In the aftermath of clozapine discontinuation: comparative effectiveness and safety of antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia who discontinue clozapine

When, Why and How to Re-challenge Clozapine in Schizophrenia Following Myocarditis

Clozapine-induced myocarditis (CIM) is among the most important adverse events limiting the use of clozapine as the most effective treatment for schizophrenia. CIM necessitates the immediate termination of clozapine, often resulting in its permanent discontinuation with considerable detrimental effects on patients' psychopathology and long-term outcome. Consequently, a clozapine re-challenge after CIM is increasingly regarded as a viable alternative, with published reports indicating a success rate of approximately 60%. However, published cases of re-challenges after CIM remain limited. Here, we provide a narrative review of the current state of research regarding the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, diagnosis and clinical management of CIM as well as a synthesis of current recommendations for re-challenging patients after CIM. This includes a step-by-step guide for this crucial procedure based on the current evidence regarding the pathophysiology and risk factors for CIM. Slow dose titration regimes and addressing risk factors including concomitant valproate and olanzapine are crucial both to prevent CIM and to ensure a safe and successful re-challenge. Furthermore, we discuss the utility of C-reactive protein, troponin, N-terminal-pro hormone and brain natriuretic peptide, therapeutic drug-monitoring and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for CIM screening and diagnosis as well as for post-CIM re-challenges.

Pneumonia Risk, Antipsychotic Dosing, and Anticholinergic Burden in Schizophrenia

Importance

Antipsychotic drugs (particularly clozapine) have been associated with pneumonia in observational studies. Despite studies of the associations between antipsychotic use and incident pneumonia, it remains unclear to what degree antipsychotic use is associated with increased risk of pneumonia, whether dose-response associations exist, and what agents are specifically associated with incident pneumonia.

Objective

To estimate pneumonia risk associated with specific antipsychotics and examine whether polytherapy, dosing, and receptor binding properties are associated with pneumonia in patients with schizophrenia.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study identified patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (hereafter, schizophrenia) aged 16 years or older from nationwide Finnish registers from 1972 to 2014. Data on diagnoses, inpatient care, and specialized outpatient care were obtained from the Hospital Discharge Register. Information on outpatient medication dispensing was obtained from the Prescription Register. Study follow-up was from 1996 to 2017. Data were analyzed from November 4, 2022, to December 5, 2023.

Exposures

Use of specific antipsychotic monotherapies; antipsychotics modeled by dosage as low (<0.6 of the World Health Organization defined daily dose [DDD] per day), medium (0.6 to <1.1 DDDs per day), or high dose (≥1.1 DDDs per day); antipsychotic polypharmacy; and antipsychotics categorized according to their anticholinergic burden as low, medium, and high.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was hospitalization for incident pneumonia. Pneumonia risk was analyzed using adjusted, within-individual Cox proportional hazards regression models, with no antipsychotic use as the reference.

Results

The study included 61 889 persons with schizophrenia (mean [SD] age, 46.2 [16.0] years; 31 104 men [50.3%]). During 22 years of follow-up, 8917 patients (14.4%) had 1 or more hospitalizations for pneumonia and 1137 (12.8%) died within 30 days of admission. Compared with no antipsychotic use, any antipsychotic use overall was not associated with pneumonia (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.12; 95% CI, 0.99-1.26). Monotherapy use was associated with increased pneumonia risk compared with no antipsychotic use (AHR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.30]; P = .03) in a dose-dependent manner, but polytherapy use was not. When categorized by anticholinergic burden, only the use of antipsychotics with a high anticholinergic burden was associated with pneumonia (AHR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.10-1.45]; P < .001). Of specific drugs, high-dose quetiapine (AHR, 1.78 [95% CI, 1.22-2.60]; P = .003), high- and medium-dose clozapine (AHR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.22-1.71]; P < .001 and AHR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.18-1.74]; P < .001, respectively), and high-dose olanzapine (AHR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.05-1.58]; P = .02) were associated with increased pneumonia risk.

Conclusions and Relevance

Results of this cohort study suggest that in patients with schizophrenia, antipsychotic agents associated with pneumonia include not only clozapine (at dosages ≥180 mg/d) but also quetiapine (≥440 mg/d) and olanzapine (≥11 mg/d). Moreover, monotherapy antipsychotics and antipsychotics with high anticholinergic burden are associated with increased pneumonia risk in a dose-dependent manner. These findings call for prevention strategies aimed at patients with schizophrenia requiring high-risk antipsychotics.

