Weight gain associated with olanzapine and risperidone in adolescent patients: a comparative prospective study

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate weight gain associated with olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol treatment and its clinical risk factors in adolescent patients. METHOD: The study was conducted at three adolescent psychiatric departments in two mental health centers in the Tel Aviv area. All patients were Jewish Israelis. Weight and body mass index (BMI) of hospitalized adolescents treated with olanzapine (n = 21), risperidone (n = 21), or haloperidol (n = 8) were prospectively monitored on a weekly basis for the first 12 weeks of treatment. Various clinical risk factors were tested for association with weight gain. RESULTS: The olanzapine and risperidone groups experienced significant weight gain between baseline and endpoint (p < .01), whereas the average weight of the haloperidol group did not change. Average weight gain was significantly higher for the olanzapine group (7.2 +/- 6.3 kg, 11.1% +/- 7.8%) than for the risperidone (3.9 +/- 4.8 kg, 6.6% +/- 8.6%) and haloperidol (1.1 +/- 3.3 kg, 1.5% +/- 6.0%) groups. Extreme weight gain (>7%) was recorded in 19 patients (90.5%), 9 patients (42.9%), and 1 (12.5%) patient, respectively Gender (males), low concern about gaining weight (females), low baseline BMI, and paternal BMI were positively correlated with weight gain, whereas previous neuroleptic history, neuroleptic dosage, response to treatment, and illness duration were not. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine and risperidone are associated with extreme weight gain in adolescents, much higher than that reported in adults. This side effect should be taken into consideration before prescribing these medications, especially in patients at high risk.     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗青少年首发精神分裂症对照研究

目的比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗青少年首发精神分裂症的疗效和安全性。方法对60例青少年期首发精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别给予奥氮平与利培酮治疗8周。于治疗前及治疗后1、2、6、8周末进行阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)及副反应量表(TESS)评定。结果奥氮平与利培酮总的疗效无显著性差异,均能快速起效,PANSS总分比较治疗第1周与第2周末奥氮平组显著低于利培酮组,利培酮组锥体外系反应显著多于奥氮平组。结论奥氮平与利培酮均是治疗首发青少年精神分裂症安全有效的非典型抗精神病药物,可根据患者的不同情况分别选择。     

Antipsychotic treatment of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in geropsychiatric inpatients.

Behavioral/psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) affect caregiver burden and transition from home to hospital or long-term care. The authors examined change in BPSD for dementia patients (from hospital admission to discharge) who were prescribed haloperidol (n= 289), olanzapine (n=209), or risperidone (n=500). Olanzapine was associated with significantly greater overall improvement in BPSD (based on the Psychogeriatric Dependency Rating Scale total score) than risperidone or haloperidol. Olanzapine was significantly superior on measures of active-, verbal-, and passive-aggression and delusions/hallucinations to risperidone or haloperidol, and, on manipulative behavior and noisiness, to risperidone. Results support the effectiveness of olanzapine in improving several BPSD in hospitalized dementia patients.     

Atypical antipsychotic agents in the treatment of violent patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder

CONTEXT: Violent behavior of patients with schizophrenia prolongs hospital stay and interferes with their integration into the community. Finding appropriate treatment of violent behaviors is of primary importance. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of 2 atypical antipsychotic agents, clozapine and olanzapine, with one another and with haloperidol in the treatment of physical assaults and other aggressive behaviors in physically assaultive patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 12-week trial. Physically assaultive subjects with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were inpatients in state psychiatric facilities were randomly assigned to treatment with clozapine (n = 37), olanzapine (n = 37), or haloperidol (n = 36). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Number and severity of physical assaults as measured by the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) physical aggression score and the number and severity of all aggressive events as measured by the MOAS overall score. Psychiatric symptoms were assessed through the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). RESULTS: Clozapine was superior to both olanzapine and haloperidol in reducing the number and severity of physical assaults as assessed by the MOAS physical aggression score and in reducing overall aggression as measured by the MOAS total score. Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in reducing the number and severity of aggressive incidents on these 2 MOAS measures. There were no significant differences among the 3 medication groups in improvement of psychiatric symptoms as measured by the PANSS total score and the 3 PANSS subscales. CONCLUSIONS: Clozapine shows greater efficacy than olanzapine and olanzapine greater efficacy than haloperidol in reducing aggressive behavior. This antiaggressive effect appears to be separate from the antipsychotic and sedative action of these medications.     

