Risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The Steady-State Comparative Bioavailability of Intramuscular Risperidone ISM and Oral Risperidone: An Open-Label, One-Sequence Study

Introduction

This open-label, one-sequence study evaluated the steady-state comparative bioavailability of risperidone in situ microimplants (ISM^®) and oral risperidone in patients stabilized on oral risperidone treatment.

Methods

Repeat oral administration of once daily 4 mg risperidone for 7 days was followed by 4 monthly (once every four weeks) intramuscular (IM) doses of risperidone ISM 100 mg. Mean steady-state concentration versus time profiles for risperidone, 9-OH risperidone, and risperidone active moiety was characterized.

Results

A total of 104 subjects were enrolled, 81 were included in the safety population and 58 completed the study. Intersubject variability for the steady-state concentrations versus time profiles for risperidone active moiety presented a greater variability range for oral risperidone versus risperidone ISM (% coefficient of variation [CV] range: 40–65% and 38–52%, respectively). Minimum plasma concentration at steady-state (C_{min, ss)} and fluctuation in plasma concentrations (Fluc) of risperidone active moiety after risperidone ISM administration met bioequivalence criteria compared to the reference oral risperidone (geometric mean ratio [GMR] = 1.09 and 0.96, respectively; both 90% CIs were within 0.80–1.25). Area under the curve during the dosing interval (AUC_tau), maximum plasma concentration at steady-state (C_{max, ss)} and average plasma concentration (C_ave) were only slightly higher (GMR [90% CI] = 1.25 [1.16–1.34], 1.17 [1.08–1.27], and 1.25 [1.16–1.34], respectively). Overall, once daily oral risperidone 4 mg and once monthly IM risperidone ISM 100 mg were generally safe and well tolerated in the participating subjects with schizophrenia previously stabilized with oral risperidone.

Conclusion

The rapid release of risperidone ISM allows the achievement of the desired levels similar to those observed at the steady-state after oral risperidone treatment. Therefore, direct switch after 24 hours from the last oral risperidone dose to risperidone ISM treatment can be done in schizophrenia patients with no time lag, maintaining steady-state levels of the active moiety throughout treatment and without the need for oral risperidone supplementation or loading doses.

Another triumph of hope over experience?

Schizophrenia continues to challenge services: recent advances in antipsychotic drug treatment and psychosocial interventions are hindered by non-adherence, disengagement and substance misuse. Furthermore, new side-effect concerns attach to atypical drugs, and psychosocial interventions may be underresourced or of unproven benefit. It is important to address all issues with which patients, families and carers need assistance, and to take a well-informed, creative approach to pharmacological treatment, using medication according to individual patient need rather than mechanistic adherence to guidelines. Psychiatrists should be realistic in their expectations of patient outcome, accepting outcomes that fall short of recovery and imply long-term supportive care, and insisting that this care be available to their patients. Psychiatrists should support early diagnosis and intervention as being possibly the only means to alleviate the burden of long-term schizophrenia for patients, families and services.

Does the efficacy of asenapine in bipolar disorder increase in the presence of comorbidity with a substance use disorder? A naturalistic study

BACKGROUND

Asenapine is a second-generation antipsychotic approved in Europe for treating moderate-to-severe manic episodes in adults affected by type I bipolar disorder (BD-I). We aimed to compare its efficacy in psychiatric inpatients with BD-I, with or without substance use disorder (SUD).

METHODS

We administered flexible asenapine doses ranging from 5-20 mg/day to 119 voluntarily hospitalized patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) BD-I diagnosis, with or without SUD. Patients were assessed with clinician-rated questionnaires [i.e. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF)]. Assessments were carried out at baseline (T0, prior to treatment), and 3 (T1), 7 (T2), 15 (T3), and 30 days (T4) after starting treatment for all clinical scales and at T0 and T4 for the GAF.

RESULTS

Patients improved on all scales (p < 0.001) across all timepoints, as shown both by paired-sample comparisons and by applying a repeated-measures, generalized linear model (GLM). Patients without comorbid SUD showed greater reductions in BPRS scores at T2 and T3, greater reduction in YMRS scores at T3, and lower HARS scores at all timepoints. HDRS scores did not differ between the two groups at any timepoint. However, the reduction in HARS scores in the comorbid group was stronger than in the BD-I only group, albeit not significantly. Side effects were few and mild-to-moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The open-label design and the relatively short observation period may expose to both type I and type II statistical errors (false positive and false negatives). Asenapine showed effectiveness and safety in hospitalized BD-I patients. Its effect was stronger in patients without comorbid SUD.

Pulmonary embolism in a patient receiving risperidone and paliperidone: A case report and review of the literature

Several cases of pulmonary embolism (PE) have been associated with antipsychotic treatment. We report a case of an otherwise healthy 27-year old male who developed a PE after receiving paliperidone long acting injection. The patient received risperidone long acting injection for over 3 months before initiating paliperidone, but was switched incorrectly. After 3 weeks on paliperidone long acting injection the patient developed a PE requiring hospitalization and a course of anticoagulation. A review of atypical antipsychotic-induced venous thromboembolism is discussed.

Risperidone and pulmonary embolism: a harmful association? Case series and review of the literature

Gallerani M, Imberti D, Mari E, Marra A, Manfredini R. Risperidone and pulmonary embolism: a harmful association? Case series and review of the literature.

Objective: Risperidone is an atypical antipsychotic drug used to treat a number of psychiatric diseases, such as schizophrenia, schizoaffective and bipolar disorders and irritability in children with autism. Moreover, it is also often administered for short-term treatment of persistent aggression in people with moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's dementia. A possible association between risperidone and venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been described. We intended to verify the dimension of the problem in our hospital setting.

