotics at the time of discharge from acute psychiatric wards

Aims and method

To determine the extent of prescribed antipsychotic polypharmacy and high-dose antipsychotics at the time of discharge from an acute psychiatric ward. Copies of discharge summaries for patients between the ages of 18 and 65 were examined; only those that had antipsychotic medications at the time of discharge were included. Names and doses of antipsychotics and all other medications concurrently prescribed were recorded.

Results

A total of 651 discharge summaries were included in the study. Nearly a quarter of individuals were discharged on one antipsychotic as the only medication to take home; only 6.8% were discharged on a high-dose antipsychotic and of those on combinations 59.6% were on depot medications. Combining antipsychotics significantly predicted the use of high dose.

Clinical implications

Most patients were discharged on doses of antipsychotics within the British National Formulary limits; however, a small proportion is still sent home on high doses of antipsychotics. Combining antipsychotics remains the strongest predictor of high-dose antipsychotic use; clinicians need to be aware of this.

3-Aminomethyl Derivatives of 2-Phenylimidazo[1,2-a]-pyridine as Positive Allosteric Modulators of GABAA Receptor with Potential Antipsychotic Activity

Schizophrenia is a mental illness characterized by behavioral changes as well as anatomical and neurochemical abnormalities. There has been remarkable progress in the drug discovery for schizophrenia; however, antipsychotics that act through molecular targets, other than monoaminergic receptors, have not been developed. One of the hypotheses of schizophrenia states that GABAergic dysfunction might be implemented in the pathophysiology of this disease. Our recent findings and previous clinical observations have suggested that modulation of GABAergic system through α₁-GABA_A receptors would represent an original approach for the treatment of schizophrenia. This study presents the synthesis and biological evaluation of a series of fluorinated 3-aminomethyl derivatives of 2-phenylimidazo[1,2-a]-pyridine as potential antipsychotic agents. Compound 7 has a high affinity for GABA_A receptor (K_i = 27.2 nM), high in vitro metabolic stability, and antipsychotic-like activity in amphetamine-induced hyperlocomotion test in rats (MED = 10 mg/kg). Compound 7 represents a promising point of entry in the course of development of antipsychotic agents with a nondopaminergic mechanism of action.

Prescription practices and attitude of psychiatrists towards clozapine: A survey of psychiatrists from India

AIM

To assess the attitude of psychiatrists towards clozapine and also to evaluate the prescription practices of psychiatrists for clozapine.

METHODOLOGY

An email survey was sent to 3381 psychiatrists from India, of whom 548 (16.2%) responded.

RESULTS

Mean number of years in clinical practice was 12.59 (SD-10.1) for participating psychiatrists. Majority of the participants rated their knowledge about clozapine to be good (61.5%)/very good (34.5%). The primary indication for use of clozapine for almost all the participants was treatment resistance and most of the psychiatrists initiated clozapine either in the dose of 25mg OD (44.3%) or 12.5mg OD (37%). Half (51.8%) of the psychiatrists preferred to use clozapine as BD dosing schedule, and median doses required to stabilize the patients ranged from 137.5 to 400mg/day. Once the clozapine dose had been stabilized, about half (51%) of the psychiatrists advised blood monitoring at monthly intervals. Almost all psychiatrists rated effectiveness of clozapine to be better than other antipsychotics. In terms of tolerability, 45.3% of the psychiatrists rated it as 'same as other antipsychotics' and 15.9% rated it as better than other antipsychotics. Most common patient and therapist related factors associated with reluctance to start clozapine were history of poor medication compliance and need for monitoring, respectively. Upon reviewing the prescription of other psychiatrists, participating psychiatrists reported that in about 28.46% of patients clozapine was not prescribed though indicated.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey suggests that clozapine is underused in India, although psychiatrists have adequate knowledge about the drug but many psychiatrists have negative attitude towards clozapine.

High-dose antipsychotics: addressing patients' resistance to physical health monitoring

High-dose antipsychotics are sometimes used in clinical practice when patients fail to respond to treatment at standard doses. Owing to the potential physical complications associated with this, strict adherence to physical health monitoring is essential. Challenges arise for clinicians when patients refuse to cooperate with this monitoring. We discuss different interventions to overcome this problem, many of which are coercive in nature, and consider their professional, ethical and legal implications. We include a flow diagram to assist clinicians in their documentation and decision-making in these circumstances as well as case vignettes showing when monitoring under restraint is and is not justifiable.