One-year double-blind study of the neurocognitive efficacy of olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol in schizophrenia

Neurocognitive deficits in schizophrenia can reach 1 to 2 standard deviations below healthy controls. The comparative effect of typical and atypical antipsychotic medications on neurocognition is controversial, and based primarily on studies with small samples and large doses of typical comparator medications. The present study assessed neurocognitive efficacy. It was hypothesized that olanzapine treatment would improve neurocognitive deficits to a greater degree than either risperidone or haloperidol treatment. This was a double-blind, randomized, controlled, parallel study with neurocognition assessed at baseline, and 8, 24, and 52 weeks. Per protocol, the haloperidol arm was discontinued. Four hundred and fourteen inpatients or outpatients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder were treated with oral olanzapine (n = 159), risperidone (n = 158), or haloperidol (n = 97). Individual domains (executive function, learning and memory, processing speed, attention/vigilance, verbal working memory, verbal fluency, motor function, and visuospatial ability) were transformed into composite scores and compared between treatment groups. At the 52-week endpoint, neurocognition significantly improved in each group (p < 0.01 for olanzapine and risperidone, p = 0.04 for haloperidol), with no significant differences between groups. Olanzapine- and risperidone-treated patients significantly (p < 0.05) improved on domains of executive function, learning/memory, processing speed, attention/vigilance, verbal working memory, and motor functions. Additionally, risperidone-treated patients improved on domains of visuospatial memory. Haloperidol-treated patients improved only on domains of learning/memory. However, patients able to remain in treatment for the entire 52 weeks benefited more from olanzapine or risperidone treatment than haloperidol treatment.     

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of patients with chronic schizophrenia: Results of the Japan multicenter, double-blind olanzapine trial

This randomized double-blind trial was conducted to test the efficacy and safety of olanzapine in Japanese patients with schizophrenia. Importantly, this study also represents the first large clinical trial of olanzapine conducted in an Asian population. Patients (n = 182) were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine or haloperidol over a period of 8 weeks. The primary analyses included: (i) a test of non-inferiority of olanzapine compared with haloperidol in efficacy using the Final Global Improvement Rating (FGIR); and (ii) comparison between the treatment groups in extrapyramidal symptom severity using the Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS). Olanzapine was comparable to haloperidol in efficacy in treating positive symptoms and significantly superior in treating negative symptoms. Extrapyramidal symptom severity was significantly improved for olanzapine-treated patients versus haloperidol-treated patients. Olanzapine was shown to be more effective and better tolerated than haloperidol in the treatment of Japanese patients suffering from chronic schizophrenia.     

Comparative efficacy of olanzapine and haloperidol for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: There is relatively little information regarding the efficacy of newer atypical antipsychotic drugs for patients with schizophrenia who are treatment-resistant to neuroleptic agents. Several lines of evidence suggest that a clinical trial of olanzapine in this population is warranted. METHODS: A subpopulation of patients (n = 526) meeting treatment-resistant criteria selected from a large, prospective, double-blind, 6-week study assessing the efficacy and safety of olanzapine and haloperidol were examined. Both last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) and completers (observed cases) analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Olanzapine demonstrated significantly greater mean improvement from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative symptoms, comorbid depressive symptoms assessed by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, akathisia as measured by Barnes Akathisia Scale, and extrapyramidal symptoms as measured by Simpson-Angus Extrapyramidal Rating Scale with both LOCF and completers analyses. In addition, olanzapine was significantly superior to haloperidol for Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total (p = .006), PANSS total (p = .005), and PANSS positive symptoms (p = .017) in completers of the 6-week study. Significantly greater response rates were observed in olanzapine-treated (47%) than haloperidol-treated (35%) patients in the LOCF analysis (p = .008), but significance was not reached in the completers analysis (p = .093). Mean doses (+/- SD) of olanzapine and haloperidol were 11.1 +/- 3.4 mg/day and 10.0 +/- 3.6 mg/day, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol for key symptom domains and parkinsonian side effects. Implications of these data for the therapeutics of this severely ill subgroup are discussed.     