Understanding clozapine-related blood dyscrasias. Developments, genetics, ethnicity and disparity: it's a CIN

Clozapine remains the gold standard intervention for treatment-resistant schizophrenia; however, it remains underused, especially for some minority groups. A significant impediment is concern about propensity to neutropenia. The aim of this article is to provide an update on current knowledge relating to: the pattern and incidence of severe blood dyscrasias; the effectiveness of current monitoring regimes in reducing harm; the mechanisms of and the distinctions between clozapine-induced neutropenia and agranulocytosis; benign ethnic neutropenia; and changes to the monitoring thresholds in the USA and other international variations. These all have implications for the practical use of clozapine; specifically, how barriers to initiating, maintaining and restarting clozapine can be understood and in many cases overcome, especially for patients from minority groups, potentially with simpler approaches than the use of lithium or G-CSF.

Comparative Effectiveness of Amisulpride and Clozapine in the Treatment of Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In approximately one-third of individuals with schizophrenia, the illness demonstrates a poor response to standard antipsychotic treatments. Although a relatively small proportion fails to achieve remission after the initial exposure to either first- or second-generation antipsychotic drugs, the condition often becomes progressively more resistant to medication following subsequent relapses. We conducted comprehensive searches in databases such as PubMed and PubMed Central, extracting and assessing data quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized clinical trials (RCTs). A random effects model was employed to calculate the pooled prevalence and explore heterogeneity, utilizing the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses differentiated between experimental and placebo groups, while sensitivity analyses assessed the robustness of our findings, and publication bias was examined. Our meta-analysis included a sample size of 323 patients from seven studies out of the 10 selected articles. The pooled sample evaluated the effectiveness of amisulpride and clozapine in treating schizophrenia, with Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)-positive and PANSS-negative scores used in the subgroup analysis. The analysis revealed a heterogeneity of 78% and a statistically significant p-value of <0.05, favoring amisulpride and clozapine for treating schizophrenia either as monotherapy or in combination. These findings indicate that the effectiveness of these drugs is statistically significant. Our study underscores the necessity of conducting larger RCTs to further elucidate the optimal dosage and guideline criteria for prescribing amisulpride, clozapine, or their combination for patients resistant to first- and second-generation antipsychotics.

A review on side effect management of second-generation antipsychotics to treat schizophrenia: a drug safety perspective

INTRODUCTION

Effective side effects management present a challenge in antipsychotic treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). In recent years, most of the commonly used SGAs, except for clozapine, have been shown to differ only slightly in their effectiveness, but considerably regarding perceived side effects, safety profiles, and compatibility to preexisting medical conditions.

AREAS COVERED

The current state of available evidence on side-effect management in SGA treatment of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD) is reviewed. In addition, current guideline recommendations are summarized, highlighting evidence gaps.

EXPERT OPINION

SGA safety and side effects needs to be considered in treatment planning. Shared decision-making assistants (SDMA) can support patients, practitioners and relatives to orient their decisions toward avoiding side effects relevant to patients' adherence. Alongside general measures like psychosocial and psychotherapeutic care, switching to better tolerated SGAs can be considered a relatively safe strategy. By contrast, novel meta-analytical evidence emphasizes that dose reduction of SGAs can statistically increase the risk of relapse and other unfavorable outcomes. Further, depending on the type and severity of SGA-related side effects, specific treatments can be used to alleviate induced side effects (e.g. add-on metformin to reduce weight-gain). Finally, discontinuation should be reserved for acute emergencies.

Discontinuation of psychotropic medication: a synthesis of evidence across medication classes

Pharmacotherapy is an effective treatment modality across psychiatric disorders. Nevertheless, many patients discontinue their medication at some point. Evidence-based guidance for patients, clinicians, and policymakers on rational discontinuation strategies is vital to enable the best, personalized treatment for any given patient. Nonetheless, there is a scarcity of guidelines on discontinuation strategies. In this perspective, we therefore summarize and critically appraise the evidence on discontinuation of six major psychotropic medication classes: antidepressants, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, mood stabilizers, opioids, and stimulants. For each medication class, a wide range of topics pertaining to each of the following questions are discussed: (1) Who can discontinue (e.g., what are risk factors for relapse?); (2) When to discontinue (e.g., after 1 year or several years of antidepressant use?); and (3) How to discontinue (e.g., what's the efficacy of dose reduction compared to full cessation and interventions to mitigate relapse risk?). We thus highlight how comparing the evidence across medication classes can identify knowledge gaps, which may pave the way for more integrated research on discontinuation.

