A comparison of ziprasidone and risperidone in the long-term treatment of schizophrenia: a 44-week, double-blind, continuation study

Drug-induced liver injury associated with atypical generation antipsychotics from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS)

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown that liver enzyme abnormalities were not only seen with typical antipsychotics (APs) but also with atypical antipsychotics (AAPs). During the last 20 years, the hepatotoxicity of various antipsychotics received much attention. However, systematic evaluations of hepatotoxicity associated with APs are limited.

METHODS

All drug related hepatic disorders cases were retrieved from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) database using standardized MedDRA queries (SMQ) from the first quarter of 2017 to the first quarter of 2022. Patient characteristics and prognosis were assessed. In this study, a case/non-case approach was used to calculate reporting odds ratio (RORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We calculated the drug-induced liver injury (DILI) RORs for each AAPs.

RESULTS

A total of 408 DILI cases were attributed to AAPs during the study period. 18.6% of these were designated as serious adverse event (SAE), which include death (19.74%), hospitalization (68.42%), disability (2.63%), and life-threatening (9.21%) outcomes. The RORs values in descending order were: quetiapine (ROR = 0.782), clozapine (ROR = 0.665), aripiprazole (ROR = 0.507), amisulpride (ROR = 0.308), paliperidone (ROR = 0.212), risperidone (ROR = 0.198), ziprasidone (0.131).

CONCLUSION

The result found in our study was that all AAPs didn't have a significant correlation with increased hepatotoxicity. Future analysis of the FAERS database in conjunction with other data sources will be essential for continuous monitoring of DILI.

Schizophrenia Treatment with Second-Generation Antipsychotics: A Multi-Country Comparison of the Costs of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Adverse Events and Weight Gain

PURPOSE

Cardiovascular and metabolic adverse events are costly to treat, and their incidence is increased amongst people with schizophrenia, with different rates observed for second-generation antipsychotics. To inform treatment choice, this study sought to estimate the lifetime costs associated with antipsychotic choice, and how these costs varied across European countries.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted to identify evidence on effectiveness and costs. A Markov model was developed to assess the costs of ten antipsychotics: aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, lumateperone, lurasidone, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. Costs were obtained for seven countries: Italy, Hungary, France, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK. The costs considered were adverse events (including diabetes, myocardial infarction, stroke and weight gain), drug costs, relapse, treatment discontinuation and schizophrenia management. Two adult populations were modelled; initiating either acute or maintenance treatment, with a lifetime horizon for both.

RESULTS

Lurasidone was associated with the lowest lifetime costs amongst patients initiating acute treatment compared to all other atypical antipsychotics considered. The second lowest costs were for ziprasidone. These results were observed for all seven countries. The main drivers of cost differences were rates of diabetes and cardiovascular diseases, which were lowest for lurasidone, followed by ziprasidone then lumateperone. Costs for managing weight gain were lowest for lurasidone and ziprasidone. Similar results were observed for patients initiating maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSION

Diabetes and cardiovascular events are large drivers of lifetime costs for people with schizophrenia. Lurasidone is predicted to have the lowest rates of these adverse events, and so the lowest costs amongst patients initiating acute treatment in seven European countries compared to nine other antipsychotics. Future research should investigate the individual costs of relapse management, including differences in the costs and proportions of hospitalizations.

Long-term effectiveness of oral second-generation antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and related disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of direct head-to-head comparisons

