Treatment resistant or resistant to treatment? Antipsychotic plasma levels in patients with poorly controlled psychotic symptoms

Overcoming the barriers to identifying and managing treatment-resistant schizophrenia and to improving access to clozapine: A narrative review and recommendation for clinical practice

Clozapine is the only approved antipsychotic for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Although a large body of evidence supports its efficacy and favorable risk-benefit ratio in individuals who have failed two or more antipsychotics, clozapine remains underused. However, variations in clozapine utilization across geographic and clinical settings suggest that it could be possible to improve its use. In this narrative review and expert opinion, we summarized information available in the literature on the mechanisms of action, effectiveness, and potential adverse events of clozapine. We identified barriers leading to discouragement in clozapine prescription internationally, and we proposed practical solutions to overcome each barrier. One of the main obstacles identified to the use of clozapine is the lack of appropriate training for physicians: we highlighted the need to develop specific professional programs to train clinicians, both practicing and in residency, on the relevance and efficacy of clozapine in TRS treatment, initiation, maintenance, and management of potential adverse events. This approach would facilitate physicians to identify eligible patients and offer clozapine as a treatment option in the early stage of the disease. We also noted that increasing awareness of the benefits of clozapine among healthcare professionals, people with TRS, and their caregivers can help promote the use of clozapine. Educational material, such as leaflets or videos, could be developed and distributed to achieve this goal. The information provided in this article may be useful to improve disease burden and support healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers navigating the complex pathways to TRS management.

[Management of treatment resistance-Treatment-resistant schizophrenia]

Despite a very high prevalence and substantial impairments among affected individuals, treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) has not been sufficiently researched in clinical research in the field of psychiatric disorders and the pathophysiology is still poorly understood. A better clinical and pathophysiological understanding of this heterogeneous and severely affected population of people with persistent symptoms in different domains is necessary in order not only to be able to intervene early but also to develop novel therapeutic strategies or individualized treatment approaches. This review article presents the state of the art criteria of the pharmacological TRS, neurobiological disease models and predictive factors for TRS as well as the phenomenon of pseudo-treatment resistance and the clinical management of TRS. In the future, not only the use of operationalized criteria and definitions of TRS in longitudinal studies and randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are paramount, but also the observation of trajectories with the integration of multimodal longitudinal phenotyping and the longitudinal collection of clinical routine data in academic research, which will be possible in the newly created German Center for Mental Health (DZPG).

Identification and treatment of individuals with childhood-onset and early-onset schizophrenia

Approximately 8 % of patients with schizophrenia are diagnosed before age 18, and 18 % experience their first symptoms before age 18. This narrative review explores the management of patients with early-onset schizophrenia (EOS) and childhood-onset schizophrenia (COS) from diagnosis to their transition to adult care settings. Early diagnosis of schizophrenia in children and adolescents is essential for improving outcomes, but delays are common due to overlapping of symptoms with developmental phenomena and other psychiatric conditions, including substance use, and lack of clinicians' awareness. Once diagnosed, antipsychotic treatment is key, with specific second-generation agents generally being preferred due to better tolerability and their broader efficacy evidence-base in youth. Dosing should be carefully individualized, considering age-related differences in drug metabolism and side effect liability. Clinicians must be vigilant in detecting early non-response and consider switching or dose escalation when appropriate. Since early age of illness onset is a consistent risk factor for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), clinicians need to be competent in diagnosing TRS and using clozapine. Since COS and EOS are associated with cognitive deficits and impaired functioning, psychosocial interventions should be considered to improve overall functioning and quality of life. Good long-term outcomes depend on continuous treatment engagement, and successful transitioning from pediatric to adult care requires careful planning, early preparation, and collaboration between pediatric and adult clinicians. Targeting functional outcomes and quality of life in addition to symptom remission can improve overall patient well-being. Comprehensive evaluations, age-specific assessments, and targeted interventions are needed to address the unique challenges of EOS and COS.

Safety of BEN guidelines in clozapine treatment: A Canadian perspective

OBJECTIVE

Unidentified benign ethnic neutropenia (BEN) has been recognized as a factor contributing to clozapine underutilization and discontinuation. Guidelines were implemented to accommodate BEN in Canada, and our main objective was to evaluate clozapine's safety in a sample of Canadian psychiatric patients with BEN.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review was conducted at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada. Through the clozapine clinic registry, participants were identified who (i) received clozapine using the approved BEN guidelines for hematological monitoring, and (ii) had at least one complete blood count pre- and post-clozapine initiation.

RESULTS

Our sample population was comprised of 41 BEN patients who were African-Caribbean (49 %), African (34 %), African-North American (12 %), Middle Eastern (2 %), and Indian-Caribbean (2 %). There was a significant reduction in hematological alerts for these patients while monitored under BEN guidelines (p < 0.001). The mean within-patient ANC value was not significantly different one year after clozapine initiation compared to the pre-clozapine baseline (p = 0.069). None of the patients discontinued clozapine for hematological reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings demonstrated that patients monitored under the modified hematological guidelines for BEN can be safely treated with clozapine. These findings have important clinical ramifications as increased implementation of BEN guidelines may allow for broader use of clozapine.

Cariprazine augmentation of clozapine in schizophrenia-a retrospective chart review

The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of cariprazine augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia in a retrospective chart review. Among 916 medical records of schizophrenia patients, we identified 12 individuals treated with a combination of those drugs for a duration of 3-60 weeks [median 32 (10-40)]. Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores were used to measure the treatment response between the introduction of cariprazine augmentation of clozapine and the last point of observation. The majority of the patients presented treatment response (9/12 patients, 75%) after 4-16 weeks of therapy [median 6 (4-12)]. Treatment was associated with the decrease in positive, negative, affective, and anxiety symptom severity, as well as improvement of patient global functioning. One patient discontinued the treatment due to side effects (akathisia), and two patients halted the therapy due to the exacerbation of psychotic symptoms. Our study presents a thorough clinical description of the largest number of treatment-resistant schizophrenia patients medicated using cariprazine augmentation of clozapine in a "real-world" setting. Our results suggest that the use of this combination may lead to the improvement in a broad range of symptoms of patients with this condition.