Clozapine augmentation with long-acting antipsychotic injections: A case series and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Up to 30% of patients with a diagnosis of treatment-resistant psychosis remain symptomatic despite an optimal trial with the gold standard treatment, clozapine. Emerging evidence suggests the clinical utility of long-acting injections (LAI) in such clinical scenarios. In this study, we aimed to describe clozapine augmentation with LAIs in an inner London hospital and explore the literature on the clinical effectiveness of this treatment modality.

METHODS

Patients prescribed clozapine, who were commenced on a LAI between 2007 and 2023 by the United Kingdom's largest mental health trust, were identified from electronic patient records. First, routine clinical data were used to describe the use, effectiveness, and safety of this augmentation strategy. Second, we conducted a literature search up to 1st June 2023 to identify published studies describing clinical outcomes after clozapine augmentation with a LAI. Clinical outcomes were collated and presented in a table, including hospitalisation rates and quantitative clinical assessments using validated scales.

RESULTS

Of the 1248 patients prescribed clozapine in SLaM, three patients (0.2%) received augmentation with the following LAIs: olanzapine embonate, paliperidone palmitate and pipotiazine palmitate. This treatment strategy was clinically effective and generally well tolerated in all three cases. Twelve published studies between 2010 and 2022 were included in the review. Eight distinct LAIs were reported (4 first and 4 second generation antipsychotics), with risperidone and paliperidone most widely studied. All the identified studies were observational including mirror-image studies, case series and case reports. Duration of follow up varied from 3 months to 3 years. There was evidence that the use of LAIs with clozapine can significantly reduce clinical symptoms, hospitalisation rates and bed days. No serious adverse effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary evidence suggests clinical utility of LAIs in alleviating residual symptoms and subsequently reducing hospitalisation rates in patients optimised on clozapine treatment. The current study warrants further investigations including a randomised controlled study to establish the clinical efficacy, tolerability, and place in therapy of this treatment modality.

Rates and Reasons for Clozapine Treatment Interruptions: Impact of the Frequency of Hematologic Monitoring and Cardiac Adverse Events

BACKGROUND

Differing rates and reasons for interruptions of clozapine treatment have been reported globally. This article evaluated the rates and reasons for clozapine therapy interruptions in Australia and explored the impact of the frequency of hematological monitoring on these parameters.

METHODS

Data of the patients who were newly commenced on clozapine at three metropolitan public mental health services in Western Australia over 11 years were retrospectively collated. The rate and reasons for clozapine therapy interruptions and their association with the frequency of hematological monitoring, age, sex, and treatment site were analyzed using parametric, nonparametric, and correlational analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 457 patients whose data were collected, 69.6% had an interruption of treatment with 41.2% of those occurring during the period of mandatory weekly hematological monitoring in the first 18 weeks. Nonadherence (57.4%) and adverse effects (28.8%) were the 2 main reasons for the treatment interruptions. Cardiac issues accounted for the majority of the interruptions (61.8%) due to specified adverse effects, and these occurred significantly more commonly within the first 18 weeks. Location, age, and sex did not predict the possibility of treatment interruptions.

CONCLUSIONS

The high rates of clozapine treatment interruption observed during the period of weekly monitoring point toward the need to address the burden of frequent hematological monitoring for patients. Disproportionately higher rates of interruption due to cardiac adverse effects observed in this study compared with research from non-Australian settings raise the possibility of geographical differences in the adverse effects leading to treatment discontinuation.