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are recommended for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. However, comparative long-term effectiveness among SGAs is unclear. Here we provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials lasting ≥⃒6 months comparing SGAs head-to-head in schizophrenia and related disorders. The primary outcome was all-cause discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and tolerability, i.e., psychopathology, inefficacy-related and intolerability-related discontinuation, relapse, hospitalization, remission, functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. Pooled risk ratio and standardized mean difference were calculated using random-effects models. Across 59 studies (N=45,787), lasting 47.4±32.1 weeks (range 24-186), no consistent superiority of any SGA emerged across efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Regarding all-cause discontinuation, clozapine, olanzapine and risperidone were significantly (p<0.05) superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine was inferior to several other SGAs. As to psychopathology, clozapine and olanzapine were superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine and ziprasidone were inferior to several other SGAs. Data for other efficacy outcomes were sparse. Regarding intolerability-related discontinuation, risperidone was superior and clozapine was inferior to several other SGAs. Concerning weight gain, olanzapine was worse than all other compared non-clozapine SGAs, and risperidone was significantly worse than several other SGAs. As to prolactin increase, risperidone and amisulpride were significantly worse than several other SGAs. Regarding parkinsonism, olanzapine was superior to risperidone, without significant differences pertaining to akathisia. Concerning sedation and somnolence, clozapine and quetiapine were significantly worse than some other SGAs. In summary, different long-term SGA efficacy and tolerability patterns emerged. The long-term risk-benefit profiles of specific SGAs need to be tailored to individual patients to optimize maintenance treatment outcomes.

Tardive dyskinesia risk with first- and second-generation antipsychotics in comparative randomized controlled trials: a meta-analysis

Tardive dyskinesia (TD) risk with D2/serotonin receptor antagonists or D2 receptor partial agonists (second-generation antipsychotics, SGAs) is considered significantly lower than with D2 antagonists (first-generation antipsychotics, FGAs). As some reports questioned this notion, we meta-analyzed randomized controlled studies (RCTs) to estimate the risk ratio (RR) and annualized rate ratio (RaR) of TD comparing SGAs vs. FGAs and SGAs vs. SGAs. Additionally, we calculated raw and annualized pooled TD rates for each antipsychotic. Data from 57 head-to-head RCTs, including 32 FGA and 86 SGA arms, were meta-analyzed, yielding 32 FGA-SGA pairs and 35 SGA-SGA pairs. The annualized TD incidence across FGA arms was 6.5% (95% CI: 5.3-7.8%) vs. 2.6% (95% CI: 2.0-3.1%) across SGA arms. TD risk and annualized rates were lower with SGAs vs. FGAs (RR=0.47, 95% CI: 0.39-0.57, p<0.0001, k=28; RaR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.28-0.45, p<0.0001, number-needed-to-treat, NNT=20). Meta-regression showed no FGA dose effect on FGA-SGA comparisons (Z=-1.03, p=0.30). FGA-SGA TD RaRs differed by SGA comparator (Q=21.8, df=7, p=0.003), with a significant advantage of olanzapine and aripiprazole over other non-clozapine SGAs in exploratory pairwise comparisons. SGA-SGA comparisons confirmed the olanzapine advantage vs. non-clozapine SGAs (RaR=0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.88, p=0.006, k=17, NNT=100). This meta-analysis confirms a clinically meaningfully lower TD risk with SGAs vs. FGAs, which is not driven by high dose FGA comparators, and documents significant differences with respect to this risk between individual SGAs.

Hepatic Safety of Atypical Antipsychotics: Current Evidence and Future Directions

The newer atypical antipsychotic agents (AAPs) represent an attractive therapeutic option for a wide range of psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar mania, because of the reduced risk of disabling extrapyramidal symptoms. However, their growing use has raised questions about their tolerability over the endocrine, metabolic, and cardiovascular axes. Indeed, atypical antipsychotic drugs are associated, to differing extents, with mild elevation of aminotransferases related to weight gain, AAP-induced metabolic syndrome, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Although the hepatic safety of new AAPs seems improved over that of chlorpromazine, they can occasionally cause idiosyncratic liver injury with varying phenotypes and, rarely, lead to acute liver failure. However, AAPs are a group of heterogeneous, chemically unrelated compounds with distinct pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties and substantially different safety profiles, which precludes the notion of a class effect for hepatotoxicity risk and highlights the need for an individualized therapeutic approach. We discuss the current evidence on the hepatotoxicity potential of AAPs, the emerging underlying mechanisms, and the limitations inherent to this group of drugs for both establishing a proper causality assessment and developing strategies for risk management.

Systematic Literature Review of the Methods Used to Compare Newer Second-Generation Agents for the Management of Schizophrenia: A focus on Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

The challenges of comparative effectiveness to support health technology assessment (HTA) agencies are important considerations in the choices of antipsychotic medications for the treatment of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to assess the study methods used and outcomes reported in the published literature to address the question of comparative effectiveness of newer antipsychotic agents and the adequacy and availability of evidence to support HTA agencies.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic search of the PubMed database from 1 January 2009 to 30 September 2013 was conducted to identify studies evaluating new atypical antipsychotics reporting on comparative effectiveness.