Effects of olanzapine on prolactin levels of female patients with schizophrenia treated with risperidone

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to prospectively examine the effect of switching from risperidone to olanzapine on female schizophrenia patients who experienced menstrual disturbances, galactorrhea, and/or sexual dysfunction. METHOD: Twenty female patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia who were taking risperidone and were suffering from menstrual disturbances, galactorrhea, and/or sexual dysfunction were enrolled. Patients were switched from risperidone to olanzapine over a 2-week period, then treated with olanzapine for 8 additional weeks. The serum prolactin concentrations were examined every 2 weeks. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), Simpson-Angus Scale for Extrapyramidal Symptoms (SAS), and questions from the Dickson-Glazer Sexual Functioning Scale were administered to evaluate efficacy, extrapyramidal side effects, and sexual and reproductive functioning at baseline and the endpoint of 10 weeks. RESULTS: Serum prolactin levels decreased significantly (p < .01) following the switch from risperidone to olanzapine. Scores of PANSS, AIMS, and SAS at the endpoint were also significantly decreased (p < .01) compared to those of baseline. Patients experienced improvements in menstrual functioning and perceptions of sexual side effects. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine reversed hyperprolactinemia in risperidone-treated female schizophrenic patients. This was associated with a decrease in amenorrhea, improved cycle regularity, and a decrease in sexual side effects that the women attributed to antipsychotic medication. This study suggests that switching to olanzapine is a safe and effective alternative method for patients with antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia associated sexual and/or reproductive dysfunction. Long-term follow-up studies are warranted, with particular attention to the course of sexual and reproductive dysfunction.     

The effects of olanzapine on the 5 dimensions of schizophrenia derived by factor analysis: combined results of the North American and international trials

BACKGROUND: The choice of drug to treat a patient with schizophrenia is one of the most critical clinical decisions. Controversy exists on the differential efficacy of olanzapine. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: Raw data from all 4 registrational double-blind, random-assignment studies of olanzapine compared with placebo or haloperidol were obtained from Eli Lilly and Company for this meta-analysis. METHOD: Analysis of covariance of the intent-to-treat last-observation-carried-forward endpoint scores was used to assess efficacy on Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores and the 5 factors derived by factor analysis (negative symptoms, positive symptoms, disorganized thoughts, impulsivity/hostility, and anxiety/depression). RESULTS: Olanzapine produced a statistically significantly greater reduction in schizophrenic symptoms than haloperidol (p < .05) on total scores on the BPRS and PANSS on each of the 5 factors as well as on almost all items. Olanzapine induced a response at a rate equal to that induced by haloperidol in the first few weeks, but by the end of the study produced a greater percentage of responders. Compared with haloperidol, olanzapine produced a somewhat greater response on symptoms responsive to haloperidol, but a markedly better response on symptoms unresponsive to haloperidol. This difference favoring olanzapine occurred to an equal degree in all subgroups examined. The incidence of parkinsonism or akathisia following olanzapine treatment was extremely low and not statistically distinguishable from placebo. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine produced a greater improvement than haloperidol particularly by benefiting a much larger number of items or factors. Extrapyramidal side effects and akathisia during olanzapine treatment were statistically indistinguishable from effects seen with placebo.     