Second to none: rationale, timing, and clinical management of clozapine use in schizophrenia

Despite its enduring relevance as the single most effective and important evidence-based treatment for schizophrenia, underutilization of clozapine remains considerable. To a substantial degree, this is attributable to a reluctance of psychiatrists to offer clozapine due to its relatively large side-effect burden and the complexity of its use. This underscores the necessity for continued education regarding both the vital nature and the intricacies of clozapine treatment. This narrative review summarizes all clinically relevant areas of evidence, which support clozapine's wide-ranging superior efficacy - for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and beyond - and make its safe use eminently feasible. Converging evidence indicates that TRS constitutes a distinct albeit heterogeneous subgroup of schizophrenias primarily responsive to clozapine. Most importantly, the predominantly early onset of treatment resistance and the considerable decline in response rates associated with its delayed initiation make clozapine an essential treatment option throughout the course of illness, beginning with the first psychotic episode. To maximize patients' benefits, systematic early recognition efforts based on stringent use of TRS criteria, a timely offer of clozapine, thorough side-effect screening and management as well as consistent use of therapeutic drug monitoring and established augmentation strategies for suboptimal responders are crucial. To minimize permanent all-cause discontinuation, re-challenges after neutropenia or myocarditis should be considered. Owing to clozapine's unique efficacy, comorbid conditions including substance use and most somatic disorders should not dissuade but rather encourage clinicians to consider clozapine. Moreover, treatment decisions need to be informed by the late onset of clozapine's full effects, which for reduced suicidality and mortality rates may not even be readily apparent. Overall, the singular extent of its efficacy combined with the high level of patient satisfaction continues to distinguish clozapine from all other available antipsychotics.

Clozapine haematological monitoring for neutropenia: a global perspective

AIMS

Clozapine is licensed for treatment-resistant psychosis and remains underutilised. This may berelated to the stringent haematological monitoring requirements that are mandatory in most countries. We aimed to compare guidelines internationally and develop a novel Stringency Index. We hypothesised that the most stringent countries would have increased healthcare costs and reduced prescription rates.

METHOD

We conducted a literature review and survey of guidelines internationally. Guideline identification involved a literature review and consultation with clinical academics. We focused on the haematological monitoring parameters, frequency and thresholds for discontinuation and rechallenge after suspected clozapine-induced neutropenia. In addition, indicators reflecting monitoring guideline stringency were scored and visualised using a choropleth map. We developed a Stringency Index with an international panel of clozapine experts, through a modified-Delphi-survey. The Stringency Index was compared to health expenditure per-capita and clozapine prescription per 100 000 persons.

RESULTS

One hundred twocountries were included, from Europe (n = 35), Asia (n = 24), Africa (n = 20), South America (n = 11), North America (n = 7) and Oceania and Australia (n = 5). Guidelines differed in frequency of haematological monitoring and discontinuation thresholds. Overall, 5% of included countries had explicit guidelines for clozapine-rechallenge and 40% explicitly prohibited clozapine-rechallenge. Furthermore, 7% of included countries had modified discontinuation thresholds for benign ethnic neutropenia. None of the guidelines specified how long haematological monitoring should continue. The most stringent guidelines were in Europe, and the least stringent were in Africa and South America. There was a positive association (r = 0.43, p < 0.001) between a country's Stringency Index and healthcare expenditure per capita.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations on how haematological function should be monitored in patients treated with clozapine vary considerably between countries. It would be useful to standardise guidelines on haematological monitoring worldwide.

Clozapine Rechallenge or Continuation Despite Neutropenia, an Extended Follow-up of a Consecutive Quebec Case Series

BACKGROUND

Clozapine is the most efficacious antipsychotic for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, clozapine-induced neutropenia may warrant treatment discontinuation, hindering recovery. Several case reports describe clozapine rechallenge or continuation despite neutropenia, although many are subject to selective reporting, with incomplete information and short follow-up periods. Thus, consecutive case series, devoid of such bias, with long-term comprehensive follow-up are needed to better assess this practice. This study aimed to describe consecutively the evolution of every patient in the Québec City catchment area for whom clozapine was either reintroduced after neutropenia during a previous clozapine trial or was maintained despite a first neutropenia.

METHODS

Patients were identified through clozapine's national hematological monitoring database and their medical records between January 1, 2000, and October 22, 2017.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients were identified, 8 continued clozapine despite neutropenia, while 15 discontinued clozapine and attempted rechallenge; among the latter, 4 patients were successfully rechallenged after agranulocytosis without the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, which is the largest published consecutively. A total of 6 patients experienced further neutropenia episodes. Every patient who had a neutropenia recurrence also had a possible explanation for neutropenia other than exposure to clozapine. After a median follow-up of 4.8 years, 16 patients were still on clozapine and 3 cases discontinued because of a hematological event.

CONCLUSIONS

This study adds further data on the subject of clozapine rechallenge or continuation despite neutropenia. Clozapine rechallenge after agranulocytosis may be less perilous than first thought, but a systematic review on this specific subject is needed.

