Anti-depressive effectiveness of olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone and ziprasidone: a pragmatic, randomized trial

The contribution of the cingulate cortex: treating depressive symptoms in first-episode drug naïve schizophrenia

Background

Our previous study has shown the cingulate cortex abnormalities in first-episode drug naïve (FEDN) schizophrenia patients with comorbid depressive symptoms. However, it remains largely unknown whether antipsychotics may induce morphometric change in cingulate cortex and its relationship with depressive symptoms. The purpose of this study was to further clarify the important role of cingulate cortex in the treatment on depressive symptoms in FEDN schizophrenia patients.

Method

In this study, 42 FEDN schizophrenia patients were assigned into depressed patients group (DP, n = 24) and non-depressed patients group (NDP, n = 18) measured by the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD). Clinical assessments and anatomical images were obtained from all patients before and after 12-week treatment with risperidone.

Results

Although risperidone alleviated psychotic symptoms in all patients, depressive symptoms were decreased only in DP. Significant group by time interaction effects were found in the right rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC) and other subcortical regions in the left hemisphere. After risperidone treatment, the right rACC were increased in DP. Further, the increasing volume of right rACC was negatively associated with improvement in depressive symptoms.

Conclusion

These findings suggested that the abnormality of the rACC is the typical characteristics in schizophrenia with depressive symptoms. It's likely key region contributing to the neural mechanisms underlying the effects of risperidone treatment on depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

Antidepressive Effectiveness of Amisulpride, Aripiprazole, and Olanzapine in Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: A Secondary Outcome Analysis of a Pragmatic, Randomized Trial (BeSt InTro)

BACKGROUND

Depressive symptoms are frequent in schizophrenia and associated with a poorer outcome. Currently, the optimal treatment for depressive symptoms in schizophrenia remains undetermined. Amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine all have antidepressive pharmacodynamic properties, ranging from serotonergic affinities to limbic dopaminergic selectivity. Consequently, in a 12-month pragmatic, randomized clinical trial, we aimed to investigate differences in antidepressive effectiveness among amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine as a secondary outcome, measured by change in the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score in patients within the schizophrenia spectrum.

METHODS

Psychotic patients within the schizophrenia spectrum were included, and effectiveness was analyzed with latent growth curve modeling.

RESULTS

Of the 144 patients, 51 (35%) were women, the mean age was 31.7 (SD 12.7), and 39% were antipsychotic naive. At inclusion, 68 (47%) participants had a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score >6, indicating severe depressive symptoms. Across the 12-month follow-up, there was a depressive symptom reduction in all medication groups, but no statistically significant differences between the study drugs. Separate analyses of the subcohort with elevated depressive symptoms at inclusion also failed to find differences in depressive symptom reduction between study drugs. The reduction in depressive symptoms mainly occurred within 6 weeks after randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a reduction in depressive symptoms under treatment with amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine in acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder, but no differences between the drugs.

Negative symptoms in first-episode psychosis: Clinical correlates and 1-year follow-up outcomes in London Early Intervention Services

AIM

Negative symptoms (NS) have been associated with poor outcome and remain difficult to treat in patients with psychosis. This study examined the association of NS with clinical features at first presentation to mental health services for psychosis and with outcomes at 1-year follow-up.

METHODS

Clinical data were utilized from five London Early Intervention Services (EIS) included in the MiData audit database. The sample comprised 484 first-episode psychosis patients with complete Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale data at baseline and 1-year follow-up. Multiple imputation (N = 50) was conducted to account for missing follow-up data.

RESULTS

Baseline NS were associated with male gender (B = -1.63, P < .05), younger age at onset (B = -.15, P <. 05), a higher level of impairment on the Global Assessment of Functioning (disability) Scale at baseline (B = -.19, P <. 010), an absence of reported substance misuse prior to baseline assessment (B = -3.05, P <. 001) and unemployment at baseline (B = -.93, P <. 01). At 1-year follow-up, NS at presentation were associated with worse Global Assessment of Functioning Scale for symptom (B = -.28, P < .01) and disability (B = -.27, P <. 05) and with hospital admission (OR = 1.06, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Negative symptoms at presentation to EIS were associated with worse functioning at entry and poorer outcomes 1 year later. Future research is required to better understand the aetiology and trajectories of NS in early psychosis and propose novel targeted interventions.