Critical review of antipsychotic polypharmacy in the treatment of schizophrenia

Antipsychotic polypharmacy remains prevalent; it has probably increased for the treatment of schizophrenia in real-world clinical settings. The current evidence suggests some clinical benefits of antipsychotic polypharmacy, such as better symptom control with clozapine plus another antipsychotic, and a reversal of metabolic side-effects with a concomitant use of aripiprazole. On the other hand, the interpretation of findings in the literature should be made conservatively in light of the paucity of good studies and potentially serious side-effects. Also, although the available data are still limited, two smaller-scale clinical trials provide preliminary evidence that converting antipsychotic polypharmacy to monotherapy could be a valid and reasonable treatment option. Several studies have explored strategies to change physicians' antipsychotic polypharmacy prescribing behaviours. These have revealed that, while the impact of purely educational interventions may be limited, more aggressive procedures such as directly notifying physicians by letters or phone calls can be more effective in reducing antipsychotic polypharmacy. In conclusion, antipsychotic polypharmacy can work for some clinically difficult conditions; however, it should be the exception rather than the rule and may be avoidable in many patients. More importantly, the paucity of the data clearly emphasizes the need for further investigations on not only advantages and disadvantages of antipsychotic polypharmacy, but also regarding effective interventions in already prescribed polypharmacy regimens.

Cost-effectiveness of second-generation antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost-effectiveness of alternate treatment strategies using second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to estimate the costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for different sequences of treatments for 40-year-old patients with schizophrenia. We considered first-line treatment with one of the four SGAs: olanzapine (OLZ), risperidone (RSP), quetiapine (QTP), and ziprasidone (ZSD). Patients could switch to another of these antipsychotics as second-line therapy, and only clozapine (CLZ) was allowed as third-line treatment. We derived parameter estimates from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trial of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study and published sources.

RESULTS

The ZSD-QTP strategy (first-line treatment with ZSD, change to QTP if ZSD is discontinued, and switch to CLZ if QTP is discontinued) was most costly while yielding the greatest QALYs, with an incremental cost-effective ratio (ICER) of $542,500 per QALY gained compared with the ZSD-RSP strategy. However, the ZSD-RSP strategy had an ICER of $5,200/QALY gained versus the RSP-ZSD strategy and had the greatest probability of being cost-effective given a willingness-to-pay threshold between $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY. All other treatment strategies were more costly and less effective than another strategy or combination of other strategies. Results varied by different time horizons adopted.

CONCLUSIONS

The ZSD-RSP strategy was most cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold between $5,200 and $542,500 per QALY. Our results should be interpreted with caution because they are based largely on the CATIE trial with potentially limited generalizability to all patient populations and doses of SGAs used in practice.

Aripirazole augmentation in clozapine-associated obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Patients with schizophrenia often experience comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Within these patients, a significant subgroup developed secondary obsessive-compulsive symptoms during treatment with clozapine.

METHOD

In this paper, we report on four cases in which adjunctive therapy with aripiprazole was tested to alleviate obsessive-compulsive symptoms in schizophrenia.

RESULTS

All four patients had a significant improvement in obsessive-compulsive symptoms. The combination of clozapine and aripiprazole was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This case series demonstrates the clinical efficacy of aripiprazole adjunctive therapy with clozapine in schizophrenic patients with comorbid obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Larger-sampled and controlled studies are required in order to test and confirm these observations.

Aripiprazole versus haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a 12-month, randomized, naturalistic trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term studies for patients with resistant schizophrenia are necessary to assess the effectiveness of combination strategies on persisting positive symptoms.

AIMS AND METHODS

This multicenter, naturalistic, randomized, superiority study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00395915) aimed to compare clinical efficacy and tolerability of haloperidol versus aripiprazole as combination treatment with clozapine in patients with resistant schizophrenia.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients were followed up for 12 months. After 12 months, the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment was not significantly different between aripiprazole and haloperidol (37% vs 28%, respectively; P = 0.431). The change in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score was similar in the aripiprazole and haloperidol groups (-7.0 vs -7.9, respectively; P = 0.389), whereas the tolerability total score decreased significantly more in the aripiprazole group (-7.2 vs -2.3; P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

While the effectiveness of clozapine augmentation with a second antipsychotic agent is not clearly demonstrated yet, results from this study suggest that augmentation with aripiprazole offers no substantial benefit over haloperidol in efficacy. Aripiprazole was perceived more tolerable than haloperidol, but it is uncertain how this finding may translate into the real world of clinical practice.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy in psychotic disorders: a critical review of neurobiology, efficacy, tolerability and cost effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to review the scientific evidence for neurobiological rationale, efficacy, tolerability and cost effectiveness of antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP).