Clinical Outcomes after Clozapine Discontinuation in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Clozapine is the gold standard of treatment for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, approximately 60% of those patients do not respond to clozapine; moreover, clinical outcomes after clozapine discontinuation are unclear so far. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to clarify the outcomes after clozapine discontinuation.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted, using MEDLINE and Embase with the following keywords: (clozapine AND (cessation* OR cease* OR withdraw* OR discontinu* OR halt* OR stop* OR switch*) AND (schizophreni* OR schizoaffective)).

RESULTS

A total of 28 clinical studies from 27 articles were identified and included in this systematic review. Three randomized controlled trials reported worsening of psychiatric symptoms. In 10 single-arm studies, the results of worsening and improving psychiatric symptoms were inconsistent. In one large retrospective cohort study, clozapine rechallenge, olanzapine, and antipsychotic polypharmacy had lower rehospitalization rates compared to no medication after clozapine discontinuation. In the other 14 retrospective studies, the vast majority showed worsening of clinical status after clozapine discontinuation. Among five studies on clinical outcomes after clozapine rechallenge, four reported improvements in clinical status in more than half of patients who rechallenged clozapine. The remaining study reported that the clozapine discontinuation-rechallenge group had a worse remission assessment score than the clozapine discontinuation-no rechallenge group.

DISCUSSION

Clinical outcomes generally worsen after clozapine discontinuation. Clozapine rechallenge and olanzapine may be considered following clozapine discontinuation. The outcomes after clozapine discontinuation in clozapine non-responders remain inconclusive; therefore, well-designed studies are warranted.

Combination With Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics and Utilization of Nonstandard Formulations as Compliance Enhancing Methods for Clozapine Users: A Systematic Review and A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Combining clozapine with a long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) or using different, nonstandard formulations of the compound may improve treatment outcomes. We aimed to investigate the utility of the clozapine-LAI combination and different formulations of clozapine for compliance problems of clozapine treatment, and to describe a case series on the combined treatment.

PROCEDURES

We conducted a PubMed search with no date restriction. The number and length of hospitalizations, the results of clinical scales, and adverse events were recorded. We also present a case series of 18 patients using the clozapine-LAI combination. Data were collected from the medical charts and electronic records.

RESULTS

We extracted 9 records describing the use of the clozapine-LAI combination. The case reports and mirror-image studies showed a significant reduction in the number of hospitalizations, length of hospital stays, and number of visits to the emergency department on the combined treatment with no serious adverse events. We included 11 articles for clozapine formulations. The case reports and retrospective data suggested that short-acting intramuscular clozapine was often well tolerated and resulted in an increased acceptance of oral clozapine in the acute phase of illness. In our case series, illness severity and the number of hospitalization per year significantly decreased after the combined treatment, besides a significant improvement in the functioning scores. Hyperprolactinemia and extrapyramidal side effects were reported due to concomitant LAIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the encouraging evidence, the present data are preliminary and mostly based on retrospective studies, and oral-dissolving tablets or oral liquid formulations of clozapine have insufficient evidence for clinical practice. Well-designed, controlled, follow-up studies are needed for both clozapine-LAI combination and different formulations of clozapine.

Genome-wide association analyses of symptom severity among clozapine-treated patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

Clozapine is the most effective antipsychotic for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, response is highly variable and possible genetic underpinnings of this variability remain unknown. Here, we performed polygenic risk score (PRS) analyses to estimate the amount of variance in symptom severity among clozapine-treated patients explained by PRSs (R2) and examined the association between symptom severity and genotype-predicted CYP1A2, CYP2D6, and CYP2C19 enzyme activity. Genome-wide association (GWA) analyses were performed to explore loci associated with symptom severity. A multicenter cohort of 804 patients (after quality control N = 684) with schizophrenia spectrum disorder treated with clozapine were cross-sectionally assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and/or the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale. GWA and PRS regression analyses were conducted. Genotype-predicted CYP1A2, CYP2D6, and CYP2C19 enzyme activities were calculated. Schizophrenia-PRS was most significantly and positively associated with low symptom severity (p = 1.03 × 10-3; R2 = 1.85). Cross-disorder-PRS was also positively associated with lower CGI-S score (p = 0.01; R2 = 0.81). Compared to the lowest tertile, patients in the highest schizophrenia-PRS tertile had 1.94 times (p = 6.84×10-4) increased probability of low symptom severity. Higher genotype-predicted CYP2C19 enzyme activity was independently associated with lower symptom severity (p = 8.44×10-3). While no locus surpassed the genome-wide significance threshold, rs1923778 within NFIB showed a suggestive association (p = 3.78×10-7) with symptom severity. We show that high schizophrenia-PRS and genotype-predicted CYP2C19 enzyme activity are independently associated with lower symptom severity among individuals treated with clozapine. Our findings open avenues for future pharmacogenomic projects investigating the potential of PRS and genotype-predicted CYP-activity in schizophrenia.

Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who recommence clozapine following therapy interruptions

OBJECTIVE

The proportion of patients who recommence clozapine after cessation, the time taken to resume clozapine post-cessation, and distinguishing demographic and clinical characteristics of this group have been poorly researched. We evaluated these in the current study.

METHOD

We retrospectively extracted selected demographic and clinical variables and clozapine treatment interruption and recommencement data up to December 2018 of a cohort of 458 patients who first commenced clozapine between 2006 and 2016. The study was conducted at three Australian health services.

RESULTS

Of the 310 (69%) patients who had at least one interruption of clozapine treatment, 170 (54.8%) did not resume clozapine, and 140 (45.2%) recommenced it after the first interruption. More than half of those who recommenced did so within a month and 80% by 12 months. Cox regression analysis revealed that age was significantly associated with recommencement, with a 2% decrease in the likelihood of restarting after an interruption for each year later that clozapine was initially commenced (HR = 0.98 95%CI: 0.97, 0.997, p = 0.02). Those who ceased clozapine due to adverse effects were less likely to restart than those who ceased due to noncompliance (HR = 0.63 95%CI: 0.41, 0.97, p = 0.03). More time on clozapine prior to interruption increased the likelihood of restarting it, with each additional month on clozapine increasing this likelihood by 1% (HR = 1.01 95%CI: 1.01, 1.02, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

If the distinguishing demographic and clinical characteristics of the group identified in this study are corroborated through further research, this could further validate the need to identify treatment resistance and commence clozapine early in people with schizophrenia and provide appropriate interventions to those more at risk of permanent discontinuation of clozapine.

Clozapine-induced myocarditis: electronic health register analysis of incidence, timing, clinical markers and diagnostic accuracy

BACKGROUND

Clozapine is associated with increased risk of myocarditis. However, many common side-effects of clozapine overlap with the clinical manifestations of myocarditis. As a result, there is uncertainty about which signs, symptoms and investigations are important in distinguishing myocarditis from benign adverse effects of clozapine. Clarity on this issue is important, since missing a diagnosis of myocarditis or discontinuing clozapine unnecessarily may both have devastating consequences.

AIMS

To examine the clinical characteristics of clozapine-induced myocarditis and to identify which signs and symptoms distinguish true myocarditis from other clozapine adverse effects.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of the record database for 247 621 patients was performed. A natural language processing algorithm identified the instances of patients in which myocarditis was suspected. The anonymised case notes for the patients of each suspected instance were then manually examined, and those whose instances were ambiguous were referred for an independent assessment by up to three cardiologists. Patients with suspected instances were classified as having confirmed myocarditis, myocarditis ruled out or undetermined.

RESULTS

Of 254 instances in 228 patients with suspected myocarditis, 11.4% (n = 29 instances) were confirmed as probable myocarditis. Troponin and C-reactive protein (CRP) had excellent diagnostic value (area under the curve 0.975 and 0.896, respectively), whereas tachycardia was of little diagnostic value. All confirmed instances occurred within 42 days of clozapine initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Suspicion of myocarditis can lead to unnecessary discontinuation of clozapine. The 'critical period' for myocarditis emergence is the first 6 weeks, and clinical signs including tachycardia are of low specificity. Elevated CRP and troponin are the best markers for the need for further evaluation.

Reducing the Risk of Withdrawal Symptoms and Relapse Following Clozapine Discontinuation-Is It Feasible to Develop Evidence-Based Guidelines?