Randomized comparison of olanzapine versus risperidone for the treatment of first-episode schizophrenia: 4-month outcomes

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared 4-month treatment outcomes for olanzapine versus risperidone in patients with first-episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders. METHOD: One hundred twelve subjects (70% male; mean age=23.3 years [SD = 5.1]) with first-episode schizophrenia (75%), schizophreniform disorder (17%), or schizoaffective disorder (8%) were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine (2.5-20 mg/day) or risperidone (1-6 mg/day). RESULTS: Response rates did not significantly differ between olanzapine (43.7%, 95% CI=28.8%-58.6%) and risperidone (54.3%, 95% CI=39.9%-68.7%). Among those responding to treatment, more subjects in the olanzapine group (40.9%, 95% CI=16.8%-65.0%) than in the risperidone group (18.9%, 95% CI=0%-39.2%) had subsequent ratings not meeting response criteria. Negative symptom outcomes and measures of parkinsonism and akathisia did not differ between medications. Extrapyramidal symptom severity scores were 1.4 (95% CI=1.2-1.6) with risperidone and 1.2 (95% CI=1.0-1.4) with olanzapine. Significantly more weight gain occurred with olanzapine than with risperidone: the increase in weight at 4 months relative to baseline weight was 17.3% (95% CI=14.2%-20.5%) with olanzapine and 11.3% (95% CI=8.4%-14.3%) with risperidone. Body mass index at baseline and at 4 months was 24.3 (95% CI=22.8-25.7) versus 28.2 (95% CI=26.7-29.7) with olanzapine and 23.9 (95% CI=22.5-25.3) versus 26.7 (95% CI=25.2-28.2) with risperidone. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes with risperidone were equal to those with olanzapine, and response may be more stable. Olanzapine may have an advantage for motor side effects. Both medications caused substantial rapid weight gain, but weight gain was greater with olanzapine.     

A randomized, flexible-dose, quasi-naturalistic comparison of quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine in the short-term treatment of schizophrenia: the QUERISOLA trial

This was a randomized, flexible-dose, rater-blind, parallel-group, quasi-naturalistic trial comparing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia hospitalized for severe psychotic symptoms. Seventy-five patients were randomized to quetiapine (n=25), risperidone (n=25), or olanzapine (n=25). Mean doses at Week 8 were: 590.0 mg/day quetiapine; 5.1 mg/day risperidone; 15.1 mg/day olanzapine. Four quetiapine, five risperidone, and five olanzapine patients discontinued prior to Week 8. There were no significant differences between groups in the primary efficacy measures of improvement from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at Week 8 in the per protocol (PP) population and the number of completers who experienced >or=40% improvement on the same scale. PP and intent-to-treat analyses showed significant improvement from baseline in each component of a PANSS-derived battery, without significant differences between treatments. No quetiapine patients, one risperidone, and four olanzapine patients reported an adverse event (AE) of moderate intensity; no severe AEs were reported. A linear mixed model for repeated measures showed an effect of treatment on body weight, with significant differences favoring quetiapine over risperidone and olanzapine. Simpson-Angus Scale scores were significantly worse with risperidone compared with both olanzapine and quetiapine at Week 3 and compared with quetiapine thereafter. Use of concomitant medications for anxiety or tension was significantly less frequent with quetiapine. In conclusion, quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine have similar efficacy in schizophrenia, but there are drug-specific differences for some AEs and in the use of concomitant medication that differentiate these agents.     

A prospective,open-label trial of olanzapine in adolescents with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic that has efficacy in adults with psychotic disorders. This preliminary study examined the effectiveness of olanzapine in adolescents with schizophrenia or its related conditions. METHOD: Adolescents aged 12-17 years (inclusive) with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or schizophreniform disorder were enrolled in this 8-week, open-label, outpatient study. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI), and the Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) were administered as outcome measures. Extrapyramidal side effects were assessed at each visit. Olanzapine was initiated at a dose of 2.5 mg/day and could be increased to a maximum total daily dose of 20 mg. RESULTS: Sixteen participants with a mean age of 13.8 (SD = 1.5) years were treated. Significant improvements were found in the PANSS, CGI severity, and CGAS scores. Reductions in both positive and negative symptoms were found. Increased appetite and sedation were the most frequently reported side effects. Two subjects required treatment for extrapyramidal side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Psychotic symptoms significantly improved during study. Overall, olanzapine was well tolerated. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings, to assess long-term treatment outcomes, and to compare the effectiveness of olanzapine with that of other antipsychotics.     