STUDY SELECTION

The systematic review comprised of studies on schizophrenia patients where at least two drugs were being compared and at least one treatment group received one of the following second-generation antipsychotics: risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, asenapine, iloperidone, lurasidone, and quetiapine. The included studies were also required to have an efficacy, safety or economic outcome, such as Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score, weight gain, resource utilization, or costs.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Two reviewers (BW and GK) independently applied the inclusion criteria. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved by consensus, referring to the original sources. Information on the methodology and outcomes was collected for each included study. This included study description, head-to-head drug comparison, patient population, study methodology, statistical methods, reported outcomes, study support, and journal type.

RESULTS

A total of 198 studies were identified from electronic search methods. The largest category of studies was randomized controlled trials [RCTs] (N = 73; 36.9%), which were largely directed at the regulatory endpoint. Fewer studies were undertaken for HTA-purposes cohort studies (N = 53; 26.8%), meta-analyses (N = 32; 16.2%), economic studies (N = 14; 7.1%), and cross-sectional studies (N = 13; 6.6%). Direct head-to-head comparisons preferred by HTA were dominated by the comparison involving olanzapine and risperidone, representing 149 (75.3%) and 119 (60.1%) studies, respectively. RCTs, which are the primary study type for regulatory submissions, showed a lack of bias. Studies aimed at HTA were not as well performed. Cohort studies suffered from bias in the selection of comparison groups, lack of control for confounders, and differential dropout rates. As a group, cross-sectional studies scored poorly for bias, with a primary failure to identify a representative sample. Economic studies showed highly variable bias, with bias in the representation of effectiveness data, model assumptions without validation, and lack of sensitivity analyses.

LIMITATIONS

One limitation of this systematic review is that it only included studies from 2009 to 2013, potentially excluding some earlier comparator studies, particularly those involving first-generation antipsychotics.

CONCLUSIONS

This review of comparative effectiveness studies of second-generation antipsychotic agents for schizophrenic patients revealed a wide range of study types, study methodologies, and outcomes. For traditional efficacy outcomes and select safety outcomes, there is strong evidence from many well-conducted studies; however, there are fewer studies of types preferred by HTA with limited head-to-head comparisons and a higher risk of bias in the execution of these studies.

[Maintenance Treatment With Antipsychotics for Adult Patients Diagnosed With Schizophrenia]

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and security of the antipsychotics available for the management of adult patients with schizophrenia in the maintenance phase. To develop recommendations of treatment for the maintenance phase of the disease.

METHODS

A clinical practice guideline was elaborated under the parameters of the Methodological Guide of the Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social to identify, synthesize and evaluate the evidence and make recommendations about the treatment and follow-up of adult patients with schizophrenia. The evidence of NICE guide 82 was adopted and updated. The evidence was presented to the Guideline Developing Group and recommendations, employing the GRADE system, were produced.

RESULTS

18 studies were included to evaluate the effectiveness and / or safety of different antipsychotic drugs first and second generation. Overall, antipsychotics (AP) showed superiority over placebo in relapse rate over 12 months (RR 0.59 95% CI 0.42, 0.82) and hospitalization rate over 24 months of follow-up (RR 0.38 95% 0.27, 0.55); its use is associated with increased risk of treatment dropout (RR 0.53 95% CI 0.46, 0.61) and adverse events such as weight gain, dystonia, extrapyramidal symptoms and sedation. There was no difference in the outcome of re hospitalizations, comparisons on quality of life, negative symptoms or weight gain between AP first and second generation. Continuous or standard dose regimens appear to be superior to intermittent or low doses in reducing the risk of abandonment of treatment regimes.

