Prescribing practices of clozapine in India: Results of a opinion survey of psychiatrists

What is the current scope of research assessing patients' and clinicians' perspectives on clozapine treatment? A comprehensive scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Clozapine is continuously underused. The existing systematic reviews addressing barriers to clozapine prescribing primarily focus on clinical staff's attitudes and perceived barriers to prescribing. However, a preliminary literature search revealed additional literature on the subject not previously included in systematic reviews, including literature on patient perspectives. A scoping review is warranted to map the scope of primary studies on patients' and/or clinicians' perspectives on clozapine treatment and to identify gaps in research.

DESIGN

A scoping review was designed and reported in accordance with established guidelines for scoping reviews.

DATA SOURCES

The electronic databases Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and two grey literature databases were searched. Furthermore, citation tracking of selected studies was undertaken.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included primary, empirical studies reporting clinicians' and/or patients' perspectives on clozapine treatment. No limitation was set for the year of publication or type of primary study.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two researchers independently screened for studies, extracted the data and coded the content. Findings were summarised visually and narratively.

RESULTS

146 studies were included. Most studies reported on patients' or clinicians' perspectives on active clozapine treatment or on clinicians' perspectives on barriers to clozapine initiation in general. Three gaps in research were identified: (1) clozapine-eligible, yet clozapine-naïve, patients' attitudes towards clozapine commencement, (2) clinicians' reasons for clozapine withholding and perceived facilitators of clozapine treatment in specific patient-cases and (3) patient and clinician perspectives on clozapine discontinuation, continuation and rechallenge in specific patient cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on clozapine perspectives tends to repeat itself. Future studies addressing the identified gaps in evidence could provide the insights needed to optimise clozapine utilisation.

Risk of clozapine-associated agranulocytosis and mandatory white blood cell monitoring: Can the regulations be relaxed?

After the introduction of clozapine eight Finnish patients died after developing agranulocytosis. Clozapine was withdrawn from the market and only reintroduced with strict mandatory white blood cell monitoring as long as treatment lasts and thresholds at which clozapine must be discontinued definitively. The fear of agranulocytosis and the need for intensive blood monitoring is the single most important barrier for prescribers and patients alike and leads to underprescription of the only effective and approved medication for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. We summarize evidence that the risk of agranulocytosis is smaller than perceived at the time of reintroduction, is concentrated in the first 18 weeks of treatment, is not greater than with other antipsychotics thereafter and that frequent blood monitoring has not demonstrably decreased the rate of agranulocytosis. Therefore we propose 1) mandatory monitoring of the absolute neutrophil count (ANC) exclusively during the first 18 weeks of clozapine treatment, 2) that thereafter the prescriber and the well-informed patient decide together about further monitoring frequency, 3) that clozapine treatment must be stopped if the ANC falls below 1.0 × 109/L. Continuation of clozapine or a rechallenge are possible if prescriber and patient determine that the benefits outweigh the risks. 4) National registries which control the haematologic monitoring are unnecessary and do not help to reduce clozapine-induced agranulocytosis. They should at least be restricted to the first 18 weeks of clozapine use.

Comparative Study of the Efficacy and Side Effects of Brand-Name and Generic Clozapine for Long-Term Maintenance Treatment Among Korean Patients With Schizophrenia: A Retrospective Naturalistic Mirror-Image Study

OBJECTIVE

Clozapine is considered the most reliable drug for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. In 2014, a generic formulation of clozapine (Clzapine) was introduced in Korea. This study was performed to provide clinical information regarding the use of clozapine and to compare efficacy and tolerability when converting from the brand-name formulation (Clozaril) to the generic formulation during longterm maintenance treatment among Korean patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

This mirror-image study retrospectively investigated the electronic medical records of patients who had switched from Clozaril to Clzapine with a ≥1-year duration for each formulation. Clinical data were collected, including information regarding clozapine use, psychiatric hospitalization, co-medications, and blood test findings. Data before and after the switch were compared using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