Clozapine is the only antipsychotic that is effective in treatment-resistant schizophrenia. However, in certain clinical situations, such as the emergence of serious adverse effects, it is necessary to discontinue clozapine. Stopping clozapine treatment poses a particular challenge due to the risk of psychotic relapse, as well as the development of withdrawal symptoms. Despite these challenges for the clinician, there is currently no formal guidance on how to safely to discontinue clozapine. We assessed the feasibility of developing evidence-based recommendations for (1) minimizing the risk of withdrawal symptoms, (2) managing withdrawal phenomena, and (3) commencing alternatives treatment when clozapine is discontinued. We then evaluated the recommendations against the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II criteria. We produced 19 recommendations. The majority of these recommendation were evidence-based, although the strength of some recommendations was limited by a reliance of studies of medium to low quality. We discuss next steps in the refinement and validation of an evidence-based guideline for stopping clozapine and identify key outstanding questions.

Clozapine resistant schizophrenia: Newer avenues of management

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

Schizophrenia: Antipsychotics and drug development

The introduction of chlorpromazine and the work that ensued provided the foundation to reposition schizophrenia as a biological illness. The present paper follows the evolution of antipsychotics and their shift from 'typical' to 'atypical'. Atypicality is reviewed in reference to its original definition, clozapine's role, and developments that now leave the concept's utility in question. In a similar fashion, drug development is reviewed in the context of the illness' multiple symptom domains, as well as differences captured by clinical staging and phenotyping. Collectively, the evidence argues for a more nuanced approach to drug development that aligns with the illness' heterogeneity and complexity. Just as 'atypical' as a descriptor for antipsychotics may be outdated, it may be time to set aside the notion of developing drugs that treat 'schizophrenia'.

There Is Life After the UK Clozapine Central Non-Rechallenge Database

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In the United Kingdom, patients on clozapine whose hematological parameters fall below certain thresholds are placed on the Central Non-Rechallenge Database (CNRD), meaning that they cannot be prescribed clozapine again except under exceptional circumstances. This practice was discontinued in the United States in 2015 by expanding the hematological monitoring guidelines, allowing more patients to receive clozapine. Our objective was to investigate the implications this policy change would have on clozapine utilization in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective analysis of patients registered on the CNRD in a large mental health trust. The first objective was to compare the number of patients placed on the CNRD under the United Kingdom and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria. The second objective was to explore the hematological and clinical outcomes of CNRD patients. The third objective was to investigate the hematological outcomes of patients rechallenged on clozapine after nonrechallengeable status.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifteen patients were placed on CNRD from 2002 to 2019, of whom 7 (6%) met the equivalent criteria for clozapine discontinuation under the FDA guidelines. Clinical outcomes, as measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, were worse 3 months after clozapine cessation than on clozapine (t = -7.4862; P < .001). Sixty-two (54%) patients placed on CNRD were rechallenged. Fifty-nine of those (95%) were successfully rechallenged; 3 patients were placed back on CNRD, only one of which would have had to stop clozapine again under FDA criteria.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of the updated FDA's monitoring criteria in the United Kingdom would significantly reduce clozapine discontinuation due to hematological reasons. The evidence suggests an urgent need for revising the UK clozapine monitoring guidelines to improve outcomes in treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Clinical outcomes after clozapine discontinuation in responders versus nonresponders: a retrospective chart review

No studies have compared clinical outcomes after discontinuation of clozapine between patients who responded to clozapine and those who did not. Therefore, we examined 1-year clinical outcomes after clozapine discontinuation in responders and nonresponders. We reviewed data on patients who discontinued clozapine and retrospectively followed them for 1 year. Clinical information was collected from medical records starting at the initiation of clozapine administration, at discontinuation and at 1 year after discontinuation. In addition, clinical status was assessed using the Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) scales. We classified the patients into clozapine responder and nonresponder groups according to the CGI-I score. Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in this study. Olanzapine was the most common antipsychotic prescribed after clozapine discontinuation in both the responder and nonresponder groups. The mean CGI-S score significantly increased 1 year after clozapine discontinuation in the responder group and significantly decreased in the nonresponder group; there was a significant difference in changes in the CGI-S scores between the groups. The difference remained significant after controlling for clozapine dose and duration of treatment. The findings suggest that clinicians may consider continuing and discontinuing clozapine treatment for patients who responded to clozapine and those who did not, respectively.

Clozapine re-challenge and initiation following neutropenia: a review and case series of 14 patients in a high-secure forensic hospital

OBJECTIVE

Clozapine remains the most effective intervention for treatment resistant schizophrenia; however, its use is prohibited following neutropenias. We review neutrophil biology as applied to clozapine and describe the strategies to initiate clozapine following neutropenia used in a case series of 14 consecutive patients rechallenged in a United Kingdom (UK) high-secure psychiatric hospital. We examine outcomes including the use of seclusion and transfer.