Methods: We considered all consecutive patients hospitalised in our Internal Medicine Department from January 2004 to December 2010, who were treated with risperidone and presented pulmonary embolism (PE).

Results: Four cases of patients, apparently free from the well-known major risk factors for VTE (i.e. cancer, prolonged immobilisation, acute cardiac and respiratory failure, infections), who presented PE associated with risperidone therapy, were reported in details.

Conclusions: A review of the available literature, discussing the possible different pathogenic reasons for this increased risk of VTE, is provided.

Effect of risperidone versus haloperidol on emotional responding in schizophrenic patients

RATIONALE

Studies on emotional processing report that schizophrenic patients present a specific pattern of emotional responding that usually includes deficits in emotional expressiveness, increased feelings of unpleasant emotion but decreased feelings of pleasant emotion, and increased physiological reactivity. However, studies have rarely controlled the nature of antipsychotic medication. Yet, the influence of these drugs on emotional response is uncertain and could vary depending on their pharmacological profile.

OBJECTIVE

This prospective and randomized study aimed to compare the effects of an atypical antipsychotic, risperidone, to a typical one, haloperidol, on patients' emotional responding during an emotional induction task.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five schizophrenic patients underwent two emotional and clinical evaluations: one before treatment initiation and a second 4 weeks after. Emotional states of fear, sadness, anger, joy, and disgust were induced, as well as a neutral baseline state. Video recordings of patients during the induction task allowed for assessment of emotional expressiveness. Self-reports and measures of skin conductance and heart rate were performed to determine both subjective and physiological reactions to emotional experience.

RESULTS

Compared to haloperidol, risperidone did not reduce patients' facial expressiveness, decreased physiological reactivity, and decreased experience of unpleasant emotion but maintained experience of pleasant emotion. Emotional expressiveness was negatively correlated to parkisonism.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary results suggest that atypical antipsychotics allow for better-adapted patterns of emotional responding than typical ones do. We suggest that this effect is due to reduced striatal D2 blockade, therefore, attenuating akinesia, coupled with increased 5HT and DA levels in prefrontal cortex, which improves emotional regulation.

Adverse effects of atypical antipsychotics : differential risk and clinical implications

Antipsychotic drugs can be of great benefit in a range of psychiatric disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, but all are associated with a wide range of potential adverse effects. These can impair quality of life, cause stigma, lead to poor adherence with medication, cause physical morbidity and, in extreme cases, be fatal. A comprehensive overview of tolerability requires a review of all available data, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies and postmarketing surveillance studies. Assessing the relative tolerability of atypical antipsychotics is hampered by the paucity of RCTs that compare these drugs head-to-head, and limited and inconsistent reporting of adverse effect data that makes cross-study comparisons difficult. Despite methodological problems in assessment and interpretation of tolerability data, important differences exist between the atypical antipsychotics in the relative risk of acute extrapyramidal symptoms (highest risk: higher doses of risperidone), hyperglycaemia and dyslipidaemia (highest risk: clozapine and olanzapine), hyperprolactinaemia (highest risk: amisulpride and risperidone), prolongation of heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) [highest risk: ziprasidone and sertindole] and weight gain (highest risk: clozapine and olanzapine). Sedation, antimuscarinic symptoms, postural hypotension, agranulocytosis and seizures are more common with clozapine than with other atypical antipsychotics. The variation in their tolerability suggests that it is misleading to regard the atypical antipsychotics as a uniform drug class, and also means that the term 'atypical antipsychotic' has only limited usefulness. Differences between the atypical agents in terms of efficacy and pharmacodynamic profiles also support this view. As tolerability differs between specific conventional and atypical drugs, we conclude that broad statements comparing the relative risk of specific adverse effects between 'atypical' and 'conventional' antipsychotics are largely meaningless; rather, comparisons should be made between specific atypical and specific conventional drugs. Adverse effects are usually dose dependent and can be influenced by patient characteristics, including age and gender. These confounding factors should be considered in clinical practice and in the interpretation of research data. Selection of an antipsychotic should be on an individual patient basis. Patients should be involved in prescribing decisions and this should involve discussion about adverse effects.

Adjusted indirect comparison may be less biased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceutical interventions

OBJECTIVE

To investigate discrepancies between direct comparison and adjusted indirect comparison in meta-analyses of new versus conventional pharmaceutical interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Results of direct comparison were compared with results of adjusted indirect comparison in three meta-analyses of new versus conventional drugs. The three case studies are (1) bupropion versus nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation, (2) risperidone versus haloperidol for schizophrenia, and (3) fluoxetine versus imipramine for depressive disorders.

RESULTS

In all the three cases, effects of new drugs estimated by head-to-head trials tend to be greater than that by adjusted indirect comparisons. The observed discrepancies could not be satisfactorily explained by the play of chance or by bias and heterogeneity in adjusted indirect comparison. This observation, along with analysis of possible systematic bias in the direct comparisons, suggested that the indirect method might have produced less biased results. Simulations found that adjusted indirect comparison may counterbalance bias under certain circumstances.

CONCLUSION

Adjusted indirect comparison could be used to cross-examine the validity and applicability of results from head-to-head randomized trials. The hypothesis that adjusted indirect comparison may provide less biased results than head-to-head randomized trials needs to be investigated by further research.