Among 332 patients, the mean 1-year dosages were 233.32±149.35 mg/day for Clozaril and 217.36±136.66 mg/day for Clzapine. The mean clozapine concentration-to-dose ratios were similar before and after the switch (Clozaril, 1.33±0.68; Clzapine, 1.26±0.80). Switching from Clozaril to Clzapine resulted in no significant differences in the hospitalization rate, hospitalization duration, or laboratory findings (liver function parameters, serum cholesterol level, and serum glucose level). Equivalent doses of co-prescribed antidepressants were decreased, but concomitant medications otherwise showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Clinical efficacy and tolerability appear comparable when switching to Clzapine during clozapine maintenance treatment. This study offers descriptive real-world clinical insights into clozapine maintenance treatment in Korea, thereby providing patients with more treatment options and contributing to the development of maintenance guidelines tailored to the Korean population.

Reflections on the Lack of Consideration of Ethnic Ancestry to Stratify Clozapine Dosing

This review article argues against trusting standard clozapine references, including the US package insert, because they do not include advances in the sciences of pharmacokinetics and pharmacovigilance and ignore the effects of ethnic ancestry on therapeutic dosing. The minimum therapeutic dose leading to the minimum therapeutic concentration of 350 ng/mL in serum/plasma can be used to compare individuals/groups with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The US clozapine package insert recommends targeting doses of 300-450 mg/day and, subsequently, increments of up to 100 mg with a maximum dose of 900 mg/day. Ethnic ancestry is defined by DNA ancestry group. Asians (people with ancestry ranging from Pakistan to Japan) and Indigenous Americans are similar in clozapine dosing; their average clozapine minimum therapeutic dose ranged from 166 mg/day (female non-smokers) to 270 mg/day (male smokers). For those with European ancestry, average clozapine minimum therapeutic doses ranged from 236 mg/day (female non-smokers) to 368 mg/day (male smokers). Based on limited studies, Black (African sub-Saharan ancestry) patients may be treated with typical US doses (300-600 mg/day), assuming no poor metabolism (PM) status. Ancestry's impact on clozapine lethality in four countries is discussed (two countries with highly homogenous populations, Denmark and Japan, and two countries with increasingly heterogenous populations due to immigration, Australia and the UK). An international guideline with 104 authors from 50 countries/regions was recently published, providing 6 personalized clozapine titration schedules for adult inpatients (3 ancestry groups and PM/non-PM schedules) and recommending c-reactive protein monitoring at baseline and weekly for 4 weeks.

Clozapine research from India: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Although clozapine is much researched in western literature, a review on Indian research on clozapine published in 2010 reported limited data and need for further research in this area.

AIM

We aimed to conduct a systematic review of research on clozapine from India from 2010 to mid-2022 and also compare the same with research output before 2010.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic various search engines, i.e., PUBMED, Medknow, Hinari and Google Scholar was done using the key words clozapine and India. Published articles with clozapine in the title and having an author from India, published during 2010 to July 2022 were included.

RESULTS

Initial Internet and hand searches yielded 280 articles, out of which 126 articles were excluded due to various reasons and 154 articles, were included for the review. This included 84 case reports, 49 original articles, 11 review articles and 10 letters to the editor as comments. We found an increase in the number of publications during the period of 2010-2022 compared to 1997-2009 in all types of publications. Over the years a significant proportion of the articles focused on various side effects of clozapine, factors associated with response and non-response to clozapine and evaluation of outcomes other than efficacy/effectiveness. However, all the studies were limited to a single centre with no multicentric studies on clozapine.

CONCLUSION

Over the last 12 years or so, there is increase in the number of publications on clozapine. However, there is lack of multicentric studies.

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.

Iranian psychiatrists' attitude towards clozapine use for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a nationwide survey

BACKGROUND

Clozapine has the greatest efficacy for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), even though its underutilization is not uncommon across different countries. This study aimed to investigate the knowledge and attitude of Iranian psychiatrists toward clozapine use.