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search of Medline, Embase, Ovid and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews until April 2012 was carried out.

RESULTS

Theories behind APP have only modest pre-clinical and clinical evidence. We found limited statistical evidence supporting modest efficacy of APP in patients with psychotic symptoms refractory to clozapine. APP is associated with increased mortality, metabolic syndrome, decreased cognitive functioning, high dose prescription and non-adherence. It brings up extra costs, lacking evidence for cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-clinical studies underpinning neurobiological hypotheses in APP are lacking. Evidence supporting efficacy of APP is limited with modest beneficial clinical relevance. APP is associated with several serious adverse effects and increased health costs. In the absence of more convincing pre-clinical support and clinical evidence we advise adherence to existing guidelines and limiting combinations of antipsychotics (in consideration with other pharmacotherapeutic, somatic and psychotherapeutic options) to patients with clozapine-refractory psychosis in well-evaluated individual trials that might need 10 weeks or more.

Lamotrigine augmentation in patients with schizophrenia who show partial response to clozapine treatment

BACKGROUND

Several placebo controlled studies investigating lamotrigine augmentation of clozapine in schizophrenia patients with partial response have shown varying results. The aim of this study was to further investigate the efficacy and safety of this augmentation strategy, and its effect on the glutamatergic system through utilizing mismatch negativity (MMN) component of auditory event related potentials.

METHODS

The study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine augmentation of clozapine in a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective, randomized design. Thirty-four patients diagnosed according to DSM-IV schizophrenia criteria and with partial response to clozapine were included. Patients were randomized to 25mg/day of lamotrigine or placebo, gradually increasing up to 200mg/day on the 6th week. The change in psychopathology was assessed with Positive and Negative Syndrome (PANSS), Calgary Depression (CDS) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scales. A neuropsychological test battery was administered and MMN measurements were also obtained at baseline and endpoint. Safety evaluation included physical examination, UKU Side Effect Rating Scale (UKU) assessment and serum drug level measurements.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two treatment groups in PANSS Positive and General Psychopathology, CDS, neurocognitive test and UKU scores, as well as MMN measurements. PANSS Total, Negative and CGI-S scores showed significant improvement compared to lamotrigine in the placebo group.

CONCLUSION

This study did not show any benefit of augmentation of clozapine with lamotrigine in schizophrenia patients with partial response. The need for further investigation of other augmentation strategies of clozapine in partially responsive schizophrenia patients is evident.

Pharmacological augmentation strategies for schizophrenia patients with insufficient response to clozapine: a quantitative literature review

BACKGROUND

When schizophrenia patients have insufficient response to clozapine, pharmacological augmentation is often applied. This meta-analysis summarizes available evidence on efficacy of pharmacological augmentation of clozapine treatment in schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

METHODS

Only double-blind randomized controlled studies were included. Primary outcome measure was total symptom severity, and secondary outcome measures were subscores for positive and negative symptoms. Effect sizes were calculated from individual studies and combined to standardized mean differences (Hedges's g).

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies reporting on 15 different augmentations were included. Significant better efficacy than placebo on total symptom severity was observed for lamotrigine, citalopram, sulpiride, and CX516 (a glutamatergic agonist). The positive effect of lamotrigine disappeared after outlier removal. The other positive findings were based on single studies. Significantly better efficacy on positive symptom severity was observed for topiramate and sulpiride. The effect of topiramate disappeared after outlier removal. Results for sulpiride were based on a single randomized controlled trial. Citalopram, sulpiride, and CX516 showed better efficacy for negative symptoms than placebo, all based on single studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence for efficacy of clozapine augmentation is currently scarce. Efficacy of lamotrigine and topiramate were both dependent on single studies with deviating findings. The effect of citalopram, sulpiride, and CX516 were based on single studies. Thus, despite their popularity, pharmacological augmentations of clozapine are not (yet) demonstrated to be superior to placebo.

Clozapine for the treatment of schizophrenia

INTRODUCTION

Despite considerable progress in the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia, about 30% of patients are minimally responsive to antipsychotics and there is still an excessively high rate of mortality in schizophrenia patients. Clozapine , a D(2)-5HT(2) antagonist, was the first antipsychotic to demonstrate efficacy in treatment-resistant patients, and to be associated with the lowest risk of death.

AREAS COVERED

The pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of clozapine are covered in this article, based on a literature review (PubMed) from 1975 to 2012. Pivotal, as well as supporting, randomized controlled trials are reviewed, along with observational and/or naturalistic safety studies. This review of clozapine will allow the reader to determine the place for clozapine in the schizophrenia treatment landscape.