Point of care assay for blood aripiprazole concentrations: development, validation and utility

BACKGROUND

The antipsychotic aripiprazole is often used in the treatment of first-episode psychosis. Measuring aripiprazole blood levels provides an objective measure of treatment adherence, but this currently involves taking a venous blood sample and sending to a laboratory for analysis.

AIMS

To detail the development, validation and utility of a new point of care (POC) test for finger-stick capillary blood concentrations of aripiprazole.

METHOD

Analytical performance (sensitivity, precision, recovery and linearity) of the assay were established using spiked whole blood and control samples of varying aripiprazole concentration. Assay validation was performed over a 14-month period starting in July 2021. Eligible patients were asked to provide a finger-stick capillary sample in addition to their usual venous blood sample. Capillary blood samples were tested by the MyCare™ Insite POC analyser, which provided measurement of aripiprazole concentration in 6 min, and the venous blood sample was tested by the standard laboratory method.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients agreed to measurements by the two methods. Venous blood aripiprazole concentrations as assessed by the laboratory method ranged from 17 to 909 ng/mL, and from 1 to 791 ng/mL using POC testing. The correlation coefficient between the two methods (r) was 0.96 and there was minimal bias (slope 0.91, intercept 4 ng/ml).

CONCLUSIONS

The MyCare Insite POC analyser is sufficiently accurate and reliable for clinical use. The availability of this technology will improve the assessment of adherence to aripiprazole and the optimising of aripiprazole dosing.

Role of FKBP5 and its genetic mutations in stress-induced psychiatric disorders: an opportunity for drug discovery

Stress-induced mental health disorders are affecting many people around the world. However, effective drug therapy for curing psychiatric diseases does not occur sufficiently. Many neurotransmitters, hormones, and mechanisms are essential in regulating the body's stress response. One of the most critical components of the stress response system is the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis. The FKBP prolyl isomerase 51 (FKBP51) protein is one of the main negative regulators of the HPA axis. FKBP51 negatively regulates the cortisol effects (the end product of the HPA axis) by inhibiting the interaction between glucocorticoid receptors (GRs) and cortisol, causing reduced transcription of downstream cortisol molecules. By regulating cortisol effects, the FKBP51 protein can indirectly regulate the sensitivity of the HPA axis to stressors. Previous studies have indicated the influence of FKBP5 gene mutations and epigenetic changes in different psychiatric diseases and drug responses and recommended the FKBP51 protein as a drug target and a biomarker for psychological disorders. In this review, we attempted to discuss the effects of the FKBP5 gene, its mutations on different psychiatric diseases, and drugs affecting the FKBP5 gene.

Long-acting antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: opportunities and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Maintenance antipsychotic treatment improves multiple outcomes in people with schizophrenia. These benefits are challenged by medication nonadherence, which is a common occurrence. Long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) formulations were developed to reduce nonadherence and thereby improve outcomes. This narrative review is based on a PubMed search (January 2000 - August 2022) for studies on LAI antipsychotics.

AREAS COVERED

Opportunities and challenges associated with LAIs are reviewed. Advantages, compared to oral antipsychotics (OAs), include improved adherence, reduced relapse and hospitalization risk, delayed and lower relapse risk after stopping treatment, and the ability to differentiate true treatment resistance from 'pseudo'-resistance. Additionally, LAIs are associated with lower all-cause mortality than OAs. LAIs are under-used in many services, partly reflecting negative attitudes, misconceptions, and lack of knowledge among clinicians, patients, and carers. Practical barriers to LAI use include acquisition costs and inadequate service structures to administer/monitor LAI treatment.

EXPERT OPINION

The education and engagement of clinicians, patients and caregivers can assist more informed decision-making regarding LAIs. Future research regarding LAIs should encompass multiple complementary designs, focus on functionality and recovery outcomes, and include groups at high risk of relapse, including those with comorbid substance use disorders and early in the course of schizophrenia.

Lurasidone Augmentation of Clozapine in Schizophrenia—Retrospective Chart Review

The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lurasidone augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (SZ) in a retrospective chart review. From the medical records of 916 SZ patients, we identified 16 individuals treated with a combination of clozapine and lurasidone. The detailed clinical data are described separately for each patient. We compared the Clinical Global Impression—Severity (CGI-S) scores between three points of observation: before the treatment and one month and two months after its initiation. CGI Improvement (CGI-I) scores were used to evaluate the treatment response between the first and last points of observation. The vast majority of patients (14/16, 87.5%) responded to lurasidone augmentation of clozapine (CGI-I scores 1 or 2). Therapeutic effects were observable after 3–12 weeks of treatment (median 6 (4–6)). A reduction in CGI-S scores was observed after the first month of observation. There was an observable reduction in positive, depressive and anxiety symptoms, as well as an improvement in psychosocial functioning. Two patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Our study suggests that lurasidone augmentation of clozapine may lead to improvements in a broad range of SZ symptom dimensions.

Efficacy and safety of Lu AF35700 in treatment-resistant schizophrenia: A randomized, active-controlled trial with open-label extension

INTRODUCTION

Treatment resistance constitutes the highest burden of disease within schizophrenia. We hypothesized that the synergistic activity of Lu AF35700 at dopamine D1 and D2 receptors might provide superior antipsychotic effects versus first-line antipsychotic therapy in patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia (TRS), with a benign tolerability profile.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial (NCT02717195) followed by a one year open-label safety extension (NCT02892422). Following prospective confirmation of treatment resistance, patients were randomized (1:1:1) to 10 weeks double-blind treatment with Lu AF35700 10 mg or 20 mg, or active comparator (risperidone or olanzapine).

RESULTS

1628 patients were screened for TRS, of which 1092 entered the prospective confirmation period. Of these, 697 were randomized (Lu AF35700 10 mg n = 235, 20 mg n = 232, comparator n = 230) and 395 discontinued before randomization, including 264 (24 %) who responded to treatment. 586 patients completed the double-blind phase, of which 524 entered the open-label extension and 318 completed 1-year of open-label treatment. At the end of the double-blind phase, the mean ± SE change in positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) total score was -10.1 ± 0.96 for Lu AF35700 10 mg, -8.22 ± 0.98 for Lu AF35700 20 mg, and - 9.90 ± 0.97 for the comparator group. Treatment differences [95 % CI] versus comparator treatment were non-significant (-0.12 [-2.37; 2.13] and 1.67 [-0.59; 3.94], respectively). The most common adverse events with Lu AF35700 were increased weight and headache. Prolactin values decreased by ≥50 % in both sexes treated with Lu AF35700.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite evidence of antipsychotic efficacy, treatment with Lu AF35700 failed to differentiate from conventional antipsychotic treatment for patients with TRS.