Novel uses for risperidone: focus on depressive, anxiety and behavioral disorders

Risperidone has been shown to be a safe and effective atypical antipsychotic agent. It was initially approved for the treatment of schizophrenia, and now, in many countries, is used to treat other conditions, including bipolar disorder, dementia and behavior problems in a range of age groups. Yet, frequent off-label use by clinicians to treat other mood and anxiety disorders and behavioral disorders is common and requires an examination of the risks and benefits in such populations. A review of the literature provides varying levels of evidence supporting its use in a range of depressive and anxiety disorders, and in special populations, including children and the elderly. Most reports are based on short-term studies and include its use both as monotherapy and as an augmenting agent to other psychotropics, and in a range of doses. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and tolerability of risperidone, both short- and long-term, in many of these conditions. The published evidence is summarized, with recommendations and suggestions for its use.

Blood pressure, heart rate, and anxiety in schizophrenia

Anxiety may worsen outcome in psychotic disorders. We assessed anxiety in 44 acutely psychotic subjects and found a positive association with heart rate and blood pressure. Risperidone treatment reduced anxiety but increased heart rate. We concluded that anxiety may adversely affect cardiovascular status in schizophrenia, but the anxiolytic effect of risperidone is not straightforward.

Aripiprazole: a new treatment for schizophrenia

Aripiprazole has a unique mechanism of action that differs from all currently available antipsychotic agents. Aripiprazole combines potent partial agonist activity at dopamine D2 receptors and serotonin (5-HT)1A receptors, with antagonist activity at 5-HT2A receptors. In short-term clinical studies, aripiprazole produced significant improvements in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale efficacy scores from baseline compared with placebo. These improvements were similar to those observed with haloperidol and risperidone. Aripiprazole has a rapid onset of efficacy, with improvements in PANSS total and positive subscale scores and CGI severity of illness scores seen as early as 1 week after starting treatment. Aripiprazole’s efficacy is maintained in long-term treatment following acute relapse in patients with schizophrenia. In the 52-week maintenance of response study, completion and responder rates were significantly higher with aripiprazole treatment compared with haloperidol, and aripiprazole was superior to haloperidol in treating negative and associated depressive symptoms. Short- and long-term clinical studies show that aripiprazole has a low liability for extrapyramidal side effects and does not increase the risk of weight gain, hyperprolactinemia, QTcprolongation, somnolence, glucose intolerance or lipid dysregulation. Patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder can be switched safely and effectively to aripiprazole from their existing antipsychotic medication using any one of three strategies.

Orally versus intramuscularly administered antipsychotic drugs in psychiatric emergencies

High utilization of emergency services by patients at increased risk for agitation and aggression makes the determination of effective therapy a major concern of psychiatric care. Agitated and aggressive behavior needs to be treated rapidly and effectively to minimize the risk to both patients and staff. Traditionally, short-acting intramuscular (IM) formulations of conventional antipsychotic drugs have been preferred in the emergency setting due to their rapid onset of action and the ability to administer them to uncooperative patients. IM injections, however, may not always be the preferred option. Recently, orally administered second generation (atypical) antipsychotics have been shown to be at least as effective in managing acute agitation as conventional antipsychotic drugs, with a superior tolerability profile. The current review evaluates pharmacokinetic parameters, formulation options, and clinical efficacy data for the treatment of acute agitation or aggressive behavior with antipsychotic medications. A synthesis of data from individual clinical trials, meta-analyses, review articles, and expert consensus recommendations is used to develop a working clinical algorithm for the acute management of aggression and agitation.

The use of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia in North Staffordshire

AIMS

To examine the long-term effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics in a naturalistic setting for patients with schizophrenia.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of atypical antipsychotic prescribing in one Health District between 1994 and 2001. Time to discontinuation of the first atypical antipsychotic prescribed was calculated using survival analysis.

RESULTS

253 patients were identified. Clozapine had a significantly lower discontinuation rate compared with olanzapine and risperidone (p = 0.018). Patients taking risperidone were 1.3 times more likely to discontinue than those taking olanzapine (p = 0.23). Older age (p = 0.0001), male sex (p = 0.016) and exposure to antidepressants (p = 0.014) significantly predicted compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

Clozapine is an effective long-term schizophrenia treatment. The trend to superior effectiveness of olanzapine over risperidone in the long-term has not been reported before and warrants further investigation.

Risperidone (Risperdal): clinical experience with a new antipsychosis drug

Risperidone (Risperdal) is a benzisoxazole derivative with a high affinity for serotonin 5-HT2 and dopamine D2 receptors, and some affinity for alpha- adrenergic, histamine H1 and dopamine D1 receptors. It has no anticholinergic effects. Early studies demonstrated risperidone to be an effective medication for psychotic symptoms, probably more so than the older neuroleptics for both positive and negative symptoms. At clinically effective doses, risperidone causes no more extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS) than placebo; at higher doses EPS frequency increases in a dose-dependent manner. Since it became available in 1994, extensive experience with the drug supports favourable early impressions of efficacy and tolerability. Minimal sedation, relatively little weight gain and absence of anticholinergic manifestations contribute to the relative tolerability of risperidone as compared to older neuroleptics. However, risperidone is associated with hyperprolactinaemia which can result in amenorrhoea and sexual dysfunction. Compared to older neuroleptics, pharmacoeconomic studies have shown that use of risperidone is associated with reduced hospitalisation and direct cost savings. A recent study found equivalent efficacy between risperidone and clozapine for treatment-resistant patients. Two studies comparing risperidone and olanzapine have yielded positive but conflicting findings. The overall positive experience with risperidone has resulted in the drug being widely recommended as a first line treatment option for psychoses.

Concurrent administration of donepezil HCl and risperidone in patients with schizophrenia: assessment of pharmacokinetic changes and safety following multiple oral doses

AIM

This open-label, multiple-dose trial investigated the effect of concurrent administration of donepezil HCl with risperidone on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety profiles of both drugs.

