Efficacy of electroconvulsive therapy augmentation for partial response to clozapine: a pilot randomized ECT – sham controlled trial

Randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with clozapine-resistant schizophrenia

There is no established treatment for patients with clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS). Clozapine augmentation strategies with antipsychotics or others substances are effective in comparison with placebo while and Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) showed to be effective in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) but not with placebo (sham-ECT). In the present double- blind randomized controlled trial, we compared 40 outpatients who received 20 sessions of ECT (n = 21) or sham-ECT (n = 19) (age = 37.40 ± 9.62, males = 77.5 %, illness duration = 14.95 ± 8.32 years, mean total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) = 101.10 ± 24.91) who fulfilled well-defined CRS criteria including baseline clozapine plasma levels ≥350 ng/mL. The primary outcome was the ≥50 % PANSS Total Score reduction; secondary outcomes were the scores of the PANSS subscales, PANSS five-factor dimensions, PANSS-6 and the Calgary Depression Rating Scale (CDRS). Treatment response was analyzed by percentage reduction, Linear Mixed Models and effect sizes. At baseline both groups showed no differences except for years of school education (included as a covariate). At endpoint, only 1/19 of the completers (5.26 %) in the ECT group and 0/17 in the sham-ECT group showed a ≥50 % total PANSS score reduction. Both groups showed no significant differences of the total PANSS score (F = 0.12; p = 0.73), Positive (F = 0.27, p = 0.61), Negative (F = 0.25, p = 0.62), and General Psychopathology scores (F = 0.01, p = 0.94) as well for all PANSS five factors, the PANSS-6 and CDRS. Thus, the present study found no evidence that ECT is better than Sham-ECT in patients with CRS. Future sham-ECT controlled studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to test the efficacy of ECT for patients with CRS.

An international research agenda for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia

Treatment-resistant symptoms occur in about a third of patients with schizophrenia and are associated with a substantial reduction in their quality of life. The development of new treatment options for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia constitutes a crucial, unmet need in psychiatry. Additionally, an overview of past and possible future research avenues to optimise the early detection, diagnosis, and management of clozapine-resistant schizophrenia is unavailable. In this Health Policy, we discuss the ongoing challenges associated with clozapine-resistant schizophrenia faced by patients and health-care providers worldwide to improve the understanding of this condition. We then revisit several clozapine guidelines, the diagnostic tests and treatment options for clozapine-resistant schizophrenia, and currently applied research approaches in clozapine-resistant schizophrenia. We also suggest methodologies and targets for future research, divided into innovative nosology-oriented field trials (eg, examining dimensional symptom staging), translational approaches (eg, genetics), epidemiological research (eg, real-world studies), and interventional studies (eg, non-traditional trial designs incorporating lived experiences and caregivers' perspectives). Finally, we note that low-income and middle-income countries are under-represented in studies on clozapine-resistant schizophrenia and propose an agenda to guide multinational research on the cause and treatment of clozapine-resistant schizophrenia. We hope that this research agenda will empower better global representation of patients living with clozapine-resistant schizophrenia and ultimately improve their functional outcomes and quality of life.

Clinical efficacy and neurobiological correlates of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with clozapine-resistant/intolerant schizophrenia: study protocol of multi-site parallel arm double-blind randomized sham-controlled study

Background: A substantial proportion of patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia do not respond well or partially to clozapine, with a subset that does not tolerate an adequate trial of clozapine. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is regarded as one of the augmenting options, but there is a lack of high-quality evidence for this practice. This protocol describes a double-blind randomised sham-controlled modified-ECT trial to evaluate its efficacy in patients with clozapine resistant/intolerant schizophrenia. The study also involves multimodal investigations to identify the response predictors and the mechanistic basis of modified ECT in this population. Methods: One hundred consenting schizophrenia patients with resistance/intolerance to clozapine referred by clinicians for ECT would be randomly assigned to receive true ECT or sham ECT at three study centers. Sham ECT would mimic all the procedures of modified ECT including anaesthesia and muscle relaxation, except the electrical stimulation. After a blinded course, non-responders to sham ECT would be offered open-label true ECT. Clinical assessments, neurocognitive assessments and multimodal investigations (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], electroencephalography, heart rate variability, investigative transcranial magnetic stimulation-transcranial direct current stimulation, gene polymorphism) would be conducted at baseline and repeated after the end of the trial, as well as open-label ECT course. The trial would evaluate the improvement in positive symptoms (scale for assessment of positive symptoms) of schizophrenia as the primary outcome measure with prediction of this change by resting-state functional-MRI based brain-connectivity as the second primary objective. Registration: Clinical Trial Registry of India (Reg no: CTRI/2021/05/033775) on 24 th May 2021.