Trajectories of depressive symptoms in the acute phase of psychosis: Implications for treatment

Depression is common in schizophrenia and associated with negative outcomes. Previous studies have identified heterogeneity in treatment response in schizophrenia. We aimed to investigate different trajectories of depression in patients suffering from psychosis and predictors of change in depressive symptoms during antipsychotic treatment. Two hundred and twenty-six patients >18 years acutely admitted due to psychosis were consecutively included and the follow-up was 27 weeks. The Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) sum score was the primary outcome. Latent growth curve (LGCM) and Growth Mixture Models (GMM) were conducted. Predictors were the Positive sum score of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for Schizophrenia (PANSS), Schizophrenia spectrum/non-spectrum psychoses, gender and being antipsychotic naive at inclusion. We found support for three depression-trajectories, including a high- (14.7%), a low depression-level (69.6%) class and a third depressed class quickly decreasing to a low level (15.7%). Change in CDSS was associated with change in PANSS positive score in all time intervals (4 weeks: b = 0.18, p < 0.001, 3 months: 0.21, p < 0.023, 6 months: 0.43, p < 0.001) and with a diagnosis within schizophrenia spectrum but not with antipsychotic naivety or gender. The schizophrenia-spectrum patients had less depressive symptoms at inclusion (-2.63, p < 0.001). In conclusion, an early responding and a treatment refractory group were identified. The treatment-refractory patients are candidates for enhanced anti-depressive treatment, for which current evidence is limited. The post-psychotic depression group was characterized by depressive symptoms in the acute phase as well. We could not identify differentiating characteristics of the depression trajectories.

Risperidone versus other antipsychotics for people with severe mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Up to 75% of people with serious mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have co-occurring substance use disorders (dual diagnosis). Dual diagnosis can have an adverse effect on treatment and prognosis of SMI.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of risperidone compared to treatment with other antipsychotics (first-generation and other second-generation antipsychotics) used in people with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse.

SEARCH METHODS

On 6 January 2016 and 9 October 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (including trial registers).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised trials of risperidone versus any other antipsychotic in people with SMI and substance abuse (dual diagnosis). We included trials meeting our inclusion criteria and reporting useable data. We excluded trials that either did not meet our inclusion criteria or met our inclusion criteria but did not report any useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and selected studies. For included studies, we independently extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the quality of evidence, creating a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight randomised trials containing a total of 1073 participants with SMI and co-occurring substance misuse. Seven of these contributed useable data to the review. There was heterogeneity in trial design and measurement. Risperidone was compared to clozapine, olanzapine, perphenazine, quetiapine and ziprasidone. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents. Few trials examined participants with a dual diagnosis from the outset and most trials only contained separate analyses of subgroups with a dual diagnosis or were secondary data analyses of subgroups of people with a dual diagnosis from existing larger trials.For risperidone versus clozapine we found no clear differences between these two antipsychotics in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), n = 36, mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% CI -2.21 to 4.01, very low quality evidence), or reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 14, risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.35, very low quality evidence), improvement in subjective well-being (1 RCT, n = 36, MD -6.00, 95% CI -14.82 to 2.82, very low quality evidence), numbers discontinuing medication (1 RCT, n = 36, RR 4.05, 95% CI 0.21 to 78.76, very low quality evidence), extrapyramidal side-effects (2 RCTs, n = 50, RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.30 to 24.08; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCTs, n = 45, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.51; I² = 34%, very low quality evidence). Clozapine was associated with lower levels of craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 28, MD 7.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 11.63, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus olanzapine we found no clear differences in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 RCT, n = 37, MD -1.50, 95% CI -3.82 to 0.82, very low quality evidence), reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 0.40, 95% CI -4.72 to 5.52, very low quality evidence), craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 5.00, 95% CI -4.86 to 14.86, very low quality evidence), parkinsonism (1 RCT, n = 16, MD -0.08, 95% CI -1.21 to 1.05, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCT, n = 77, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.35; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus perphenazine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 281, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus quetiapine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 294, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus ziprasidone, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 240, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10, low-quality evidence).For many comparisons, important outcomes were missing; and no data were reported in any study for metabolic disturbances, global impression of illness severity, quality of life or mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not sufficient good-quality evidence available to determine the effects of risperidone compared with other antipsychotics in people with a dual diagnosis. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents, leading to limited applicability to settings where access to second-generation agents is limited, such as in low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, heterogeneity in trial design and measurement of outcomes precluded the use of many trials in our analyses. Future trials in this area need to be sufficiently powered but also need to conform to consistent methods in study population selection, use of measurement scales, definition of outcomes, and measures to counter risk of bias. Investigators should adhere to CONSORT guidelines in the reporting of results.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia. Part 3: Update 2015 Management of special circumstances: Depression, Suicidality, substance use disorders and pregnancy and lactation