EXPERT OPINION

Studies conducted so far suggest that clozapine is the treatment of choice for schizophrenic patients who are refractory to treatment, display violent behaviors, or who are at high risk of suicide. However, it is also the antipsychotic with the worst side effect profile, the highest risk of complications, and the most difficult to prescribe. Experience with clozapine should therefore be included in the education of future physicians.

Association of antipsychotic polypharmacy with health service cost: a register-based cost analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association of antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia with cost of primary and secondary health service use.

METHOD

Comparative analysis of health service cost for patients prescribed antipsychotic polypharmacy versus antipsychotic monotherapy. Resource utilisation and costs were described using central Danish registers for a 2 year period (2007-2008). We included patients attached to one of two Danish psychiatric referral centres in 1 January 2008 and/or 1 January 2009. Their prescribed treatment with either antipsychotic polypharmacy or monotherapy at the two cross-sectional dates was recorded and used as proxy of polypharmacy exposure during the preceding year. A multivariate generalised linear model was fitted with total costs of primary and secondary health service use as dependent variable, and antipsychotic polypharmacy, diagnosis, age, gender, disease duration, psychiatric inpatient admissions, and treatment site as covariates.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 736 outpatients with a diagnosis in the schizophrenia spectrum. Antipsychotic polypharmacy was associated with significantly higher total health service costs compared with monotherapy (2007: 25% higher costs; 2008: 17% higher costs) when adjusting for potential confounders and risk factors. A subgroup analysis suggested that the excessive costs associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy were partly accounted for by the functional level of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate that antipsychotic co-prescribing is associated with increased use of health care services, even though no causal relations can be inferred from an observational study.

Antipsychotic Polypharmacy in Clozapine Resistant Schizophrenia: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Tapering Antipsychotic Co-treatment

There is a considerable disparity between clinical practice and recommendations based on meta-analyses of antipsychotic polypharmacy in clozapine resistant schizophrenia. For this reason, we investigated the clinical response to reducing the use olanzapine that had been previously added on clozapine treatment among seriously ill hospitalized patients. In a randomized controlled trial with crossover design, we studied volunteer patients (N=15) who had olanzapine added on to clozapine in a state mental hospital. Clozapine monotherapy was just as effective as clozapine-olanzapine therapy, according to results from Clinical Global Impression Scale and Global Assessment of Functioning as primary outcome measures. Polypharmacy is widely used in treating schizophrenia, and usually, add-on medications are started because of worsening of the clinical state. A major confounding feature of these add-ons is whether observed improvements are caused by the medication or explained by the natural fluctuating course of the disorder. The present study, in spite of its small size, indicates the necessity of reconsidering the value of polypharmacy in treating schizophrenia.

Augmentation of clozapine with a second antipsychotic - a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine using meta-analysis the effect of adding a second antipsychotic to established clozapine monotherapy.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted in April 2011, and randomised placebo-controlled double-blind studies were identified. We performed a meta-analysis of efficacy (as standardised mean difference) and tolerability (withdrawals from trials) and a regression analysis of duration of study versus effect size. We also examined publication bias using funnel-plot analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 14 studies were included (734 subjects). Individual study numbers ranged from 10 to 207 (mean 52.6, median 40). Augmentation of clozapine with a second antipsychotic conferred a small benefit over placebo (effect size -0.239 (95% CI: -0.452, -0.026); P = 0.028). Meta-regression of the effect of length of treatment on effect size showed no relationship (P = 0.254). The risk of discontinuing antipsychotic augmentation was no greater than the risk of discontinuing placebo (RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.80-1.82). There was no evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Augmentation with a second antipsychotic is modestly beneficial in patients not responding fully to clozapine. Tolerability seems not to be adversely affected, at least in the short term. Longer studies do not appear to increase the probability of showing positive effects for augmentation.

Adjunctive treatment of bimodal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in pharmacologically non-responsive patients with schizophrenia: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the efficacy of bimodal repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in treating pharmacologically non-responsive patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Ten patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia, unresponsive to pharmacological treatment, underwent treatment with 15 rTMS sessions, as an adjunctive therapy, for three weeks. Each session comprised 40 trains, beginning every 30s: 20 trains of 10 Hz rTMS to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) with a 3-s duration and 20 trains of 1 Hz rTMS to the left temporoparietal cortex (TPC) with a 30-s duration. We assessed patients via the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Korean Version of the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (K-CDSS), at five time points: baseline, Days 8, 15, and 22, and 1 week after final treatment (Day 29). Patients who agreed to take neurocognitive tests underwent neurocognitive function evaluations at baseline and 1 week after final treatment.