Assessment of treatment resistance criteria in non-invasive brain stimulation studies of schizophrenia

Novel treatment modalities, such as non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS), typically focus on patient groups that have failed multiple treatment interventions. Despite its promise, the clinical translation of NIBS in schizophrenia has been limited. One important obstacle to implementation is the inconsistent reporting of treatment resistance in the clinical trial literature contributing to heterogeneity in reported effects. In response, we develop a numerical approach to synthesize quality of assessment of Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia (TRS) and apply this to studies investigating therapeutic response to NIBS in patients with schizophrenia. Literature search conducted through PubMed database identified 119 studies investigating Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and Transcranial Electrical Stimulation in treating resistant schizophrenia symptoms. A quality score out of 11 was assigned to each study based on adherence to the international consensus guidelines for TRS developed by the Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) group. Results revealed an overall paucity of studies with thorough assessment and/or reporting of TRS phenomenon, as evidenced by a mean quality score of 3.38/11 (SD: 1.01) for trials and 5.16/11 (SD: 1.57) for case reports, though this improved minimally since the publication of consensus criteria. Most studies considered treatment-resistance as a single dimensional construct by reporting resistance of a single symptom, and failed to establish treatment adherence, resistance time course and functional impairment. We conclude that the current NIBS literature in schizophrenia do not reflect its true effects on treatment-resistance. There is an urgent need to improve assessment and reporting standards of clinical trials that target TRS.

Treatment resistance in psychiatry: state of the art and new directions

Treatment resistance affects 20-60% of patients with psychiatric disorders; and is associated with increased healthcare burden and costs up to ten-fold higher relative to patients in general. Whilst there has been a recent increase in the proportion of psychiatric research focussing on treatment resistance (R² = 0.71, p < 0.0001), in absolute terms this is less than 1% of the total output and grossly out of proportion to its prevalence and impact. Here, we provide an overview of treatment resistance, considering its conceptualisation, assessment, epidemiology, impact, and common neurobiological models. We also review new treatments in development and future directions. We identify 23 consensus guidelines on its definition, covering schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, bipolar affective disorder, and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This shows three core components to its definition, but also identifies heterogeneity and lack of criteria for a number of disorders, including panic disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and substance dependence. We provide a reporting check-list to aid comparisons across studies. We consider the concept of pseudo-resistance, linked to poor adherence or other factors, and provide an algorithm for the clinical assessment of treatment resistance. We identify nine drugs and a number of non-pharmacological approaches being developed for treatment resistance across schizophrenia, major depressive disorder, bipolar affective disorder, and OCD. Key outstanding issues for treatment resistance include heterogeneity and absence of consensus criteria, poor understanding of neurobiology, under-investment, and lack of treatments. We make recommendations to address these issues, including harmonisation of definitions, and research into the mechanisms and novel interventions to enable targeted and personalised therapeutic approaches.

Consideration of Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics for Polypharmacy Regimen in the Treatment of Schizophrenia: Put It on the Table or Not?

Antipsychotic monotherapy (APM) is considered best-acceptable treatment option regardless of antipsychotic class and formulation types for treating schizophrenia. However, antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) has been also widely utilized in routine clinical practice. Despite APP has some clinical benefits it has also numerous pitfalls in relation with increased total number and doses of APs leading to adverse events as well as decrease of treatment adherence and persistence resulting in poor clinical outcomes. Recent introduction of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) to the market has offered a chance for better medication adherence/persistence and also provided a simplification of treatment regime leading to more stabilized treatment for schizophrenia patients. When we cannot stay away from APP in the treatment of schizophrenia, clinicians need to find more proper APP regimens and thereby utilization of APP in efficient way should be a practical strategy to benefit schizophrenia patient in a real world treatment setting. With this regard, LAIs can be one of available APP regimen for treatment of schizophrenia in routine practice since their clinical utility and pharmacokinetic stability over oral APs have been well-elaborated today. However, when we have to commence LAIs as a part of APP with oral APs or other LAIs, every effort should be made before doing so whether or not validated and available treatment options or other clinical factors were not done or evaluated yet. Any treatment guidelines do not support APP regardless of the formulation of APP regimen or address two or more LAIs for treatment of schizophrenia till today.

The Relation between the Plasma Concentrations of Long-Acting Atypical Antipsychotics and Clinical Effectiveness in Patients Affected by Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective Disorder: A Comprehensive Overview

Atypical antipsychotic depot medications are currently recommended for patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) to prevent relapse and ameliorate the long-term prognosis of these patients. This review critically summarizes the available data about the association between the plasma concentrations of long-acting Second- Generation Antipsychotics (SGAs) and the clinical effectiveness of these compounds in patients affected by SCZ or schizoaffective disorder. Our question is if the measurement of these concentrations can be helpful for clinicians in predicting treatment response and clinical stabilization of patients. Bibliographic research on the main databases was performed, and 13 studies were finally included in this review. Contrasting results were found between plasma concentrations of long-acting injectable (LAI) risperidone and clinical amelioration according to rating scale scores. Data are too scanty to draw conclusions for olanzapine and paliperidone. In contrast, despite small sample sizes, data are quite concordant in showing a relation between long-acting SGA plasma concentrations and D2 receptor occupancy. Despite the preliminary encouraging results, particularly for D2 receptor occupancy, future research with larger samples will have to confirm the clinical usefulness of measuring LAI SGA plasma concentrations to predict the clinical response of patients affected by severe mental conditions such as SCZ.