METHODS

A case series of 14 male patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia treated with clozapine despite previous episodes of neutropenia between 2006 and 2015 is presented. Data were collected during 2015 and 2019. Using this routinely collected clinical data, we describe the patient characteristics, causes of neutropenia, the strategies used for rechallenging with clozapine and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Previous neutropenias were the result of benign ethnic neutropenia, clozapine, other medications and autoimmune-related. Our risk mitigation strategies included: granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF), lithium and watch-and-wait. There were no serious adverse events; at follow up half of the patient's had improved sufficiently to transfer them to conditions of lesser security. There were dramatic reductions in the use of seclusion.

CONCLUSION

Even in this extreme group, clozapine can be safely and effectively re/initiated following neutropenias, resulting in marked benefits for patients. This requires careful planning based on an understanding of neutrophil biology and the aetiology of the specific episode of neutropenia.

Persistence of Antipsychotic Use After Clozapine Discontinuation: A Real-World Study Across Antipsychotics

Although clozapine treatment is often discontinued due to limited efficacy or low tolerability, there is a lack of guidelines and evidence on treatment options after discontinuation of clozapine in patients with schizophrenia. Persistence has proven to be an adequate indicator for treatment effectiveness in patients with schizophrenia. The aim of this study was, therefore, to compare persistence of antipsychotic use between antipsychotic treatment options in patients after stopping clozapine treatment. Registry data from a prescription database representative of the Dutch population (1996-2017) was collected to investigate persistence in patients with schizophrenia who had been using clozapine for ≥ 90 days. Persistence with antipsychotics after clozapine discontinuation was analyzed using Cox-proportional hazard regression models. Our study population consisted of 321 participants, of whom 138 re-initiated clozapine and 183 started some other antipsychotic in the year after clozapine discontinuation (N = 518 antipsychotic use periods, N = 9,178 months). Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) as a group were associated with better persistence compared to first-generation antipsychotics (adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-0.93; P = 0.011). Compared with other antipsychotics, the following oral monotherapy antipsychotics were associated with significantly better persistence: restarting clozapine (aHR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32-0.71; P < 0.001) and switching to risperidone (aHR 0.52; 95% CI 0.32-0.84; P = 0.008) or olanzapine (aHR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.87; P = 0.010). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the results. In conclusion, oral SGAs are associated with better persistence than alternative antipsychotic treatment options in patients discontinuing clozapine for undefined reasons. Especially clozapine (except in those with previous serious adverse reactions to clozapine), olanzapine and risperidone should be considered as oral monotherapy for these patients.

Clozapine Combination and Augmentation Strategies in Patients With Schizophrenia -Recommendations From an International Expert Survey Among the Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) Working Group

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the management of inadequate clinical response to clozapine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia is sparse. Accordingly, an international initiative was undertaken with the aim of developing consensus recommendations for treatment strategies for clozapine-refractory patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey among members of the Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) working group. An agreement threshold of ≥75% (responses "agree" + "strongly agree") was set to define a first-round consensus. Questions achieving agreement or disagreement proportions of >50% in the first round, were re-presented to develop second-round final consensus recommendations.

RESULTS

Forty-four (first round) and 49 (second round) of 63 TRRIP members participated. Expert recommendations at ≥75% agreement included raising clozapine plasma levels to ≥350 ng/ml for refractory positive, negative, and mixed symptoms. Where plasma level-guided dose escalation was ineffective for persistent positive symptoms, waiting for a delayed response was recommended. For clozapine-refractory positive symptoms, combination with a second antipsychotic (amisulpride and oral aripiprazole) and augmentation with ECT achieved consensus. For negative symptoms, waiting for a delayed response was recommended, and as an intervention for clozapine-refractory negative symptoms, clozapine augmentation with an antidepressant reached consensus. For clozapine-refractory suicidality, augmentation with antidepressants or mood-stabilizers, and ECT met consensus criteria. For clozapine-refractory aggression, augmentation with a mood-stabilizer or antipsychotic medication achieved consensus. Generally, cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychosocial interventions reached consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the limited evidence from randomized trials of treatment strategies for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS), this consensus-based series of recommendations provides a framework for decision making to manage this challenging clinical situation.