Clinical efficacy and neurobiological correlates of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with clozapine-resistant/intolerant schizophrenia: study protocol of multi-site parallel arm double-blind randomized sham-controlled study

Background: A substantial proportion of patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia do not respond well or partially to clozapine, with a subset that does not tolerate an adequate trial of clozapine. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is regarded as one of the augmenting options, but there is a lack of high-quality evidence for this practice. This protocol describes a double-blind randomised sham-controlled modified-ECT trial to evaluate its efficacy in patients with clozapine resistant/intolerant schizophrenia. The study also involves multimodal investigations to identify the response predictors and the mechanistic basis of modified ECT in this population. Methods: One hundred consenting schizophrenia patients with resistance/intolerance to clozapine referred by clinicians for ECT would be randomly assigned to receive true ECT or sham ECT at three study centers. Sham ECT would mimic all the procedures of modified ECT including anaesthesia and muscle relaxation, except the electrical stimulation. After a blinded course, non-responders to sham ECT would be offered open-label true ECT. Clinical assessments, neurocognitive assessments and multimodal investigations (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], electroencephalography, heart rate variability, investigative transcranial magnetic stimulation-transcranial direct current stimulation, gene polymorphism) would be conducted at baseline and repeated after the end of the trial, as well as open-label ECT course. The trial would evaluate the improvement in positive symptoms (scale for assessment of positive symptoms) of schizophrenia as the primary outcome measure with prediction of this change by resting-state functional-MRI based brain-connectivity as the second primary objective. Registration: Clinical Trial Registry of India (Reg no: CTRI/2021/05/033775) on 24th May 2021.

Which are the best evidence-based therapeutic options for clozapine and ECT resistant schizophrenia? A case-report

This is a case description of a patient with clozapine and ECT resistance schizophrenia with several suicide attempts. We discussed evidence-based clinical decisions to deal with such conditions.

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.

Characteristics and definitions of ultra-treatment-resistant schizophrenia - A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to characterize ultra-treatment-resistant Schizophrenia also known as clozapine-resistant schizophrenia (CRS) patients across clozapine combination and augmentation trials through demographic and clinical baseline data. Furthermore, we investigated the variability and consistency in CRS definitions between studies.

METHODS

Systematic searches of articles indexed in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and PsycINFO were conducted in March 2020. 1541 randomized and non-randomized clinical trials investigating pharmacological and non-pharmacological clozapine add-on strategies were screened and a total of 71 studies were included. The primary outcome was the overall symptom score at baseline, measured with Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total or Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total scores.

RESULTS

Data from 2731 patients were extracted. Patients were overall moderately ill with a mean PANSS total score at baseline of 79.16 (±7.52), a mean duration of illness of 14.64 (±4.14) years with a mean clozapine dose of 436.94 (±87.47) mg/day. Illness severity data were relatively homogenous among patients independently of the augmentation strategy involved, although stark geographical differences were found. Overall, studies showed a large heterogeneity of CRS definitions and insufficient guidelines implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

This first meta-analysis characterizing CRS patients and comparing CRS definitions revealed a lack of consistent implementation of a CRS definition from guidelines into clinical trials, compromising the replicability of the results and their applicability in clinical practice. We offer a new score modeled on a best practice definition to help future trials increase their reliability.

Long-term clinical efficacy of maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia on clozapine

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has been suggested as a treatment for augmenting the response to clozapine in patients that do not respond well to clozapine alone and maintenance ECT (M-ECT) had also been recommended to sustain improvement. This retrospective study of up to 2 years of observation was conducted to explore whether M-ECT is beneficial for long-term maintenance of the symptom remission elicited by acute ECT. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were plotted for each patient and compared using a linear mixed-effect model. A total of thirty-eight patients were followed and classified into three groups: (1) clozapine alone (CZP, n = 15), (2) acute ECT only (A-ECT, n = 11), and (3) acute ECT with M-ECT (M-ECT, n = 12). The mean number and interval of ECT sessions during the maintenance period in the M-ECT group were 39.0 ± 26.7 and 15.6 ± 8.4 days, respectively. The slope of the M-ECT group eventually declined, but that of the A-ECT group gradually increased back to the pre-ECT level. No persistent or serious adverse effects were observed. In conclusion, A-ECT augmented the effect of clozapine, but M-ECT was required for sustaining symptom improvement.

Treatment resistant schizophrenia - review and a call to action

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