Demographic and clinical variables associated with response to clozapine in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clozapine is the only licensed pharmacotherapy for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, response to clozapine is variable. Understanding the demographic and clinical features associated with response to clozapine may be useful for patient stratification for clinical trials or for identifying patients for earlier initiation of clozapine. We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate clinical and demographic factors associated with variation in clozapine response in treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Subsequently, we performed a random-effects meta-analysis to evaluate differences in duration of illness, age at clozapine initiation, age of illness onset, body weight and years of education between clozapine responders and non-responders. Thirty-one articles were eligible for qualitative review and 17 of these were quantitatively reviewed. Shorter duration of illness, later illness onset, younger age at clozapine initiation, fewer hospitalisations and fewer antipsychotic trials prior to clozapine initiation showed a trend to be significantly associated with a better response to clozapine. Meta-analysis of seven studies, totalling 313 subjects, found that clozapine responders had a significantly shorter duration of illness compared to clozapine non-responders [g = 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.56; p = 0.01]. The results imply that a delay in clozapine treatment may result in a poorer response and that a focus on prompt treatment with clozapine is warranted.

Asenapine: an atypical antipsychotic with atypical formulations

Asenapine is a second-generation (atypical) antipsychotic medication not available in a pill that can be swallowed; rather, it is commercialized in sublingual and transdermal formulations. This is a consequence of extensive first-pass metabolism if ingested. The sublingual formulation is approved in many jurisdictions for the treatment of schizophrenia and manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder and is available generically. The efficacy profile is well characterized in a number of clinical trials, including an off-label use for the management of agitation. Obstacles to its use include food and drink restrictions, twice-daily dosing and adverse effects such as dysgeusia (distorted, altered, or unpleasant taste) and oral hypoesthesia (numbness). Transdermal asenapine was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2019 for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults. Efficacy was established in a registrational study examining acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia. The patch needs to changed once daily. Obstacles to its use include the potential for skin reactions such as erythema and pruritis, and being a branded product, it is more costly than other options. This is a narrative review of the chemistry and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of asenapine, as well as summarizing the efficacy and tolerability of both sublingual and transdermal asenapine, and its possible place in treatment.

Predictors of treatment resistant schizophrenia: a systematic review of prospective observational studies

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia, affecting approximately 20-30% of patients with schizophrenia, has a high burden both for patients and healthcare services. There is a need to identify treatment resistance earlier in the course of the illness, in order that effective treatment, such as clozapine, can be offered promptly. We conducted a systemic literature review of prospective longitudinal studies with the aim of identifying predictors of treatment-resistant schizophrenia from the first episode. From the 545 results screened, we identified 12 published studies where data at the first episode was used to predict treatment resistance. Younger age of onset was the most consistent predictor of treatment resistance. We discuss the gaps in the literature and how future prediction models can identify predictors of treatment response more robustly.

Predicting onset of early- and late-treatment resistance in first-episode schizophrenia patients using advanced shrinkage statistical methods in a small sample

Evidence suggests there are two treatment-resistant schizophrenia subtypes (i.e. early treatment resistant (E-TR) and late-treatment resistant (L-TR)). We aimed to develop prediction models for estimating individual risk for these outcomes by employing advanced statistical shrinkage methods. 239 first-episode schizophrenia (FES) patients were followed-up for approximately 5 years after first presentation to psychiatric services; of these, n=56 (25.2%) were defined as E-TR and n=24 (12.6%) were defined as L-TR. Using known risk factors for poor schizophrenia outcomes, we developed prediction models for E-TR and L-TR using LASSO and RIDGE logistic regression models. Models' internal validation was performed employing Harrell's optimism-correction with repeated cross-validation; their predictive accuracy was assessed through discrimination and calibration. Both LASSO and RIDGE models had high discrimination, good calibration. While LASSO had moderate sensitivity for estimating an individual risk for E-TR and L-TR, sensitivity estimated for RIDGE model for these outcomes was extremely low, which was due to having a very large estimated optimism. Although it was possible to discriminate with sufficient accuracy who would meet criteria for E-TR and L-TR during the 5-year follow-up after first contact with mental health services for schizophrenia, further work is necessary to improve sensitivity for these models.

Antipsychotic Treatment Failure: A Systematic Review on Risk Factors and Interventions for Treatment Adherence in Psychosis

Objective: Antipsychotic medication non-adherence has detrimental effects on patients' clinical outcome. It is unclear which risk factors affect adherence most and which interventions are effective at improving adherence to antipsychotic medication. The aim of this systematic review is to summarize evidence exploring risk factors of non-adherence to antipsychotic treatment and effectiveness of intervention to improve adherence in patients with psychotic spectrum disorders.

Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed from 1994 to 2019 using a structured search strategy. Studies were quality assessed, and studies reporting on possible risk factors and intervention strategies were synthesized.

Results: We reviewed 26 studies on factors related to antipsychotic medication adherence and 17 studies on interventions to improve adherence in patients with psychosis spectrum disorders. Risk factors of non-adherence included younger age, poor illness insight, cannabis abuse, and the presence of severe positive symptoms. Antipsychotic medication adherence was associated with positive attitude toward medication of both patients and their family, family involvement, and illness insight. Somewhat consistent evidence was found for interventions involving family and technology-based interventions and strategies combining depot medication with psychoeducation. However, given the wide range of heterogeneous interventions and methodological limitations, findings must be interpreted with caution.

Conclusion: Despite much effort invested in the research area of antipsychotic medication adherence, the heterogeneity in study design and outcome, adding to confounding effects and possible biases, and methodological restraints complicate comparability of the results. Future research in this field should therefore be conducted on patient-tailored interventions, considering risk factors affecting the patient and implementing well-validated, standardized assessment methods. Accordingly, this systematic review seeks to facilitate endeavors improving adherence to antipsychotic treatment by identifying modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, outlining effective intervention strategies, and proposing recommendations to enhance adherence strategies.

Undetectable or subtherapeutic serum levels of antipsychotic drugs preceding switch to clozapine

Adequate antipsychotic treatment intensity is required for defining treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and justifying clozapine treatment. We investigated the occurrence of undetectable or subtherapeutic serum levels of oral antipsychotics preceding switch to clozapine as an endpoint of TRS. For patients starting clozapine, 12-month retrospective reviews of antipsychotic serum concentration measurements were performed in a Norwegian therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database from 2005 to 2017. Undetectable levels in high-sensitive analytical assays defined ‘no drug use’, while levels <50% of the lower reference range defined ‘subtherapeutic use’. Similar data were collected for patients switching to long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, as a reference of ‘no or subtherapeutic drug use’. Nineteen of 353 patients initiating clozapine (5.4%) had a recent history of undetectable antipsychotic drug levels compared to 91 of 1048 (8.7%) initiating LAI. Another 19 patients starting clozapine (5.4%) had recent events of subtherapeutic levels. In conclusion, the present retrospective study may indicate that every 10th patient starting clozapine has a recent history of undetectable or subtherapeutic serum levels of oral antipsychotics. The clinical implications of the present study for the assessment of TRS should be investigated prospectively in further studies.