METHOD

In this cross-sectional study, a questionnaire was distributed among psychiatrists registered with the Iranian Psychiatrists Association (including its provincial branches) to assess their knowledge and attitude towards clozapine use. A total of 282 psychiatrists completed the questionnaire. Descriptive analysis was used to describe demographic information, and Chi-square tests were conducted to determine if there is an association between academic position and work experience. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS® version 25.0 for Windows, and a significance level of 0.05 was used.

RESULTS

Most respondents (93%) acknowledged that they prescribed clozapine for their patients, and 74% believed that clozapine was more effective than other antipsychotic drugs. However, 43.3% of the respondents said they did not believe in the safety of clozapine. Difficulty initiating and having no firsthand experience in the superiority of clozapine were reported by 81.2 and 80% of the respondents, respectively. Our results also showed an association between having an academic position and access to appropriate facilities for the control and management of patients treated with clozapine and believing in the safety of clozapine (p < 0.05). Longer work experience (more than 15 years) was associated with a higher prescription of clozapine, belief in greater effectiveness of clozapine, and its safety (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Iranian psychiatrists had a good self-perception of knowledge about the efficacy of clozapine for patients with TRS, but concerns about serious side effects are common. Psychiatrists with longer work experience and academic positions were more optimistic towards clozapine use than the younger ones with no academic position. Considering the results in planning the strategies to decrease concerns about clozapine use is recommended.

A comparative study of executive functions among children with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder and those with learning disabilities

Background

Both ADHD and learning disorders have been found to be associated with executive dysfunctions; the executive functions’ (EFs) construct generally involves a series of components—planning, cognitive flexibility, inhibition, attention control, and verbal and visuo-spatial working memory—that work independently in many ways but are closely related. There were no significant studies comparing both disorders and excluding the drug’s effects on executive functions. In our study, we used BDEFS-CA to assess executive functions among a sample of 340 children divided in to four groups: group 1 (100 children), ADHD only; group II (80 children), LD only; group III (60 children), combined ADHD and LD; and group IV (100 children), control group. We included children aged from 6 to 13 of both sexes of average IQ and all had to be drug naive with no sensory impairment or disabling neurological disorder and after their parents’ consent.

Results

The results showed that there was significant higher affection of the five executive functions domains in the first three groups more than the fourth control group. Furthermore, the self-restraint (response-inhibition) executive dysfunction was the most commonly affected EF in group I while time management EF and self-regulation and problem solving EF were the most commonly affected EF in the LD group.

Conclusions

Complete executive function profile assessment should be done for children diagnosed with ADHD or learning disability and EF intervention program should be included in the management plan for better outcomes mainly self-restraint EF in case of ADHD and problem solving and self-organization EF in case of learning disabilities

Delaying clozapine: how long is too long?

Background

Although clozapine is the most effective drug for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, its use remains restricted in clinical practice in India. The delay in initiating treatment with clozapine and its impact on disease outcome needs evaluation.

Aim

To identify the implications of delaying clozapine initiation in clinical outcomes among people with treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Methods

Subjects with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, stabilised on clozapine monotherapy, were recruited from the outpatient clinic of a general hospital psychiatry unit offering tertiary care services in Thrissur district, Kerala, India. A retrospective cohort design was employed, and information on duration of illness, total duration of treatment and duration of treatment with clozapine was collected. Present symptom status was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Factors associated with higher symptom scores were analysed using an independent sample t test, Spearman correlation and multiple linear regression.

Results

Forty subjects stabilised on long-term clozapine therapy formed the study sample. The mean dose of clozapine used in the study population was 200 mg. The mean duration of antipsychotic treatment before starting clozapine was 89.3 months (7.4 years). The duration of treatment before starting clozapine was found to have a significant positive association with the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale score (correlation coefficient 0.40; p=0.01) and negative symptom score (correlation coefficient 0.33; p=0.04). The multiple regression analysis adjusting for covariates showed that the duration of treatment before starting clozapine was an independent factor associated with a higher negative symptom score in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (slope β=0.05; p=0.02; R²=0.27).