CONCLUSION

Adult patients diagnosed with schizophrenia should receive maintenance treatment with antipsychotics. The medication of choice will depend on the management of the acute phase, the patient's tolerance to it and the presentation of adverse events.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics, safety and clinical efficacy of ziprasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Multiple strategies exist for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders. In the last 20 years, several 'new' compounds have been introduced, called 'atypical antipsychotics', which have higher efficacy and better tolerability than first-generation neuroleptics. Among them, ziprasidone (ZPR) is currently finding widespread use, and it has also been shown to be active as an augmenter in bipolar disorder therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide the latest information on ZPR, an 'atypical' agent for the pharmacological therapy of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. A literature search has been carried out with the keywords 'ziprasidone', 'schizophrenia', 'psychosis', 'bipolar', 'pharmacokinetics' and 'clinical trials'. In this process, particular attention has been paid to the drug pharmacokinetic characteristics and its safety in clinical use.

EXPERT OPINION

ZPR shares most advantages and disadvantages with other atypical antipsychotics. However, it can be useful for its low tendency to cause metabolic syndrome and hyperprolactinaemia, especially in patients suffering from excess weight, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes or who have suffered from hyperprolactinaemia when using other antipsychotics. However, there are serious doubts as to whether ZPR should be administered to patients suffering from arrhythmias or QTc prolongation, and even more for administration to bipolar patients undergoing polypharmacy with antidepressants.

The effects of novel and newly approved antipsychotics on serum prolactin levels: a comprehensive review

Since the 1970s, clinicians have increasingly become more familiar with hyperprolactinemia (HPRL) as a common adverse effect of antipsychotic medication, which remains the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment for patients with schizophrenia. Although treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) as a group is, compared with use of the first-generation antipsychotics, associated with lower prolactin (PRL) plasma levels, the detailed effects on plasma PRL levels for each of these compounds in reports often remain incomplete or inaccurate. Moreover, at this moment, no review has been published about the effect of the newly approved antipsychotics asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone on PRL levels. The objective of this review is to describe PRL physiology; PRL measurement; diagnosis, causes, consequences and mechanisms of HPRL; incidence figures of (new-onset) HPRL with SGAs and newly approved antipsychotics in adolescent and adult patients; and revisit lingering questions regarding this hormone. A literature search, using the MEDLINE database (1966-December 2013), was conducted to identify relevant publications to report on the state of the art of HPRL and to summarize the available evidence with respect to the propensity of the SGAs and the newly approved antipsychotics to elevate PRL levels. Our review shows that although HPRL usually is defined as a sustained level of PRL above the laboratory upper limit of normal, limit values show some degree of variability in clinical reports, making the interpretation and comparison of data across studies difficult. Moreover, many reports do not provide much or any data detailing the measurement of PRL. Although the highest rates of HPRL are consistently reported in association with amisulpride, risperidone and paliperidone, while aripiprazole and quetiapine have the most favorable profile with respect to this outcome, all SGAs can induce PRL elevations, especially at the beginning of treatment, and have the potential to cause new-onset HPRL. Considering the PRL-elevating propensity of the newly approved antipsychotics, evidence seems to indicate these agents have a PRL profile comparable to that of clozapine (asenapine and iloperidone), ziprasidone and olanzapine (lurasidone). PRL elevations with antipsychotic medication generally are dose dependant. However, antipsychotics having a high potential for PRL elevation (amisulpride, risperidone and paliperidone) can have a profound impact on PRL levels even at relatively low doses, while PRL levels with antipsychotics having a minimal effect on PRL, in most cases, can remain unchanged (quetiapine) or reduce (aripiprazole) over all dosages. Although tolerance and decreases in PRL values after long-term administration of PRL-elevating antipsychotics can occur, the elevations, in most cases, remain above the upper limit of normal. PRL profiles of antipsychotics in children and adolescents seem to be the same as in adults. The hyperprolactinemic effects of antipsychotic medication are mostly correlated with their affinity for dopamine D2 receptors at the level of the anterior pituitary lactotrophs (and probably other neurotransmitter mechanisms) and their blood-brain barrier penetrating capability. Even though antipsychotics are the most common cause of pharmacologically induced HPRL, recent research has shown that HPRL can be pre-existing in a substantial portion of antipsychotic-naïve patients with first-episode psychosis or at-risk mental state.