Neuroanatomical profiles of treatment-resistance in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

Widespread structrual abnormalities in subcortical brain regions have been identified in patients with schizophrenia. However, only a few studies have examined the neuroanatomical profiles of patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to compare differences in subcortical and hippocampal volumes between: (i) treatment-resistant patients who are non-responders to both first-line antipsychotics and clozapine (URS), (ii) treatment-resistant patients who are non-responders to first-line antipsychotics but are responders to clozapine (CLZ-Resp), (iii) responders to first-line antipsychotics (FL-Resp), and (iv) healthy controls. T1-weighted images of 103 participants (27 URS, 29 CLZ-Resp, 21 FL-Resp, and 26 healthy controls) were obtained. Group differences in striatal, thalamic, globus pallidus, amygdala, and hippocampus volumes were examined. Multiple regression analyses were performed to examine the associations between subcortical and hippocampal volumes and participant characteristics. The FL-Resp group showed larger striatal and globus pallidus volumes compared to the URS group and larger post-commissural putamen and globus pallidus volumes compared to healthy controls. The URS group showed smaller thalamic volume compared to healthy controls. There were no subcortical or hippocampal volume differences between the URS and CLZ-Resp groups. Differences in subcortical and hippocampal structural volumes were not related to symptom severity or chlorpromazine antipsychotic dose equivalents. Our findings suggest different structural volume alterations in subcortical brain regions between treatment-resistant schizophrenia and responders to first-line antipsychotics. Whether subcortical structure compromise is a distinct pathophysiological marker of treatment-resistant schizophrenia, or a result of antipsychotic exposure, remains to be explored.

A Rational Use of Clozapine Based on Adverse Drug Reactions, Pharmacokinetics, and Clinical Pharmacopsychology

Using Richardson and Davidson's model and the sciences of pharmacokinetics and clinical pharmacopsychology, this article reviewed the: (1) poor life expectancy associated with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), which may be improved in patients who adhere to clozapine; (2) findings that clozapine is the best treatment for TRS (according to efficacy, effectiveness and well-being); and (3) potential for clozapine to cause vulnerabilities, including potentially lethal adverse drug reactions such as agranulocytosis, pneumonia, and myocarditis. Rational use requires: (1) modification of the clozapine package insert worldwide to include lower doses for Asians and to avoid the lethality associated with pneumonia, (2) the use of clozapine levels for personalizing dosing, and (3) the use of slow and personalized titration. This may make clozapine as safe as possible and contribute to increased life expectancy and well-being. In the absence of data on COVID-19 in clozapine patients, clozapine possibly impairs immunological mechanisms and may increase pneumonia risk in infected patients. Psychiatrists should call their clozapine patients and families and explain to them that if the patient develops fever or flu-like symptoms, the psychiatrist should be called and should consider halving the clozapine dose. If the patient is hospitalized with pneumonia, the treating physician needs to assess for symptoms of clozapine intoxication since halving the dose may not be enough for all patients; consider decreasing it to one-third or even stopping it. Once the signs of inflammation and fever have disappeared, the clozapine dose can be slowly increased to the prior dosage level.

Monitoring and improving antipsychotic adherence in outpatient forensic diversion programs

Outpatient diversion programs present an opportunity for severely mentally ill defendants to receive psychiatric treatment and have alleged offenses dismissed by the court. Moreover, the successful completion of pretrial diversion is associated with fewer post-program arrest and jail days. The target patient population for such programs is typically people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, but the care of such patients in outpatient settings presents challenges for monitoring treatment fidelity, specifically antipsychotic adherence, as low adherence rates are associated with increased rates of recidivism. Presented here is a review of evidence-based strategies that must be employed to track antipsychotic adherence in outpatient diversion programs, including pill counts, use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics, and determination of plasma antipsychotic levels to assess adherence and the adequacy of antipsychotic treatment. Antipsychotic therapy remains the foundation of schizophrenia treatment, but only through the use of all available modalities can clinicians maximize the odds that schizophrenia patients in pretrial diversion maintain psychiatric stability and successfully complete mental health court mandates.

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

Clozapine is established as the gold standard for antipsychotic treatment of patients suffering from treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Over virtually 3 decades, the level of inadequate response to clozapine was found to range from 40% to 60%. A heightened interest developed in the augmentation of clozapine to try to achieve response or maximize partial response. A large variety of drug groups have been investigated. This article focuses on the meta-analyses of these trials to discover reasonable evidence-based approaches to the management of patients not responding to clozapine.

Patient characteristics, burden and pharmacotherapy of treatment-resistant schizophrenia: results from a survey of 204 US psychiatrists

BACKGROUND

Minimal/non-response to antipsychotic treatment, and persistent positive symptoms despite treatment, are common among patients with schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to characterize a US treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) population in terms of patient demographics, burden of symptoms, treatment history, and factors influencing therapeutic choice.

METHODS

In an online survey, 204 psychiatrists self-selected and completed three patient records: two TRS and one schizophrenia ('non-TRS').

RESULTS

Respondents reported that 29.5% of their schizophrenia caseload had TRS. Selected TRS (n = 408) vs non-TRS (n = 204) patients were more likely to be unemployed (74.5% vs 45.1%, p < 0.001), hospitalized at least once (93.4% vs 74.0%, p < 0.001), and to have physical/psychiatric comorbidities including obesity (40.2% vs 23.5%, p < 0.001) and depression (38.7% vs 25.0%, p = 0.001). Psychiatric symptoms were more frequent and severe in TRS, and interfered more with social and functioning domains. Of positive symptoms, eliminating delusions and hallucinations was considered most important to improve a patient's long-term prognosis. In TRS, clozapine monotherapy was the most common treatment (15.9%), though ranked fifth of ten options to treat TRS. Psychiatrists typically increased the antipsychotic dose or added a second antipsychotic before initiating clozapine or switching antipsychotics. Antipsychotic switches were most commonly due to lack of efficacy (TRS = 71.4% vs non-TRS = 54.3%, p < 0.001) and intolerability (34.4% vs 38.4%, p = 0.22) with the prior antipsychotic. Persistent hallucinatory behavior was the top symptom leading to treatment switches in TRS (63.9% vs 37.1%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

According to psychiatrists, symptoms have a greater clinical burden on patients with TRS than non-TRS. TRS is commonly managed by antipsychotic dose increases/combinations, with clozapine the fifth preference despite being the only approved TRS medication. New treatments are needed for patients who do not respond to available antipsychotics.