METHODS

Sixteen male patients with schizophrenia, who were receiving stable, physician-optimized risperidone (1-4 mg twice daily), and 15 healthy age- and weight-matched male controls, received donepezil HCl 5 mg daily for 7 days. Patients with schizophrenia remained on their physician-optimized dose of risperidone throughout the study. Pharmacokinetic parameters (C(max), t(max) and AUC) were assessed from plasma drug concentrations measured in blood collected before, during and after administration (for 12 h after risperidone on days 0 and 7, and for 24 h after donepezil HCl on day 7).

RESULTS

The mean age of all the subjects was 38.5 years. Donepezil PK parameters were similar between patients taking donepezil HCl + risperidone (AUC(0-24 h) = 329.0 +/- 17.2 ng x h ml(-1)) and controls taking donepezil HCl alone (AUC(0-24 h) = 354.7 +/- 28.2 ng x h ml(-1)). Pharmacokinetic parameters for risperidone and 9-OH risperidone were not altered in patients with schizophrenia after 7 days of donepezil HCl administration (AUC(0-12 h) standardized by dose: risperidone = 59.6 +/- 16.3 ng.h ml(-1) at day 0, 56.0 +/- 15.8 ng x h ml(-1) at day 7; 9-OH risperidone = 162.1 +/- 19.2 ng x h ml(-1) at day 0, 163.3 +/- 15.0 ng x h ml(-1) at day 7). The most common adverse event in both treatment groups was diarrhoea (6/16 risperidone + donepezil HCl patients and 9/16 donepezil HCl only subjects). There were no significant changes in physical examination, ECG, vital signs or treatment-emergent abnormal laboratory values associated with either of the treatment regimens. No subject developed extrapyramidal side-effects following donepezil administration.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that once-daily dosing of 5 mg donepezil HCl does not alter the PK of risperidone in patients with schizophrenia. The combination of risperidone and donepezil HCl was well tolerated.

Oral risperidone with lorazepam versus oral zuclopenthixol with lorazepam in the treatment of acute psychosis in emergency psychiatry: a prospective, comparative, open-label study

Acutely psychotic patients presenting as psychiatric emergencies with aggression or agitation are often administered conventional antipsychotics intramuscularly. However, patients view intramuscular administration as coercive, and conventional antipsychotics are often associated with adverse events. In this open study, consecutive adult patients presenting with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder were assigned to oral risperidone 2-6 mg/day (n = 48) or oral zuclopenthixol 20-50 mg/day (n = 27) for 7-14 days. Lorazepam (either oral or intramuscular) was administered to both groups as needed. Patients were assessed regularly until day 14 or discharge. Mean Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) aggression scores (sum of item scores on excitement, poor impulse control, hostility and uncooperativeness) decreased steadily and similarly in both groups; the mean changes from baseline were statistically significant at days 10 and 14 and at study end-point. The mean decrease at study end-point in the PANSS component score for hostility was statistically significant in the risperidone group, but not in the zuclopenthixol group. Social Dysfunction and Aggression Scale aggression scores and Clinical Global Impression scores decreased significantly and similarly in both groups. Overall, 18.7% of patients showed minor extrapyramidal symptoms during the study, but only 16.7% of risperidone-treated patients, compared to 59.3% of zuclopenthixol-treated patients, received anti-parkinsonian medication (p < 0.001). Lorazepam was administered to all of the patients assigned to risperidone and to 89% of those assigned to zuclopenthixol. Oral risperidone plus lorazepam is a convenient, effective and well-tolerated alternative to conventional antipsychotics for the treatment of acute psychosis in emergency psychiatry.

Relapse in patients with schizophrenia: a comparison between risperidone and haloperidol

OBJECTIVES

To compare rates of rehospitalization and time to relapse in risperidone vs. haloperidol-treated schizophrenic patients discharged from the hospital.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial comparing risperidone and haloperidol regarding relapse in patients with schizophrenia treated with flexible doses during one year.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were assigned to risperidone and 13 to haloperidol. One patient from each group withdrew consent and one patient in the risperidone group was lost for follow-up. Six (30.0%) patients in the risperidone group and 3 (23.1%) in the haloperidol group relapsed (p=1.00). However, time to relapse was shorter in the later (logrank =4.2; p=.04). When rehospitalized, patients in the risperidone group stayed 34.5 days (median) at hospital as compared to the haloperidol group (median of 61 days) (p=.61).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of schizophrenic patients who relapsed was similar in both groups; However, time to relapse was shorter in the haloperidol-treated patients.

Management of the negative symptoms of schizophrenia: new treatment options

This article presents a systematic review of pharmacological treatment for negative symptoms of schizophrenia, based on MEDLINE searches from 1995 to September 2002 to identify pertinent clinical trials. The pharmacotherapy of negative symptoms in schizophrenia includes novel/atypical antipsychotics and classical antipsychotics, as well as antidepressants, glutamatergic compounds, antiepileptic drugs and estrogens. In the assessment of therapy for negative symptoms of schizophrenia, it is imperative that better studies of sound methodology are performed. In such studies, some important aspects to be considered include an accurate definition and assessment of negative symptoms (including well designed, valid and reliable rating scales), the differentiation between primary and secondary negative symptoms, an appropriate selection of standard comparators, adequate dosages of comparators (e.g. haloperidol dosages) and an overall optimal study design. Most of the available studies on treating negative symptoms in schizophrenia have focused on the atypical antipsychotics, while other potential candidates, mostly in the context of add-on therapy, have not been so intensively investigated. Atypical antipsychotics have been proven in placebo-controlled trials to be effective in treating negative symptoms of acute schizophrenic episodes. In many of the comparator studies, they showed efficacy in treating negative symptoms that was superior to that of typical antipsychotics. Data on stable, predominant negative symptoms in subchronic or chronic cases of schizophrenia, although limited, have demonstrated the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics. If the beneficial tolerability profile with respect to extrapyramidal symptoms is also taken into account during clinical decision making, the atypical antipsychotics should be preferred for the treatment of negative symptoms. It is also worth noting that the traditional antipsychotics have the risk of inducing negative symptoms in the context of akinesia. The benefits of add-on therapy with SSRIs or a glutamatergic compound are well documented. Estrogen add-on therapy seems promising. Other traditionally suggested approaches, such as comedication with an antiepileptic drug, lithium or beta-adrenoceptor antagonist, cannot generally be recommended on the basis of the available data.

Antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia: atypical options and NICE guidance

Following the reintroduction of clozapine, several atypical antipsychotics have become available for the treatment of schizophrenia. These drugs are at least as effective as conventional treatment. Although each has an individual pattern of affinities, new work suggests that the hallmark of atypicality is fast dissociation at the dopamine-2 receptor. Numerous novel drugs are in development, but it is not clear how these conform to this theory of therapeutic effect. Atypical antipsychotics cause less extrapyramidal side effects than conventional treatment, but other effects such as hyperprolactinaemia, weight gain, glucose dysregulation and prolonged QTc interval remain problematic for some. Current antipsychotic prescribing practice is far from ideal: the NICE guidance stresses that atypical treatments should be considered unless symptoms are well controlled and side effects are acceptable, or depot formulation is indicated. There is a welcome emphasis on drug treatment as part of an integrated package of care negotiated with patients and their carers.

Weight gain in patients with schizophrenia treated with risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine or haloperidol: results of the EIRE study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this cross-sectional study, the EIRE study, was to assess the frequency of several side effects with antipsychotics in the clinical setting. This paper addresses the adverse effect of weight gain.

METHOD

Outpatients diagnosed of schizophrenia according to DSM-IV criteria and receiving a single antipsychotic (risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine or haloperidol) for at least 4 weeks were consecutively recruited. Data were collected in a single visit, including data on demographic, clinical and treatment characteristics. Mean weight change was evaluated retrospectively by means of clinical charts and the weight at the time of the visit; in addition, the corresponding item of a modified version of the UKU, a Scandinavian side-effect rating scale, was used. Chi-squared test and logistic regression methods were used to analyze frequency of weight gain between treatments.

RESULTS

Out of 669 recruited, 636 evaluable patients were assessed. The treatment with the highest number of patients with weight gain as an adverse reaction on the UKU scale was olanzapine (74.5%), followed by risperidone (53.4%) and haloperidol (40.0%). The proportion of patients with clinically relevant weight gain (>or=7% increase versus initial weight) was also higher with olanzapine (45.7%) than with risperidone (30.6%) and haloperidol (22.4%). Five patients (13.5%) treated with quetiapine had some degree of weight gain according to the UKU scale, although no patient showed a clinically relevant weight gain (>or=7%). Treatment with olanzapine and risperidone were identified as risk factors of weight gain versus haloperidol. The risk of weight gain was higher in women (OR: 4.4), overweight patients (OR: 3.0) and in patients with <or=1 year of treatment (OR: 6.3) in the olanzapine group. A higher risk of weight gain in women (OR: 2.6) was also seen with risperidone.

CONCLUSION

Clinically relevant weight gain is clearly associated with olanzapine, and to lesser extent, with haloperidol and risperidone. Data for quetiapine were not conclusive because of the short duration of treatment.

Aripiprazole in the treatment of schizophrenia: safety and tolerability in short-term, placebo-controlled trials

Aripiprazole is a novel antipsychotic with a unique mechanism of action. Presented here is a pooled analysis of safety and tolerability data from all completed short-term, placebo-controlled trials in schizophrenia from the aripiprazole clinical development program. Data were analyzed from five 4- to 6-week double-blind multicenter studies of patients hospitalized with acute relapse of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder randomized to aripiprazole (n=932), placebo (n=416), or haloperidol (n=201). Daily aripiprazole doses ranged from 2 to 30 mg. Safety assessments included adverse event (AE) reports, EPS scales, ECGs, weight, and prolactin, glucose and cholesterol levels. Aripiprazole was well tolerated, with similar AE incidence rates to placebo, and lower rates than haloperidol for akathisia, extrapyramidal syndrome and somnolence. Objective EPS assessments demonstrated no significant differences between aripiprazole and placebo on Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS) scores, no dose-dependent effects on Barnes Akathisia scores, and significant reductions in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) scores from baseline vs. placebo (p</=0.01). Haloperidol showed increased SAS and Barnes Akathisia scores over placebo (p</=0.01). There was minimal mean weight change with aripiprazole (+0.71 kg) and haloperidol (+0.56 kg), and a lack of QT(c) prolongation. Serum prolactin increased with haloperidol, but not aripiprazole. In conclusion, aripiprazole shows a favorable safety and tolerability profile with low potential for EPS, weight gain, prolactin elevation, QT(c) prolongation, and sedation. Aripiprazole's safety profile may offer benefits in schizophrenia treatment.