RESULTS

At Day 29, all PANSS subscale scores in had decreased significantly compared to baseline (Z=-2.214, p=0.027, positive; Z=-2.132, p=0.033, negative; Z=-2.023, p=0.043, general pathology; Z=-2.371, p=0.018, total). Effect over time was significant for the PANSS positive and negative subscale scores and total score (χ(2)=13.35, p=0.010; χ(2)=10.27, p=0.036; and χ(2)=16.50, p=0.002, respectively) but not for the general pathology subscale. Among the neurocognitive tests, the fourth and fifth trials and total K-AVLT scores showed significant increases (Z=-2.041, p=0.041; Z=-2.251, p=0.024; and Z=-2.201, p=0.028, respectively), suggesting improvement in short-term auditory verbal memory.

CONCLUSIONS

Bimodal rTMS stimulation of left DLPFC and left TPC induced clinical improvement in pharmacologically non-responsive schizophrenia patients and may have improved their short-term verbal memories.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy: a survey study of prescriber attitudes, knowledge and behavior

OBJECTIVE

Although common in psychiatric practice, reasons for antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) have remained unclear.

METHODS

Single-site, semi-structured interview study of prescribers at a psychiatric teaching hospital inquiring about APP attitudes and behaviors, including frequency, preferred combinations, rationale and concerns.

RESULTS

Forty-four prescribers reported using APP in 17.0 ± 10.0% of antipsychotic-treated patients. Although clinicians themselves initiated APP in only 23.3 ± 27.0% of cases, they did not attempt conversion to antipsychotic monotherapy in 40.9 ± 37.7%, despite reported successful conversion in 28.0 ± 30.8% of cases. The following reasons justified most APP (0-10): cross-titration (9.2 ± 1.4), failed clozapine trial (8.2 ± 2.2), randomized controlled evidence (8.0 ± 2.0), and clozapine intolerance (7.7 ± 2.6). Prescribers felt "moderately" (5.0 ± 1.9) concerned about APP (0-10), mostly due to chronic side effects (7.6 ± 2.0), lack of evidence (7.1 ± 2.2), non-adherence risk (6.7 ± 2.3) and mortality risk (6.7 ± 3.2), while increased cost (4.9 ± 2.5) and higher total antipsychotic dose (4.2 ± 2.9) ranked lowest. Comparing high with low APP prescribers (>10% vs. ≤ 10% of patients; mean: 36.1 ± 19.8 vs. 3.4 ± 3.4, p<0.0001), no differences emerged on 25/26 ratings regarding APP justification and 9/9 ratings regarding concerns. In a multivariate analyses, only attending status (OR=10.3, p=0.0043) and endorsing a specific APP preference (OR=21.4, p=0.011) predicted APP use >10% (r(2):0.35, p<0.0001), yet no uniformly preferred APP strategy emerged.

CONCLUSIONS

High APP prescribers had more clinical experience, less concerns about APP and more likely a preferred APP choice, although no overall preferred strategy emerged. Otherwise, high and low APP prescribers shared attitudes toward APP. Both had inherited most of their APP cases and were reluctant to convert patients to antipsychotic monotherapy.

Optimizing clozapine treatment

OBJECTIVE

Clozapine treatment remains the gold standard for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, but treatment with clozapine is associated with several side-effects that complicate the use of the drug. This clinical overview aims to provide psychiatrists with knowledge about how to optimize clozapine treatment. Relevant strategies for reducing side-effects and increasing the likelihood of response are discussed.

METHOD

Studies of clozapine available in MEDLINE were reviewed.

RESULTS

A slow up-titration of clozapine is recommended in order to reach the optimal dosage of clozapine and diminish the risk of dose-dependent side-effects. Particularly, in case of partial response or non-response, the use of therapeutic drug monitoring of clozapine is recommended. Plasma levels above the therapeutic threshold of 350-420 ng/ml are necessary to determine non-response to clozapine. To ease the burden of dose-dependent side-effects, dose reduction of clozapine should be tried and combination with another antipsychotic drug may facilitate further dose reduction. For most side-effects, counteracting medication exists. Augmentation with lamotrigine, antipsychotics, or electroconvulsive therapy may be beneficial in case of partial response to clozapine.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with clozapine should be optimized in order to increase the rate of response and to minimize side-effects, thus diminishing the risk of discontinuation and psychotic relapse.