Prevalence of treatment-resistant psychoses in the community: A naturalistic study

BACKGROUND

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) is a major cause of disability. Clozapine is currently the only antipsychotic medication licensed for its treatment. However, the rate of treatment resistance among outpatients with schizophrenia or other psychoses, and the rate of use of clozapine among them, is not known.

AIMS

The aims of this study are (a) to determine the point prevalence of treatment-resistant psychosis in a community sample, and (b) to determine the number of patients with TRS who have never had a clozapine trial.

METHOD

Clinico-demographic data were extracted from the case notes for 202 patients from two community mental-health teams.

RESULTS

We found that 56% (99/176) had a diagnosis of TRS, and 52% (51/99) of these patients had never been treated with clozapine. Patients of non-white ethnicity were less likely to have had a clozapine trial (p=0.009). The point prevalence of treatment resistance within the bipolar affective disorder sample was 19% (5/26).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that TRS is common in the community mental-health team, and a large proportion of these patients have not received clozapine. These findings indicate that identifying and treating treatment resistance should be a focus of community services for schizophrenia.

Resting-state functional connectivity in treatment response and resistance in schizophrenia: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and treatment-responsive schizophrenia may exhibit distinct pathophysiology. Several functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have used resting-state functional connectivity analyses (rs-FC) in TRS patients to identify markers of treatment resistance. However, to date, existing findings have not been systematically evaluated.

METHODS

A systematic literature search using Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ProQuest, PUBMED, and Scopus was performed. The query sought fMRI articles investigating rs-FC in treatment response or resistance in patients with schizophrenia. Only studies that examined treatment response, operationalized as the explicit categorization of patients by their response to antipsychotic medication, were considered eligible. Pairwise comparisons between patient groups and controls were extracted from each study.

RESULTS

The search query identified 159 records. Ten studies met inclusion criteria. Five studies examined not TRS (NTRS), and 8 studies examined TRS. Differences in rs-FC analysis methodology precluded direct comparisons between studies. However, disruptions in areas involved in visual and auditory information processing were implicated in both patients with TRS and NTRS. Changes in connectivity with sensorimotor network areas tended to appear in the context of TRS but not NTRS. Moreover, there was some indication that this connectivity could be affected by clozapine.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional connectivity may provide clinically meaningful biomarkers of treatment response and resistance in schizophrenia. Studies generally identified similar areas of disruption, though methodological differences largely precluded direct comparison between disruption effects. Implementing data sharing as standard practice will allow future reviews and meta-analyses to identify rs-FC correlates of TRS.

Maximizing response to first-line antipsychotics in schizophrenia: a review focused on finding from meta-analysis

RATIONALE

There are many psychotropic drugs available for treatment of schizophrenia. The clinician's choice of the most effective first-line antipsychotic treatment for patients with schizophrenia should balance considerations of differential efficacy of antipsychotics against the relative risk of different side effects.

METHOD

We reviewed recent studies using meta-analytic techniques and additional studies of new antipsychotics which quantitatively evaluate the efficacy of side effects of first- and second-generation antipsychotics and studies of the efficacy on add-on secondary medications. We present an integrated summary of these results to guide a clinician's decision-making.

RESULTS

Recent meta-analyses have suggested that antipsychotics are not equivalent in efficacy. Clozapine (effect size [SMD] 0.88 vs. placebo), amisulpride (effect size 0.6 vs placebo), olanzapine (effect size 0.59 vs. placebo), and risperidone (effect size 0.56 vs placebo) show small but statistically significant differences compared to a number of other antipsychotics on measures of overall efficacy (effect sizes 0.33-0.50). However, increasing placebo response remains a concern in interpreting these data. Amisulpride (effect size 0.47 vs placebo) and cariprazine (effect size in one trial compared to risperidone 0.29) have the strongest evidence indicating greater efficacy for treating primary negative symptoms relative to other antipsychotics. In terms of side effects, clozapine and olanzapine have among the highest weight gain potential and sertindole and amisulpride have more effects on QTc prolongation than other commonly used antipsychotics. Prolactin elevation is highest with paliperidone, risperidone, and amisulpride. Adjunctive treatment with an antidepressant drug may improve response in patients with schizophrenia who also have severe depressive or negative symptoms. For multi-episode patients with an inadequate response to an adequate dose and duration of the initial antipsychotic choice, switching to another antipsychotic, with a different receptor profile, may improve response, although evidence is very limited. In first-episode patients, a recent study on switching to another antipsychotic, with a different receptor profile after 4 weeks demonstrated no beneficial effects. There is little evidence to support using doses above the therapeutic range other than in exceptional circumstances.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review of recent studies using meta-analytic techniques has provided evidence that all antipsychotics are not equal in the severity of different side effects and in some measures of clinical efficacy. Comparative analysis and rankings from network meta-analyses can provide guidance to clinicians in choosing the most appropriate antipsychotic for first-line treatment, if used in conjunction with available information of the patient's history of previous clinical response or higher risks for specific side effects.

Treatment resistant schizophrenia - review and a call to action

Recovery rates in schizophrenia remain suboptimal with up to one-third resistant to standard treatments, a population prevalence of 0.2%. Clozapine is the only evidenced-based treatment for treatment resistant schizophrenia (TRS), yet there are significant delays in its use or it may not be trialled, potentially impacting the chance of recovery. Better outcomes with earlier use of clozapine may be possible. There is emerging evidence that early treatment resistance is not uncommon from the earliest stages of psychosis. In this review, we provide an update on TRS, its epidemiology and its management, with a specific focus on the optimal use and timing of clozapine and augmentation strategies for the one-third of patients who do not respond to clozapine.