These updated guidelines are based on the first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of schizophrenia published in the years 2005 and 2006. For this 2015 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations which are clinically and scientifically relevant. They are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating patients with schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines a systematic review, as well as a data extraction from national guidelines have been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and subsequently categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and five levels of recommendation (1-5). This third part of the updated guidelines covers the management of the following specific treatment circumstances: comorbid depression, suicidality, various comorbid substance use disorders (legal and illegal drugs), and pregnancy and lactation. These guidelines are primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antipsychotic medication and other pharmacological treatment options) of patients with schizophrenia.

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.

Ziprasidone as Adjunctive Therapy in Severe Bipolar Patients Treated with Clozapine

Aim. To confirm the efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone as adjunctive therapy in bipolar patients partially responding to clozapine or with persisting negative symptoms, overweight, or with metabolic syndrome. Methods. Eight patients with psychotic bipolar disorder were tested with the BPRS, the HAM-D, and the CGI at T0 and retested after 2 weeks (T1). Plasma clozapine and norclozapine levels and BMI were tested at T0 and T1. Results. Ziprasidone was well tolerated by all the patients. BPRS and HAM-D scores were reduced in all patients. BMI was reduced in patients with a BMI at T0 higher than 25. Plasma levels of clozapine and norclozapine showed an irregular course.

[Long-term treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders: focus on pharmacotherapy]

Schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) constitute a group of psychiatric illnesses which frequently lead to persisting mental impairment. Although some patients show a clinical course with few episodes and good long-term outcome, the course of the disease is often chronic and unfavorable. Long-term treatment (LTT) of SSD pertains to the postacute stabilization period and the remission period following pharmacological and psychosocial therapy of an acute illness episode. This article provides an overview of treatment recommendations concerning long-term pharmacotherapy, dealing with side effects, treatment of non-response and therapy resistance and the treatment of psychiatric comorbidities. Furthermore, an overview of non-pharmacological treatment options is presented. An integrated therapeutic setting combining evidence-based pharmacotherapy, psychosocial interventions, and supportive therapies is recommended for optimal LTT of SSD. Considering the limited financial resources available in the healthcare system, one of the major challenges is to provide patients with access to the evidence-based treatment options available.

Treatment of depression in first episode of schizophrenia: results from EUFEST

Depressive symptomatology is an important target of treatment in first episode schizophrenia. This reanalysis of the European First Episode Schizophrenia Trial (EUFEST) describes the depressive symptomatology and the effect of antipsychotic treatment in patients suffering from first episode schizophrenia and schizophreniform disorder randomized to treatment with low dose haloperidol (n=103), amisulpride (n=104), olanzapine (n=105), quetiapine (n=104) or ziprasidone (n=82) for one year. At baseline, the mean score on the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) was 5.1 (±4.9) with 38.3% of patients having a CDSS score≥6, i.e. clinically relevant depressive symptom severity. During treatment depression scores decreased, the mean CDSS score being 1.1 (±2.1) and 3.0% of patients having a CDSS≥6 at 52 weeks. The proportion of patients using antidepressants during the complete trial was 18.5% in the haloperidol group, 28.6% in the olanzapine group compared to 5.8% in the quetiapine group, 12.5% in the amisulpride group, and 9.8% in the ziprasidone group. There were no differences over time in the probability of being depressed (CDSS≥6) between the 5 treatment groups after adjustment for antidepressant use, nor in a sub analysis of patients who did not take any antidepressant. Depression scores at baseline or during the trial had no effect on treatment discontinuation or on the reduction of positive symptoms. In summary, the results of EUFEST did not demonstrate a differential effect of the antipsychotics studied on depressive symptomatology in patients with first episode schizophrenia.