Add-on of aripiprazole improves outcome in clozapine-resistant schizophrenia

Although clozapine proved effective in treating 30-50% of the cases of resistant schizophrenia, its clinical use is hampered by significant side effects. To overcome this problem, augmentation with other atypical antipsychotics has been attempted, with conflicting results. A clozapine-aripiprazole combination showed interesting properties, due to the favourable complementary pharmacodynamic receptor profile and to the negligible metabolic interactions. In this retrospective case series, we investigated the change in BPRS scores and metabolic features like BMI, fasting glucose, total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, functional outcome HoNOS Rome and PSP scores after aripiprazole augmentation in 16 persons with treatment-resistant schizophrenia who were already treated with clozapine. The results demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in metabolic indices, psychopathology and functional outcome measures from baseline to endpoint (6weeks) after augmentation with aripiprazole. Statistically significant correlations were observed between psychopathological and behavioural measures at baseline and at endpoint. Linear regression analysis defined a tripartite model, in which item HoNOS Rome 11, measuring autonomy in everyday life, explained nearly half of functional outcome PSP score predictive variance, together with BPRS total psychopathology score and HoNOS Rome total social functioning score. Adequately conducted randomised double-blind studies should provide further specific data highlighting the role of a clozapine-aripiprazole combination in improving functional outcome of persons with treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia: benefits and risks

Antipsychotic polypharmacy refers to the co-prescription of more than one antipsychotic drug for an individual patient. Surveys of prescribing in psychiatric services internationally have identified the relatively frequent and consistent use of combined antipsychotics, usually for people with established schizophrenia, with a prevalence of up to 50% in some clinical settings. A common reason for prescribing more than one antipsychotic is to gain a greater or more rapid therapeutic response than has been achieved with antipsychotic monotherapy. However, the evidence on the risks and benefits for such a strategy is equivocal, and not generally considered adequate to warrant a recommendation for its use in routine clinical practice in psychiatry. Combined antipsychotics are a major contributor to high-dose prescribing, associated with an increased adverse effect burden, and of limited value in helping to establish the optimum maintenance regimen for a patient. The relatively widespread use of antipsychotic polypharmacy identified in cross-sectional surveys reflects not only the addition of a second antipsychotic to boost therapeutic response, but also the use of as-required antipsychotic medication (mainly to treat disturbed behaviour), gradual cross-titration while switching from one antipsychotic to another, and augmentation of clozapine with a second antipsychotic where the illness has failed to respond adequately to an optimized trial of clozapine. This review addresses the clinical trial data and other evidence for each of these pharmacological approaches. Also reviewed are examples of systematic, practice-based interventions designed to reduce the prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, most of which have met with only modest success. Guidelines generally agree that if combined antipsychotics are prescribed to treat refractory psychotic illness, this should be after other, evidence-based, pharmacological treatments such as clozapine have been exhausted. Further, their prescription for each patient should be in the context of an individual trial, with monitoring of the clinical response and adverse effects, and appropriate physical health monitoring.

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

These guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology address the scope and targets of pharmacological treatment for schizophrenia. A consensus meeting, involving experts in schizophrenia and its treatment, reviewed key areas and considered the strength of evidence and clinical implications. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from the participants and interested parties, and cover the pharmacological management and treatment of schizophrenia across the various stages of the illness, including first-episode, relapse prevention, and illness that has proved refractory to standard treatment. The practice recommendations presented are based on the available evidence to date, and seek to clarify which interventions are of proven benefit. It is hoped that the recommendations will help to inform clinical decision making for practitioners, and perhaps also serve as a source of information for patients and carers. They are accompanied by a more detailed qualitative review of the available evidence. The strength of supporting evidence for each recommendation is rated.

Pharmacotherapy for treatment-refractory schizophrenia

INTRODUCTION

despite advances in pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, a large percentage of persons with schizophrenia remain at least partially nonresponsive to treatment, leading to increased morbidity/mortality, increased healthcare cost, and poor quality of life for affected individuals.

AREAS COVERED

this paper comprises a review of recent research in drug therapy for schizophrenia, particularly treatment-refractory schizophrenia, with a focus on research conducted between 2005 and June 2010. Databases that were searched include: Pubmed, CINAHL, Science Direct, Medline and Clinical Trials.gov. Primary search terms were 'treatment-refractory schizophrenia' and 'treatment-resistant schizophrenia', with cross reference to specific agents covered in this article. An objective perspective on current trends in pharmacotherapy for treatment-refractory schizophrenia. We review the available evidence and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of published data in this field.

EXPERT OPINION

although there have been many advances in pharmacotherapy for schizophrenia, more well-designed trials are required to establish true efficacy and safety of current prescribing trends in clinical practice.