Almost all antipsychotics result in weight gain: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Antipsychotics (AP) induce weight gain. However, reviews and meta-analyses generally are restricted to second generation antipsychotics (SGA) and do not stratify for duration of AP use. It is hypothesised that patients gain more weight if duration of AP use is longer.

Method

A meta-analysis was conducted of clinical trials of AP that reported weight change. Outcome measures were body weight change, change in BMI and clinically relevant weight change (7% weight gain or loss). Duration of AP-use was stratified as follows: ≤6 weeks, 6–16 weeks, 16–38 weeks and >38 weeks. Forest plots stratified by AP as well as by duration of use were generated and results were summarised in figures.

Results

307 articles met inclusion criteria. The majority were AP switch studies. Almost all AP showed a degree of weight gain after prolonged use, except for amisulpride, aripiprazole and ziprasidone, for which prolonged exposure resulted in negligible weight change. The level of weight gain per AP varied from discrete to severe. Contrary to expectations, switch of AP did not result in weight loss for amisulpride, aripiprazole or ziprasidone. In AP-naive patients, weight gain was much more pronounced for all AP.

Conclusion

Given prolonged exposure, virtually all AP are associated with weight gain. The rational of switching AP to achieve weight reduction may be overrated. In AP-naive patients, weight gain is more pronounced.

Evidence review and clinical guidance for the use of ziprasidone in Canada

While indicated for schizophrenia and acute mania, ziprasidone's evidence base and use in clinical practice extends beyond these regulatory approvals. We, an invited panel of experts led by a working group of 3, critically examined the evidence and our collective experience regarding the effectiveness, tolerability and safety of ziprasidone across its clinical uses. There was no opportunity for manufacturer input into the content of the review. As anticipated, ziprasidone was found to be effective for its indicated uses, although its utility in mania and mixed states lacked comparative data. Beyond these uses, the available data were either unimpressive or were lacking. An attractive characteristic is its neutral effect on weight thereby providing patients with a non-obesogenic long-term treatment option. Key challenges in practice include the need for dosing on a full stomach and managing its early onset adverse effect of restlessness. Addressing these issues are critical to its long-term success.

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.

Optimizing outcomes in schizophrenia: long-acting depots and long-term treatment

Antipsychotics are the mainstay of treatment for patients with schizophrenia. However, these medications only work if they are taken and perhaps work best if they are taken for longer periods of time than seen in typical research trials. Here we explore the idea of "time as drug" by reviewing the data showing the potential benefits of long-term antipsychotic use. We also discuss the utility of depot antipsychotic formulations for improving the chances of attaining long-term therapeutic results.

Ziprasidone hydrocloride: what role in the management of schizophrenia?

Background

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

Objectives

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

Understanding the relationship between baseline BMI and subsequent weight change in antipsychotic trials: effect modification or regression to the mean?

The purpose of this study was to examine whether prior evidence of an inverse relationship between initial body weight and subsequent antipsychotic-induced weight change represents true effect modification or a statistical artifact, regression to the mean (RTM). We conducted a post-hoc analysis after pooling seven randomized, placebo- or active-controlled trials of ziprasidone and other antipsychotic agents. ANCOVA was applied to evaluate treatment-by-baseline body mass index (BMI) range interaction effect on weight change. Regression analysis was applied to estimate the potential bias due to RTM. Statistical interaction tests between baseline BMI ranges and treatment assignments (haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone, versus placebo) were not significant within studies or across studies. Correlation between baseline and follow-up measurements of body weight in placebo-treated subjects was less than perfect (r=0.87, 6-month cohort), leading to RTM. Consistent with predictions based on RTM, the greatest weight change, on average, was observed in subgroups with baseline weights differing the most from the population mean. Our findings suggest that the previously observed correlation between baseline BMI and weight change subsequent to antipsychotic treatment reflects in part RTM, and not effect modification. This class of drugs appears to cause similar weight gain in both high and low baseline BMI groups.

Ziprasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Specialised Register (April 2007) and references of all identified studies for further trial citations. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials for additional information.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised, at least single-blind, controlled trials comparing oral ziprasidone with oral forms of amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone or zotepine in people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (MD) for dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Weight effects associated with antipsychotics: a comprehensive database analysis

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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