Conclusion

Poor treatment outcomes in treatment-resistant schizophrenia could be secondary to a delay in initiating clozapine therapy.

Do Asian Patients Require Only Half of the Clozapine Dose Prescribed for Caucasians? A Critical Overview

Since 1997, studies have found that Asians need lower clozapine doses than Caucasians. Caucasians with average clozapine metabolism may need from 300 to 600 mg/day to reach the therapeutic range (350 ng/ml). Thus, serum clozapine concentration-to-dose (C/D) ratios typically range between 0.60 (male smokers) and 1.20 (female non-smokers). A 2019 systematic review of clozapine levels demonstrated weighted mean C/D ratios of 1.57 in 876 East Asians and 1.07 in 1147 Caucasians (P < .001). In Asian countries, average clozapine doses are lower than 300 mg/day. After sex and smoking stratification in 5 Asian samples with clozapine concentrations, the clozapine dose required to reach 350 ng/ml in female non-smokers ranged from 145 to 189 mg/day and in male smokers, from 259 to 294 mg/day. Thus, in Asian patients with average metabolism (with no inducers other than smoking, with no inhibitors, and in the absence of extreme obesity), the dose needed for clinical response may range between 150 mg/day for female non-smokers to 300 mg/day for male smokers. Clozapine levels may help personalize dosing in clozapine poor metabolizers (PMs) and ultrarapid metabolizers (UMs). Asian PMs may need very low doses (50-150 mg/day) to obtain therapeutic concentrations. About 10% (range 2-13%) of Asians are genetic PM cases. Other PMs are patients taking CYP1A2 inhibitors such as fluvoxamine, oral contraceptives, and valproate. Temporary clozapine PM status may occur during severe systemic infections/inflammations with fever and C-reactive protein (CRP) elevations. Asian UMs include patients taking potent inducers such as phenytoin, and rarely, valproate.

Prescriber and institutional barriers and facilitators of clozapine use: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

As clozapine is under-prescribed in persons with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), it is necessary to better identify the determinants of health inequalities in access to clozapine use.

OBJECTIVE

To identify mental health professionals' characteristics or attitudes and institutional characteristics facilitating or limiting clozapine prescribing.

METHOD

We systematically searched multiple electronic databases for articles reporting: (i) mental health professionals' attitudes and characteristics favoring or limiting clozapine prescribing; (ii) institutional characteristics associated with variations in clozapine prescribing; (iii) interventions aimed at enhancing clozapine prescribing. Data were synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 31 articles reporting findings of 29 studies published from 1993 to 2017 in 11 countries fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The main prescriber-related barriers to clozapine prescribing are lack of personal prescribing experience and concern with pharmacological characteristics of clozapine (blood monitoring and adverse effects). Lack of knowledge about the effectiveness of clozapine does not appear as a major determinant of under-prescription. Institutional-related characteristics favoring clozapine prescribing are prescribers' adherence to evidence-based medicine principles and learning by modelling from experienced clozapine prescribers.

CONCLUSION

Effective strategies to increase access to clozapine in persons with TRS include implementation of integrated clozapine clinics, simplification of blood monitoring, education for prescribers and contact with experienced prescribers. Programs addressing barriers in clozapine prescription need to be disseminated more broadly to ensure persons with TRS have access to evidenced based treatments such as clozapine. Inequality in access to clozapine care should be more systematically handled by mental health facilities and health regulatory agencies.