The new and evolving pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia

Based on the evidence presented here, the following tentative conclusions can be drawn. Atypical antipsychotics (except amisulpride) have shown superiority over placebo in acute schizophrenia. Compared with conventional antipsychotics, they are at least as effective. Generally, analyses employing conservative criteria (e.g., Cochrane reviews) report few efficacy differences between atypical and conventional agents. There are now many well-controlled studies indicating modest advantages for the atypical antipsychotics, however, particularly in specific symptom domains. For the treatment of negative symptoms, olanzapine and to a lesser extent amisulpride seem most promising. Risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine display advantages in improving cognitive and depressive symptoms. There are indications that the atypical antipsychotics are associated with decreased likelihood of rehospitalization and improved quality of life. In head-to-head comparisons of atypical antipsychotics, none have shown consistent efficacy advantages. In severely refractory samples, no atypical antipsychotics have consistently been shown to be as effective as clozapine or superior to conventional agents. There are indications, however, that risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine have advantages over conventional agents in less severely refractory patients. Few maintenance RCTs have been published, and efficacy advantages for atypical antipsychotics in prospective RCTs in first-episode schizophrenia have not been reported.

Costs and outcomes of risperidone treatment in schizophrenia in the Czech Republic

The increasing cost of pharmaceuticals in the Czech Republic has led to restrictions on the prescription of more expensive atypical antipsychotics. The aim of the study was to compare the costs and outcomes of using risperidone versus classical neuroleptics in treatment of schizophrenia in order to see if there was any cost advantage in restricting use of more recent antipsychotics. Sixty-seven patients (39 women) with a mean age of 34.6 years (S.D. = 9.74) suffering from schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were treated with risperidone while 67 patients (39 women) with the same diagnoses with a mean age of 35.7 years (S.D. = 9.91) received standard neuroleptics. Yearly direct medical costs and outcomes (indicated by the average Global Assessment of Functioning score) were assessed retrospectively in an open, intent-to-treat study by abstracting psychiatric outpatient charts. The outcomes were not significantly different between the treatment groups while the risperidone treatment was significantly more expensive than the therapy with standard neuroleptics. This result which appears to be inconsistent with the literature was caused by the cheap labor force in the Czech Republic. The difference between the followed treatments in the direct costs will probably become insignificant in the future when the country's economy will be more developed.

Meta-analysis comparing newer antipsychotic drugs for the treatment of schizophrenia: evaluating the indirect approach

BACKGROUND

Meta-analysis is a useful method to assess the efficacy of newer antipsychotic drugs compared with older drugs or placebo. However, few trials directly compare novel drugs to each other.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the method of indirect meta-analysis by applying it to data on olanzapine versus haloperidol and risperidone versus haloperidol to enable a comparison between olanzapine and risperidone.

METHODS

Published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of risperidone, olanzapine, and/or haloperidol were identified through literature searches (1983 to 1999) of the MEDLINE, Current Contents, and HealthSTAR databases and reviewed. Data for the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total score, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative subscale, the percentage of patients using anticholinergic drugs, and the percentage of patients dropping out due to lack of efficacy, side effects, or any cause were extracted and combined using the indirect method. These findings were compared with those from a direct comparative study of olanzapine and risperidone.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 8 RCTs comparing risperidone to haloperidol and 3 comparing olanzapine to haloperidol. Only 1 trial directly comparing olanzapine and risperidone was found. In this trial, the change in BPRS total and PANSS negative subscale scores tended to be higher with olanzapine by 1.80 and 1.10, respectively, but these differences were not statistically significant. Indirect meta-analysis yielded similar results. Changes in both BPRS total scores and PANSS negative subscale scores tended to be higher with olanzapine by 0.37 and 0.54, respectively, and again, the differences were not statistically significant. In the indirect meta-analysis, the rate of anticholinergic drug use was 19.5% greater among patients treated with risperidone than among patients treated with olanzapine (P < 0.05). In the direct comparative RCT, the rate was 13.1% higher among patients treated with risperidone (P < 0.05). The dropout rates were similar for patients treated with risperidone and those treated with olanzapine in both analyses.

CONCLUSION

An indirect meta-analysis of studies comparing olanzapine with haloperidol and risperidone with haloperidol yielded conclusions similar to those found in a direct comparative RCT of olanzapine and risperidone.

Bodyweight gain with atypical antipsychotics. A comparative review

The atypical antipsychotics have been shown to have superior efficacy compared with typical antipsychotics such as haloperidol, particularly in the treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Furthermore, they induce less extrapyramidal effects. However, following clinical use, marked bodyweight gain has been frequently observed with some of the atypical antipsychotic drugs. In order to examine and compare the frequency, amount and conditions of bodyweight gain during treatment with atypical antipsychotics, studies concerning bodyweight gain with these agents were identified through a MEDLINE search from 1966 to March 2000. Although comparison is limited by the different designs and recruitment procedures of the reviewed studies, the available data support the notion that the frequency as well as the amount of bodyweight gain is high in patients treated with olanzapine (average bodyweight gain 2.3 kg/month), clozapine (1.7 kg/month), quetiapine (1.8 kg/month), and possibly also zotepine (2.3 kg/month). Moderate changes in bodyweight have been observed in the treatment with risperidone (average bodyweight gain 1.0 kg/month). Ziprasidone seems to induce only slight bodyweight changes (0.8 kg/month). Bodyweight gain most frequently occurs in the first 12 weeks of treatment. Patients who were underweight at the beginning of treatment are at highest risk of gaining bodyweight. The underlying pathomechanism still remains largely unclear. The relative receptor affinities of the atypical antipsychotics for histamine H1 receptors as well as the ratio of their affinity for serotonin 5-HT2 and dopamine D2 receptors appear to be the most robust correlate of bodyweight gain. Furthermore, the induction of leptin secretion may have an important impact on bodyweight gain in patients treated with atypical antipsychotics. Although many questions concerning the pathogenesis of bodyweight gain remain unresolved, this adverse effect has to be taken into consideration when prescribing the atypical antipsychotics, particularly in view its affect on compliance during long term treatment and the long term effects of obesity on mortality and morbidity.

Atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: systematic overview and meta-regression analysis

OBJECTIVE

To develop an evidence base for recommendations on the use of atypical antipsychotics for patients with schizophrenia.

DESIGN

Systematic overview and meta-regression analyses of randomised controlled trials, as a basis for formal development of guidelines.

SUBJECTS

12 649 patients in 52 randomised trials comparing atypical antipsychotics (amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and sertindole) with conventional antipsychotics (usually haloperidol or chlorpromazine) or alternative atypical antipsychotics.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Overall symptom scores. Rate of drop out (as a proxy for tolerability) and of side effects, notably extrapyramidal side effects.

RESULTS

For both symptom reduction and drop out, there was substantial heterogeneity between the results of trials, including those evaluating the same atypical antipsychotic and comparator drugs. Meta-regression suggested that dose of conventional antipsychotic explained the heterogeneity. When the dose was

CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence that atypical antipsychotics are more effective or are better tolerated than conventional antipsychotics. Conventional antipsychotics should usually be used in the initial treatment of an episode of schizophrenia unless the patient has previously not responded to these drugs or has unacceptable extrapyramidal side effects.

Collapse

Key Words Collapse

MESH Headings

• Amisulpride
• Antipsychotic Agents/therapeutic use
• Benzodiazepines
• Clozapine/therapeutic use
• Dibenzothiazepines/therapeutic use
• Drug Costs
• Humans
• Imidazoles
• Indoles
• Olanzapine
• Pirenzepine/analogs & derivatives
• Pirenzepine/therapeutic use
• Quetiapine Fumarate
• Regression Analysis
• Risperidone/therapeutic use
• Schizophrenia/drug therapy
• Sulpiride/analogs & derivatives
• Sulpiride/therapeutic use

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

J Geddes Department of Psychiatry University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford OX3 7JX.
N Freemantle
P Harrison
P Bebbington

Collapse

Risperidone versus typical antipsychotic medication for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

The 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs, such as haloperidol and chlorpromazine, are frequently used as the first line treatment for people with schizophrenia. However, about 5-25% of these people show poor response to these treatments and side effects often makes compliance with the 'older generation' of drug treatment problematic. Although the efficacy of these medications with respect to 'positive' symptoms is well described, little evidence exists that 'conventional' antipsychotic treatment has any effect on the 'negative' symptoms of schizophrenia. Risperidone is one of the 'new generation' neuroleptic compounds. As well as its reputed tendency to cause fewer movement disorders it is claimed that risperidone may improve negative symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of risperidone for schizophrenia in comparison to 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1980-1997), Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (1997), The Cochrane Library (1997, Issue1), EMBASE (1980-1997), MEDLINE (1966-1997), PsycLIT (1974-1997), and SCISEARCH (1997) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials comparing risperidone to any 'conventional' neuroleptic treatment for those with schizophrenia or other serious mental illnesses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were also independently extracted. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone, haloperidol and duration of illness were undertaken for the primary outcomes of clinical improvement, side effects (movement disorders) and acceptability of treatment. For homogeneous dichotomous data the odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve short-term studies and two long term studies provided data on 3401 people. This review provides no evidence relating to the effect of risperidone on cognitive or social functioning, quality of life, employment status, discharge from hospital and relapse rates. Risperidone increases the odds of moderate clinical improvement (OR 0.65, CI 0.55-0.77, NNT 10, CI 7-16). It appears to have little or no additional effect on the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia but did have less tendency to cause movement disorders, largely in comparison with haloperidol (OR 0.43, CI 0.34-0.55, NNT 7, CI 5-10) for use of antiparkinsonian medication. Risperidone seems to be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia (OR 0.69 CI 0.57-0.83, NNT 15, CI 10-30, 30% baseline risk of dropping out). Those taking risperidone are also marginally less likely to experience somnolence (OR 0.78, CI 0. 61-0.99, NNT 22). Weight gain, however, is more likely with risperidone (OR 1.51 CI 1.14-2.00, NNT 13). Funnel plots show that smaller studies generally show greater benefit for risperidone than larger studies. A publication bias in favour of risperidone amongst the included studies may explain this effect. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone (excluding those receiving 1 or 2 mg) did not materially change the results for the principal outcomes. Excluding data from those on higher doses of haloperidol (>10mg/day) does marginally change the results. Risperidone is less effective in achieving clinical improvement and preventing dropout but outcomes relating to movement disorders change little.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Little can be concluded about the long term effects of risperidone and generalising results beyond a comparison with haloperidol would be imprudent. Risperidone may be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia and have marginal benefits in terms of limited clinical improvement and side

Evidence-based psychopharmacology 2. Appraising a systematic review: is risperidone better than conventional antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia?

Systematic reviews are increasingly used to combine the results of several studies in order to define the treatment effect with a high degree of precision. However, reviews of this nature may lead to spurious results and should not be accepted uncritically. This article, the second in a series on evidence-based psychopharmacology, is intended to illustrate the process of critical appraisal of a systematic review. In this example, a systematic review of studies comparing risperidone with conventional antipsychotics is appraised. Interpretation of the results of the systematic review may be hampered by the way in which studies were selected.

Weight gain: side effect of atypical neuroleptics?