Resistance is not futile: treatment-refractory schizophrenia - overview, evaluation and treatment

INTRODUCTION

Schizophrenia is a debilitating condition with three main symptom domains: positive, negative, and cognitive. Approximately one-third of persons with schizophrenia will fail to respond to treatment. Growing evidence suggests that treatment-resistant (refractory) schizophrenia (TRS) may be a distinct condition from treatment-respondent schizophrenia. There is limited evidence on effective treatments for TRS, and a lack of standardized diagnostic criteria for TRS has hampered research. Areas covered: A literature search was conducted using Pubmed.gov and the EMBASE literature database. The authors discuss the pragmatic definitions of TRS and review treatments consisting of antipsychotic monotherapy and augmentation strategies. Expert opinion: Currently available first-line antipsychotic medications are generally effective at treating the positive symptoms of schizophrenia, leaving residual negative and cognitive symptoms. Before diagnosing TRS, rule out any pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic failures. Most evidence supports clozapine as having the most efficacy for TRS. If clozapine is used, it should be optimized, and serum levels should be at least 350-420 ng/ml. If clozapine is unable to be tolerated, some evidence suggests olanzapine at dosages up to 40mg/day can be useful. Augmentation strategies have weak evidence. Tailoring treatment to the specific domain is the preferred approach, and the use of a structured assessment/outcome measure is encouraged.

Medication Exposure in Highly Adherent Psychiatry Patients

Medication exposure is dependent upon many factors, the single most important being if the patient took the prescribed medication as indicated. To assess medication exposure for psychotropic and other medication classes, we enrolled 115 highly adherent psychiatry patients prescribed five or more medications. In these patients, we measured 21 psychotropic and 38 nonpsychotropic medications comprising a 59 medication multiplex assay panel. Strict enrollment criteria and reconciliation of the electronic health record medication list prior to study initiation produced a patient cohort that was adherent with 91% of their prescribed medications as determined by comparing medications detected empirically in blood to the electronic health record medication list. In addition, 13% of detected medications were not in the electronic health record medication list. We found that only 53% of detected medications were within the literature-derived reference range with 41% below and 6% above the reference range specific to each medication. When psychotropic medications were analyzed near trough-level, only sertraline was found to be within the literature-derived reference range for all patients tested. Concentrations of the remaining medications indicated extensive exposure below the reference range. This is the first study to empirically and comprehensively assess medication exposure obtained in comorbid polypharmacy patients, minimizing the important behavioral factor of adherence in the study of medication exposure. These data indicate that low medication exposure is extensive and must be considered when therapeutic issues arise, including the lack of response to medication therapy.

Antipsychotic plasma levels in the assessment of poor treatment response in schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Treatment resistance is a challenge for the management of schizophrenia. It is not always clear whether inadequate response is secondary to medication ineffectiveness, as opposed to medication underexposure due to non-adherence or pharmacokinetic factors. We investigated the prevalence of subtherapeutic antipsychotic plasma levels in patients identified as treatment-resistant by their treating clinician.

METHOD

Between January 2012 and April 2017, antipsychotic plasma levels were measured in 99 individuals provisionally diagnosed with treatment-resistant schizophrenia by their treating clinicians, but not prescribed clozapine. Patients were followed up to determine whether they were subsequently admitted to hospital.

RESULTS

Thirty-five per cent of plasma levels were subtherapeutic, and of these, 34% were undetectable. Black ethnicity (P = 0.006) and lower dose (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with subtherapeutic/undetectable plasma levels. Individuals with subtherapeutic/undetectable levels were significantly more likely to be admitted to hospital (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of patients considered treatment-resistant have subtherapeutic antipsychotic plasma levels, and this is associated with subsequent admission. The presence of subtherapeutic plasma levels may suggest a need to address adherence or pharmacokinetic factors as opposed to commencing clozapine treatment. While antipsychotic levels are not recommended for the routine adjustment of dosing, they may assist with the assessment of potential treatment resistance in schizophrenia.

Accuracy of Clinician Assessments of Medication Status in the Emergency Setting: A Comparison of Clinician Assessment of Antipsychotic Usage and Plasma Level Determination

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to assess the level of agreement between clinicians' routine assessments of medication status and plasma levels of commonly prescribed antipsychotic medications in patients presenting to an emergency room with an exacerbation of psychosis.

METHODS

We studied 105 patients presenting to an emergency room and admitted to an inpatient psychiatric unit with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar I disorder, or psychotic disorder not otherwise specified and a prior outpatient medication regimen including risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, or paliperidone. Plasma levels of antipsychotics were drawn and sent to a specialty laboratory for testing.

FINDINGS

Of the 97 patients with usable samples, 33 (34%) were found to have therapeutic antipsychotic levels. Of these, 22 were judged by emergency room staff to be taking their medications at the appropriately prescribed doses, whereas 11 were judged not to be taking medication at all. Sixty-four patients were found to have subtherapeutic antipsychotic levels, 31 of whom had been assessed to be taking medication as prescribed. Emergency assessment of medication status predicted therapeutic and nontherapeutic antipsychotic levels at rates of 41.5% and 75%, respectively. Emergency staff assessment was statistically independent from the likelihood of having a therapeutic antipsychotic level.

IMPLICATIONS

In patients presenting to emergency rooms with exacerbations of psychosis who are subsequently admitted to an inpatient facility, common assessments of medication status are frequently misleading. Readily available methods for rapidly measuring antipsychotic plasma levels in clinical settings are needed for clinicians to make reliable assessments.

Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) Working Group Consensus Guidelines on Diagnosis and Terminology

OBJECTIVE

Research and clinical translation in schizophrenia is limited by inconsistent definitions of treatment resistance and response. To address this issue, the authors evaluated current approaches and then developed consensus criteria and guidelines.

METHOD

A systematic review of randomized antipsychotic clinical trials in treatment-resistant schizophrenia was performed, and definitions of treatment resistance were extracted. Subsequently, consensus operationalized criteria were developed through 1) a multiphase, mixed methods approach, 2) identification of key criteria via an online survey, and 3) meetings to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

Of 2,808 studies identified, 42 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 21 studies (50%) did not provide operationalized criteria. In the remaining studies, criteria varied considerably, particularly regarding symptom severity, prior treatment duration, and antipsychotic dosage thresholds; only two studies (5%) utilized the same criteria. The consensus group identified minimum and optimal criteria, employing the following principles: 1) current symptoms of a minimum duration and severity determined by a standardized rating scale; 2) moderate or worse functional impairment; 3) prior treatment consisting of at least two different antipsychotic trials, each for a minimum duration and dosage; 4) systematic monitoring of adherence and meeting of minimum adherence criteria; 5) ideally at least one prospective treatment trial; and 6) criteria that clearly separate responsive from treatment-resistant patients.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in current approaches to defining treatment resistance in schizophrenia. The authors present consensus guidelines that operationalize criteria for determining and reporting treatment resistance, adequate treatment, and treatment response, providing a benchmark for research and clinical translation.