Disability multilevel modelling in first episodes of psychosis at 3-year follow-up

The description of longitudinal bio-psycho-social profiles in FEP samples may be useful for the prediction of disability trajectories. This study aimed to describe the differences between disability status of FEP patients at baseline and their change over time, analysing how variables associated to the psychological status, and the environment of the patient can affect his or her disability trajectory, once the influence of health condition and socio-demographic variables has been controlled for. Using data from a 3-year follow-up study on early psychosis (PAFIP), a multilevel structure in which the longitudinal measurements (within level) were nested within the individuals (between level), was modeled. The contribution of the different time-varying and time-invariant variables to the patients' disability outcomes was tested through eight nested models. Consecutive models, that successively added health related, socio-demographic, psychological and environmental variables to the unconditional model were estimated, by means of deviance and fit statistics. The present work revealed the importance of psychological and environmental factors in the explanation of disability changes in the context of FEP. We may conclude that longitudinal assessments of time-varying predictors - living situation (b=-0.10, p<0.05), economic support (b=0.11, p<0.01) and insight (b=-0.08, p<0.05) - explain a relevant amount of disability variation over time, independently from symptoms' severity, duration of untreated psychosis, age, gender and years of education. Additionally, the level of premorbid adjustment (b=0.05, p<0.001) was associated to differences in disability outcomes among FEP patients.

Prescription practices and attitude of psychiatrists towards clozapine: A survey of psychiatrists from India

AIM

To assess the attitude of psychiatrists towards clozapine and also to evaluate the prescription practices of psychiatrists for clozapine.

METHODOLOGY

An email survey was sent to 3381 psychiatrists from India, of whom 548 (16.2%) responded.

RESULTS

Mean number of years in clinical practice was 12.59 (SD-10.1) for participating psychiatrists. Majority of the participants rated their knowledge about clozapine to be good (61.5%)/very good (34.5%). The primary indication for use of clozapine for almost all the participants was treatment resistance and most of the psychiatrists initiated clozapine either in the dose of 25mg OD (44.3%) or 12.5mg OD (37%). Half (51.8%) of the psychiatrists preferred to use clozapine as BD dosing schedule, and median doses required to stabilize the patients ranged from 137.5 to 400mg/day. Once the clozapine dose had been stabilized, about half (51%) of the psychiatrists advised blood monitoring at monthly intervals. Almost all psychiatrists rated effectiveness of clozapine to be better than other antipsychotics. In terms of tolerability, 45.3% of the psychiatrists rated it as 'same as other antipsychotics' and 15.9% rated it as better than other antipsychotics. Most common patient and therapist related factors associated with reluctance to start clozapine were history of poor medication compliance and need for monitoring, respectively. Upon reviewing the prescription of other psychiatrists, participating psychiatrists reported that in about 28.46% of patients clozapine was not prescribed though indicated.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey suggests that clozapine is underused in India, although psychiatrists have adequate knowledge about the drug but many psychiatrists have negative attitude towards clozapine.

Delay in initiation of clozapine: a retrospective study from a tertiary care hospital in North India

This study aimed to assess the delay in initiation of clozapine, number of adequate antipsychotic trials prior to starting clozapine and practice of polypharmacy prior to starting clozapine. A retrospective study design was followed. Treatment records of 200 patients started on clozapine during the period of January 2006-June 2014 were reviewed. The mean delay in clozapine initiation was 1.93 (S.D. 1.82) years and median was 1.5 years. Mean of 3 (S.D. 1.18) adequate antipsychotic trials was given prior to considering clozapine and 27.5% patients had received polypharmacy prior to clozapine. Factors related to delay in starting of clozapine included higher age, longer duration of illness, age more than 20 years of age, polypharmacy, use of an adequate trial of typical antipsychotic medication, patients from urban locality and those with onset of illness prior to introduction of clozapine into Indian market. Findings of the present study suggest that there is a delay of 1.5-2 years in starting of clozapine and about one-fourth of patients receive polypharmacy prior to receiving clozapine. These finding suggests that there is a need to change the prescribing habits to reduce the delay in starting of clozapine.

An audit of first prescription of new patients attending a psychiatry walk-in-clinic in north India

Background:

Although almost all psychotropic medications available worldwide are readily available in India, there is meager data in this country on the prescription patterns of psychiatrists.