Evidence-based pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia

We describe the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia and have arranged the manuscript as a simple algorithm which starts from the choice of an antipsychotic drug for an acutely ill patient and concludes with the most important questions about maintenance treatment. In acutely ill patients the choice of drug is mainly based on pragmatic criteria. Among many strategies used for agitated patients, haloperidol plus promethazine is the best examined one. In case of persistent depression or negative symptoms treatment includes antidepressants, and some second-generation antipsychotic drugs (SGAs) have been found somewhat superior to first-generation antipsychotic drugs (FGAs) in these domains. If an antipsychotic is suspected to be ineffective, several factors need to be checked before action is taken. Few trials have addressed strategies such as switching the drug or increasing the dose in case of non-response. Clozapine remains the gold-standard for treatment-refractory patients, while none of the numerous augmentation strategies that have been examined by randomized controlled trials can be generally recommended. Maintenance treatment with antipsychotic drugs effectively reduces relapse rates. Small, not definitive, studies have shown that withdrawing antipsychotics from patients who have been stable for up to 6 yr leads to more relapses than continuing medication. In effect, continuous treatment is more effective than intermittent strategies. The identification of optimum doses for relapse prevention with FGAs has proven difficult, and there is little randomized data on SGAs. Although the randomized evidence on a superiority of depot compared to oral treatment is not ideal, this approach suggests obvious advantages in assuring compliance.

[Polypharmacy in schizophrenia]

BACKGROUND

While most guidelines recommend monotherapy with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) in schizophrenia, the combined application of multiple psychotropic agents is very common, especially in treatment-refractory cases.

METHODS

This review summarizes the evidence of combined antipsychotic treatment strategies and the augmentation of antipsychotics with mood stabilizers, antidepressants and experimental substances, based on publications accessible in public databases (Medline/Ovid, Google, http://www.clinicaltrials.gov) up to October 2009.

RESULTS

Polypharmacy aims to address several aspects of treatment resistance and side effects of antipsychotics. Some evidence supports the augmentation of antipsychotics with antidepressants for negative symptoms and comorbid major depressive episodes. The add-on of lithium and mood stabilizers lacks compelling evidence but might be beneficial for specific subgroups. For treatment-resistant cognitive symptoms, cognitive re-mediation seems most promising as no pharmacological add-on strategy has gained convincing evidence so far. Acute dystonic movements should be treated with anticholinergic agents while agitation and anxiety might respond to short-term application of benzodiazepines. Treatment-resistant positive and/or negative symptoms should primarily lead to clozapine monotherapy; the add-on of a second SGA may be considered in single cases.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, rigorous data on combination therapy in schizophrenia are rare, and further randomized controlled trials (RCT), naturalistic and head-to-head-studies are necessary.

Plasma clozapine, norclozapine, and the clozapine:norclozapine ratio in relation to prescribed dose and other factors: data from a therapeutic drug monitoring service, 1993-2007

Therapeutic drug monitoring of plasma clozapine and of its principal plasma metabolite N-desmethylclozapine (norclozapine) (predose or "trough" sample) can help in monitoring adherence, in dose adjustment, and in minimizing the risk of toxicity. To obtain data to assist in the interpretation of analytical results, the results from a clozapine therapeutic drug monitoring service, 1993-2007, have been audited. There were 104,127 samples from 26,796 patients [18,750 (70%) men aged at time of first sample (median, range) 34 (10-89) years, and 7763 (30%) female aged 38 (12-90) years]. Clozapine was not detected (plasma concentration <0.01 mg/L) in 1.5% of samples (prescribed clozapine dose up to 900 mg/d). Plasma clozapine was either below 0.35 mg/L or greater than 0.60 mg/L in 42.5% and 28.4% of samples, respectively; in 0.4% samples plasma clozapine was 2.0 mg/L or more. Although plasma clozapine was broadly related to prescribed dose, there was much variation: 1.2% of samples had plasma clozapine >1.0 mg/L at prescribed clozapine doses up to 150 mg/d (76.2% < 0.35 mg/L), whereas 23.3% of samples had plasma clozapine < 0.35 mg/L at doses of 850 mg/d and over (18.0% > 1.0 mg/L). The highest plasma clozapine and norclozapine concentrations encountered were 4.95 and 2.45 mg/L, respectively. Although the median plasma clozapine:norclozapine ratio was 1.25 at plasma clozapine concentrations < 0.35 mg/L, the median ratio was 2.08 at plasma clozapine concentrations > 1.0 mg/L. Data (median, 10th-90th percentile) for both clozapine and norclozapine by prescribed clozapine dose band are useful in assessing partial adherence. Analysis of the plasma clozapine:norclozapine ratio by clozapine concentration provides clear evidence that clozapine N-demethylation becomes saturated at higher plasma clozapine concentrations and adds urgency to the requirement for dose adjustment should smoking habit change. A clozapine:norclozapine ratio greater then 2 suggests either a nontrough sample, or that clozapine N-demethylation has become saturated.