During clinical experience with the "atypical" neuroleptic drugs clozapine, risperidone, and zotepine, some patients have shown a marked weight gain. To prove whether weight gain is a relevant side effect of atypical neuroleptics, the charts of all patients admitted with DSM-III-R diagnoses of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder in the years 1991 to 1995 were evaluated. A retrospective chart review was performed, which included all patients who were treated longer than 2 weeks with a single neuroleptic. The data analysis showed that weight gain must be considered as a common side effect of atypical neuroleptics (clozapine, risperidone, sulpiride, or zotepine). The mean weight gain (3.1, 1.5, 1.9, or 4.3 kg, respectively) was significantly higher than that of patients treated with "classic" neuroleptics (mean, 0.0-0.5 kg) (Kruskal-Wallis, p = 0.01). Young and not obese patients show the highest weight increase. Because weight gain occurs in the first weeks of treatment, particularly in previously untreated subjects, this side effect has to be considered in view of compliance with long-term neuroleptic medication.

Efficacy and extrapyramidal side-effects of the new antipsychotics olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and sertindole compared to conventional antipsychotics and placebo. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The objective of this meta-analysis is to summarize the efficacy and tolerability of the new antipsychotics risperidone, olanzapine, sertindole and quetiapine in schizophrenia compared to placebo and conventional antipsychotics. The main results are: (1) All of the 4 new drugs are more effective than placebo, but the magnitude of the effect is only moderate [mean effect size, r, of all antipsychotics vs. placebo = 0.25, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.22-0.28, n = 2477]. (2) According to the studies published to date, sertindole and quetiapine are as effective as haloperidol, and risperidone and olanzapine are slightly more effective than haloperidol in the treatment of global schizophrenic symptomatology. (3) With respect to negative symptoms, all new antipsychotics are more effective than placebo. However, contrary to widespread opinion, so is the 'conventional' antipsychotic haloperidol. Risperidone and olanzapine are slightly superior, sertindole is as effective and--according to the only study fully published to date--quetiapine is even slightly less effective than haloperidol in this regard. (4) All new antipsychotics are associated with less frequent use of antiparkinson medication than haloperidol, with risperidone appearing to have a slightly less favourable EPS-profile than the other new antipsychotics. The methodological limitations of this review, the generalizability of the results and expectations from future research are discussed.

The use of atypical antipsychotics in the management of schizophrenia

Long-term drug treatment of schizophrenia with conventional antipsychotics has limitations: an estimated quarter to one third of patients are treatment-resistant; conventional antipsychotics have only a modest impact upon negative symptoms (poverty of thought, social withdrawal and loss of affect); and adverse effects, particularly extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). Newer, so-called atypical, antipsychotics such as olanzapine, risperidone, sertindole and clozapine (an old drug which was re-introduced in 1990) are claimed to address these limitations. Atypical agents are, at a minimum, at least as effective as conventional drugs such as haloperidol. They also cause substantially fewer extrapyramidal symptoms. However, some other adverse effects are more common than with conventional drugs. For example, clozapine carries a significant risk of serious blood disorders, for which special monitoring is mandatory; it also causes troublesome drowsiness and increased salivation more often than conventional agents. Some atypical agents cause more weight gain or QT prolongation than older agents. The choice of therapy is, therefore, not straightforward. At present, atypical agents represent an advance for patients with severe or intolerable EPS. Most published evidence exists to support the use of clozapine, which has also been shown to be effective in schizophrenia refractory to conventional agents. However, the need for compliance with blood count monitoring and its sedative properties make careful patient selection important. The extent of any additional direct benefit offered by atypical agents on negative symptoms is not yet clear. The lack of a depot formulation for atypical drugs may pose a significant practical problem. To date, only two double-blind studies in which atypical agents were compared directly have been published. Neither provides compelling evidence for the choice of one agent over another. Atypical agents are many times more expensive than conventional drugs. Although drug treatment constitutes only a small proportion of the costs of managing schizophrenia, the additional annual cost of the use of atypical agents in, say, a quarter of the likely U.K. schizophrenic population would be about 56 M pound sterling. There is only limited evidence of cost-effectiveness. Atypical antipsychotics are not currently licensed for other conditions where conventional antipsychotics are commonly used, such as behaviour disturbance or dementia in the elderly. Their dose, and place in treatment in such cases have yet to be determined.

The QT interval and the atypical antipsychotic, sertindole

Sertindole is a limbic-selective antipsychotic agent with a strong affinity for D2, 5-HT2 and α1-adrenergic receptors. Prolongation of the QT interval and other adverse cardiac or cardiovascular reactions are known effects of most antipsychotic drugs. For this reason such effects have been extensively monitored during clinical trials of sertindole. A small proportion of sertindole-treated patients were found to exhibit an increase in QT interval. Detailed analysis revealed no increased risk with sertindole of lethal complications due to an increase in QT interval. Nevertheless, as with other antipsychotics, electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings should be made prior to starting and during treatment with sertindole.

The new antipsychotics, and their potential for early intervention in schizophrenia

Over almost four decades, few fundamentally different antipsychotic drugs evolved to challenge classical neuroleptics as the mainstay of the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia. However, the recent re-emergence of clozapine, together with the emergence of risperidone, portends an increasing number of new antipsychotics which are now either traversing the stages of regulatory approval or else well-advanced in clinical development. This article first evaluates the significance of clozapine and risperidone; it then reviews some of the new antipsychotics and how they might be classified vis-a-vis potential advantages for patients, outlines putative mechanisms and new therapeutic targets, and considers whether such agents may act on any disease process inherent to schizophrenia. One fundamental issue is the extent to which the new antipsychotics might shift materially the risk benefit balance towards intervention, not just at the earliest possible stage following the onset of psychosis but at a yet earlier, 'prodromal' phase of the disorder where there is a considerably greater likelihood of 'treating' behavioural disturbances that prove not to be the harbingers of psychotic illness.