Aim:

To study the first prescription handed over to patients attending the psychiatry outpatient clinic of a tertiary care hospital.

Materials and Methods:

Data of all patients (for the period of January 1, 2009 to November 30, 2010; diagnosed with an ICD-10 diagnosis of F2-F4) were extracted from the computer-based registry and analyzed.

Results:

Ten thousand two hundred and fourteen (10 214) patients were diagnosed to have a diagnosis of F2-F4 ICD-10 category. In all diagnostic groups, olanzapine was the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic followed by risperidone. Very few patients (8%) received typical antipsychotic medication. In all diagnostic groups, escitalopram was the most commonly prescribed antidepressant; other frequently prescribed antidepressants were sertraline, paroxetine, and venlafaxine. Among the mood stabilizers, valproate was preferred over lithium. In all the groups, more than half of the patients were prescribed benzodiazepines, clonazepam being the most commonly prescribed agent, followed by lorazepam. The mean number of psychotropic medications was highest in the bipolar disorder group. Very few patients received the combination of same group of drugs.

Conclusions:

Olanzapine, escitalopram, and clonazepam are the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines, respectively. Valproate was preferred over lithium as a mood stabilizer. In general, the prescription trends were in accordance to the recommendations of various treatment guidelines, except for the use of benzodiazepines, which was higher.

Atypical antipsychotics usage in long-term follow-up of first episode schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

It is not clear if the role of antipsychotics in long-term clinical and functional recovery from schizophrenia is correlated. The pattern of use is a major aspect of pharmacotherapy in long-term follow-ups of schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to examine patterns of antipsychotic usage in patients with longstanding psychosis and their relationship to social outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study on a cohort from a long-term outcome study. Participants were 116 first episode schizophrenia patients from Mumbai, India, who had more than 80% compliance, as reported by relatives. Patients were assessed on antipsychotic medication use and on clinical and functional parameters.

RESULTS

There was a high compliance rate (72%). Most patients (77%) used atypical antipsychotics; only 10 (8.6%) patients were taking typical antipsychotics. There were no among-drug differences in the percentage of patients meeting the recommended dose: Clozapine (200-500 mg), Riseperidone (4.0-6.0 mg), Olanzapine (10-20 mg), Quetiapine (400-800 mg), Aripiprazole (15-30 mg), Ziprasidone (120-160 mg); an equivalent dosage of Chlorpromazine (300-600 mg) did not differ amongst any atypical antipsychotic subgroup. Also, we did not find any significant differences in recovery on Clinical Global Impression Severity scale (CGIS), Quality of Life (QOL), or Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) between groups of antipsychotic drugs.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that most patients suffering from schizophrenia, in a long-term follow-up, use prescribed atypical antipsychotics within the recommended limits. Also, the chlorpromazine equivalence dosages do not differ across antipsychotic medications. The outcomes on clinical and functional parameters are also similar across all second-generation antipsychotics.

Indian research: Focus on clozapine

Clozapine has been used in the treatment of schizophrenia for about two decades and extensive data have been accumulated with regard to its use in various parts of the world. However, in contrast to Western countries, there are few studies which have evaluated the usefulness of clozapine in Indian patients. This article attempts to review the available data on clozapine originating from India. This review reflects the fact that there are few studies from the Indian subcontinent and most of these are case reports. In view of the same, there is a need for further research to evaluate the effectiveness of clozapine in India.

Research on antipsychotics in India

Antipsychotic as a class of medications became available for treatment of various psychiatric disorders in the early 1950's. Over the last 60 years many antipsychotics have become available. In line with the west, Indian researchers have evaluated the efficacy of antipsychotics in various conditions. Additionally, researchers have also evaluated the important safety and tolerability issues. Here, we review data originating from India in the form of drug trials, effectiveness, usefulness, safety and tolerability of antipsychotics. Additionally, data with respect to other important treatment related issues is discussed.