The Association Between Comorbid Autism Spectrum Disorders and Antipsychotic Treatment Failure in Early-Onset Psychosis: A Historical Cohort Study Using Electronic Health Records

OBJECTIVE

In a sample of children and adolescents with first-episode psychosis, we investigated whether multiple treatment failure (MTF, defined as the initiation of a third trial of novel antipsychotic due to nonadherence, adverse effects, or insufficient response) was associated with comorbid autism spectrum disorders.

METHODS

Data were from the electronic health records of 638 children (51% male) aged from 10 to 17 years with first-episode psychosis (per ICD-10 criteria) from January 1, 2008, to November 1, 2014, referred to mental health services in South London, United Kingdom; data were extracted using the Clinical Record Interactive Search (CRIS) system. The effect of autism spectrum disorder comorbidity on the development of MTF during a 5-year period was modeled using Cox regression.

RESULTS

There were 124 cases of MTF prior to the age of 18 (19.4% of the sample). Comorbid autism spectrum disorders were significantly associated with MTF (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.99; 95% CI, 1.19-3.31; P = .008) after controlling for a range of potential confounders. Other factors significantly associated with MTF included higher age at first presentation (P = .001), black ethnicity (P = .03), and frequency of clinical contact (P < .001). No significant association between other comorbid neurodevelopmental disorders (hyperkinetic disorder or intellectual disability) and MTF was found.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with first-episode psychosis and comorbid autism spectrum disorders at first presentation are less likely to have a beneficial response to antipsychotics.

Antipsychotic Induced Dopamine Supersensitivity Psychosis: A Comprehensive Review

Chronic prescription of antipsychotics seems to lose its therapeutic benefits in the prevention of recurring psychotic symptoms. In many instances, the occurrence of relapse from initial remission is followed by an increase in dose of the prescribed antipsychotic. The current understanding of why this occurs is still in its infancy, but a controversial idea that has regained attention recently is the notion of iatrogenic dopamine supersensitivity. Studies on cell cultures and animal models have shown that long-term antipsychotic use is linked to both an upregulation of dopamine D₂-receptors in the striatum and the emergence of enhanced receptor affinity to endogenous dopamine. These findings have been hypothesized to contribute to the phenomenon known as dopamine supersensitivity psychosis (DSP), which has been clinically typified as the foundation of rebound psychosis, drug tolerance, and tardive dyskinesia. The focus of this review is the update of evidence behind the classification of antipsychotic induced DSP and an investigation of its relationship to treatment resistance. Since antipsychotics are the foundation of illness management, a greater understanding of DSP and its prevention may greatly affect patient outcomes.

Two distinct patterns of treatment resistance: clinical predictors of treatment resistance in first-episode schizophrenia spectrum psychoses

BACKGROUND

Clozapine remains the only evidence-based antipsychotic for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). The ability to predict which patients with their first onset of schizophrenia would subsequently meet criteria for treatment resistance (TR) could help to diminish the severe functional disability which may ensue if TR is not recognized and correctly treated.

METHOD

This is a 5-year longitudinal assessment of clinical outcomes in a cohort of 246 first-episode schizophrenia spectrum patients recruited as part of the NIHR Genetics and Psychosis (GAP) study conducted in South London from 2005 to 2010. We examined the relationship between baseline demographic and clinical measures and the emergence of TR. TR status was determined from a review of electronic case records. We assessed for associations with early-, and late-onset TR, and non-TR, and differences between those TR patients treated with clozapine and those who were not.

RESULTS

Seventy per cent (n = 56) of TR patients, and 23% of the total study population (n = 246) were treatment resistant from illness onset. Those who met criteria for TR during the first 5 years of illness were more likely to have an early age of first contact for psychosis (<20 years) [odds ratio (OR) 2.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-4.94] compared to those with non-TR. The relationship between an early age of first contact (<20 years) and TR was significant in patients of Black ethnicity (OR 3.71, 95% CI 1.44-9.56); and patients of male gender (OR 3.13 95% CI 1.35-7.23).

CONCLUSIONS

For the majority of the TR group, antipsychotic TR is present from illness onset, necessitating increased consideration for the earlier use of clozapine.

Enhancing adherence, subjective well-being and quality of life in patients with schizophrenia: which role for long-acting risperidone?

AIM

This study evaluated adherence to treatment, quality of life and subjective well-being in patients with psychosis treated with long-acting injectable risperidone. Subjects enrolled were part of a larger study where patients were observed in an adherence to treatment program of the University of Rome Tor Vergata.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 27 nonadherent patients (21 men, six women; mean age: 36.1 years; range: 23-63 years) were enrolled. Maximum observational period was 30 months.

RESULTS

A total of 12 patients were under treatment for 30 months (44.44%) but only nine had a valid 30-month follow up, while the remaining three patients initially treated at our unit continued long-acting risperidone at their local centre. Reductions of monthly mean values of Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS) [repeated measures analysis of variance (rm-ANOVA): p < 0.0001] and Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) (p < 0.0001), increase of monthly mean values of Subjective Well-Being Under Neuroleptic Treatment Scale (SWN) (p < 0.0001) and Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale (S-QoL) (p < 0.01) were observed. Significant differences with respect to SAPS baseline values from the sixth month, SANS baseline values from the seventh month, SWN baseline values from the eighth month, S-QoL baseline values from the eighteenth month were shown in post hoc tests. Reduction of SAPS mean values was associated with increase of SWN (p < 0.0001) and S-QoL (p < 0.0001) mean values as demonstrated by correlation analysis. The same inverse correlation was found between reduction of SANS mean values and increases of SWN (p < 0.0001) and S-QoL (p = 0.0001) mean values.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with long-acting risperidone may be associated with improvement to adherence to therapy and quality of life. Patients may show improvement in psychopathological symptoms, subjective well-being and quality of life.