Adjunctive risperidone for partially responsive people with schizophrenia treated with clozapine

The large numbers of partial clozapine responders represent a major therapeutic challenge. Unfortunately, there are no clear data to support how best to treat these patients. This study examines the efficacy and safety of adjunctive risperidone in a well-defined treatment-resistant population optimally treated with clozapine. A total of 69 inpatients and outpatients with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder entered a 16-week double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial. Of them, 33 participants were randomized to risperidone and 36 were randomized to placebo. There was no significant group difference in the predefined response criteria. There were modest group differences for Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) positive symptoms, which were significant in the completer analysis (F=5.70; df=1, 70.3; p=0.02; ES=0.27) but not the intent-to-treat (ITT) analyses (F=3.01; df=1, 77.5; p=0.09; ES=0.19). A similar pattern was found for the BPRS total score, with the completer analysis showing a significant improvement in the risperidone group (F=5.21; df=1, 64.9; p=0.03; ES=0.27), whereas the ITT analysis was not significant (F=3.52; df=1, 71.3; p=0.06; ES=0.22). In addition, there was a small, but significant, group difference for negative symptoms, as measured by the SANS total score, which favored the risperidone group (F=5.67; df=1, 78.7; p=0.02; ES=0.24). There were no significant group differences on safety measures, including neuropsychological test and extrapyramidal symptom scores. A significant elevation of prolactin in the risperidone group was observed. The study results suggest that adjunctive risperidone may have a modest benefit for treatment-resistant clozapine patients. The study results are discussed in the context of previous double-blind studies of adjunctive risperidone. (clinicaltrials.gov, trial number: NCT00056498).

The combined use of risperidone long-acting injection and clozapine in patients with schizophrenia non-adherent to clozapine: a case series

Poor adherence to clozapine treatment represents an important problem in clinical practice because additional useful treatment options are unavailable. Although switching to risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI) has been recommended for those with compliance problems, this medication has been found to be less suitable for patients who previously received clozapine. Based on the suggested beneficial effects of RLAI, such as higher rates of treatment continuation and patient satisfaction, and the possible effectiveness of oral risperidone augmentation, it seems worthwhile to try RLAI augmentation for clozapine non-adherence. In this article, we present the cases of four patients with schizophrenia undergoing combined treatment with RLAI and clozapine for more than one year after multiple relapses related to clozapine non-adherence. Durations and frequencies of hospitalizations markedly declined after RLAI augmentation. Indeed, three patients receiving RLAI and clozapine for 1.2-3.5 years were never hospitalized during this period. The lengths of hospitalizations before and after augmenting with RLAI were 54.7 +/- 33.1 and 4.2 +/- 4.2 days/year, respectively. Participants also showed great improvements in social skills. These findings suggest the possible beneficial effects of RLAI augmentation in cases of clozapine nonadherence. However, controlled clinical trials are necessary to confirm whether RLAI augmentation represents a useful treatment option for patients who have not adhered to clozapine treatment.

Polypharmacy in schizophrenia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although most guidelines recommend monotherapy in schizophrenia, the combined application of multiple psychotropic agents is very common, especially in treatment-refractory cases. We review the empirical basis supporting these attempts and their relevance for clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Polypharmacy intends to address different aspects of treatment resistance, most importantly insufficient response of psychotic positive and negative symptoms, but also cognitive disturbances, affective comorbidity, obsessive-compulsive syndromes and side-effects of antipsychotic drugs. This review summarizes the current state of evidence of combined antipsychotic treatment strategies and the augmentation of antipsychotics with mood stabilizers, antidepressants and experimental substances.

SUMMARY

In general, rigorous data on combination therapy in schizophrenia are rare and further randomized controlled trials, naturalistic trials and head-to-head-trials are necessary. Some evidence supports a combination of antipsychotics and antidepressants for negative symptoms and comorbid major depressive episodes. The add-on of lithium and mood stabilizers lacks compelling evidence, but might be beneficial for specific subgroups. For treatment-resistant cognitive symptoms, antipsychotic medication should be combined with cognitive remediation, as no pharmacological add-on strategy has gained convincing evidence so far. Treatment-emergent positive and/or negative symptoms under clozapine monotherapy might benefit from adding a second atypical substance.