Quetiapine monotherapy in acute phase for major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia and bipolar depression trials suggest that quetiapine may have an antidepressant effect.

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of quetiapine treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). Only the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparison between quetiapine and placebo were included. The authors searched such clinical trials carried out between 1991 and February 2012.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched in February 2012. Study populations comprised adults with MDD or major depression. STUDY ELIGIBLE CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Eligible studies were randomized, placebo-controlled trials of quetiapine monotherapy carried out in adults with MDD and presenting endpoint outcomes relevant to: i) depression severity, ii) response rate, iii) overall discontinuation rate, or iv) discontinuation rate due to adverse events. No language restriction was applied.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

All abstracts identified by the electronic searches were examined. The full reports of relevant studies were assessed, and the data of interest were extracted. Based on the Cochrane methods of bias assessment, risks of bias were determined. The studies with two risks or less were included. The efficacy outcomes were the mean change scores of depression rating scales, the overall response rate, and the overall remission rates. The overall discontinuation rate was considered as a measure of acceptability. The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was a measure of tolerability. Relative risks (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed by using a random effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 1,497 participants in three RCTs were included. All trials examined the quetiapine extended-release (XR). The pooled mean change scores of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) of the quetiapine-treated group were higher than those of the placebo-treated group with the WMDs (95%CI) of -3.37 (-3.95, -2.79) and -2.46 (-3.47, -1.45), respectively. All studies defined the response and remission as ≥ 50% reduction of the MADRS total score and the MADRS total score of ≤8 at endpoint, respectively. The overall response and remission rates were significantly greater in the quetiapine-treated group with RRs (95%CIs) of 1.44 (1.26, 1.64) and 1.37 (1.12, 1.68), respectively. The pooled discontinuation rate was not significantly different between groups with an RR (95%CI) of 1.16 (0.97, 1.39). The pooled discontinuation rate due to adverse event was greater in the quetiapine group with an RR (95%CI) of 2.90 (1.87, 4.48). With respect to sleep time, the pooled mean change Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores of the quetiapine-treated group was also significantly higher than that of the placebo-treated group [WMD (95%CI) of -1.21 (-1.81, -0.61)].

LIMITATIONS

Variety of quetiapine XR doses and the small number of RCTs were key limitations of this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the limited evidence obtained from three RCTs, quetiapine XR is effective for adult patients with MDD. The high dropout rate due to adverse events suggests that some MDD patients may not be able to tolerate quetiapine XR. Due to the balance of its efficacy benefit and risk of side effects, as the overall discontinuation rate shown, the acceptability of this agent is not more than placebo. These results should be viewed as the very preliminary one. Further studies in this area are warranted. IMPLICATION OF KEY FINDINGS: Quetiapine may be an alternative antidepressant. However, both risk and benefit of this agent should be taken into account for an individual patient with MDD.

Update on typical and atypical antipsychotic drugs

Antipsychotic drugs (APDs) are best classified as typical or atypical. The distinction is based solely on their ability to cause extrapyramidal side effects (EPS), including tardive dyskinesia (TD). The two classes differ in mechanism of action, with atypical APDs providing important modulation of serotonergic neurotransmission. TD increases the death rate and can be minimized by limiting use of typical APDs. Clozapine is unique among the atypical APDs in its efficacy for ameliorating psychosis in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), for reduction of suicide, and for improving longevity. The typical and atypical APDs do not differ in improving psychopathology in non-TRS. The atypicals vary in metabolic side effects: some have little burden. Cognitive benefits of the atypical APDs may be superior for some domains of cognition and require less use of anticholinergic drugs, which impair memory, for treatment of EPS. Overall, choosing among the atypical APDs as first-line treatment represents the best course for schizophrenia and most likely other disorders for which APDs are used.

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.