Rehospitalization Risk with Second-Generation and Depot Antipsychotics

Decreasing hospital admissions is important for improving outcomes for people with schizophrenia. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are better tolerated for long-term therapy than traditional medications and may contribute to a lower rehospitalization risk, but have not been compared to depot forms with regard to long-term outcomes. This study evaluates the risk of readmission in patients discharged from six State of Maryland inpatient mental health facilities between Jan. 1, 1997 and Dec. 31, 1997 on clozapine (N = 41), risperidone (N = 149), and olanzapine (N = 103). These patients were compared with those discharged from the two largest state facilities during the same time period on fluphenazine decanoate (N = 59) or haloperidol decanoate (N = 59). One-year readmission risk (measured by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with Holm's adjustment for multiple comparison on Log Rank tests) were 10% for clozapine, 12% for risperidone, and 13% for olanzapine. These risks were not significantly lower than the readmission risk for fluphenazine decanoate (21%) but were significantly lower than haloperidol decanoate (35%) for all three SGAs. Demographic and clinical variables did not predict readmission for any of the medications. In patients with similar demographic and clinical characteristics, 1-year risk of readmission for patients treated with SGAs were at least comparable to the 1-year risk for patients receiving fluphenazine decanoate and lower than the risk for patients treated with haloperidol decanoate. SGAs may provide better long-term prognoses and outcomes for patients with schizophrenia.     

Reduced basal ganglia volumes after switching to olanzapine in chronically treated patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE: A follow-up study of patients with schizophrenia was conducted to examine change in striatal volumes and extrapyramidal symptoms after a change in medication. METHOD: Thirty-seven patients with schizophrenia and 23 healthy volunteers were examined. Patients at baseline receiving typical antipsychotics (N=10) or risperidone but exhibiting limited response (N=13) were switched to treatment with olanzapine. Patients receiving risperidone and exhibiting a good response (N=14) continued treatment with risperidone. Caudate, putamen, and pallidal volumes were assessed with magnetic resonance imaging. The Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale was used to assess clinical signs and symptoms. RESULTS: At baseline, basal ganglia volumes in patients treated with typical antipsychotics were greater than in healthy subjects (putamen: 7.0% larger; globus pallidus: 20.7% larger). After the switch to olanzapine, putamen and globus pallidus volumes decreased (9.8% and 10.7%, respectively) and did not differ from those of healthy subjects at the follow-up evaluation. Akathisia was also reduced. In the patients receiving risperidone at baseline, basal ganglia volumes did not differ between those exhibiting good and poor response, and no significant volume changes were observed in subjects with poor risperidone response after the switch to olanzapine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine reversed putamen and globus pallidus enlargement induced by typical antipsychotics but did not alter volumes in patients previously treated with risperidone. Changes in striatal volumes related to typical and atypical antipsychotics may represent an interactive effect between individual medications and unique patient characteristics.     

Treatment with olanzapine, risperidone or typical antipsychotic drugs in Asian patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE: To examine clinical outcomes in Asian patients with schizophrenia receiving monotherapy with olanzapine, risperidone or typical antipsychotics in naturalistic settings. METHOD: In this report, data from the first 12 months of the prospective, observational, 3-year Intercontinental Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes study are presented for patients from participating Asian countries (Korea, Taiwan and Malaysia) who were started on, or switched to, monotherapy with olanzapine (n = 484), risperidone (n = 287) or a typical antipsychotic drug (n = 127) at baseline. RESULTS: At 12 months, overall reduction in the score of Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness rating scale was greatest with olanzapine (p < 0.001 vs typical agents), followed by risperidone (p = 0.007 vs typical agents) treatment. Olanzapine treatment was found to have significantly better effects than typical agents on negative and depressive symptom scores, and significantly greater improvements than risperidone on negative and cognitive symptoms. The occurrence of extrapyramidal symptoms was least likely with olanzapine (p < 0.001 vs typical agents, and p = 0.012 vs risperidone), while the estimated odds of tardive dyskinesia were greatest in the typical treatment group (p = 0.046 vs olanzapine, and p = 0.082 vs risperidone). Mean weight increase was greater for olanzapine-treated patients compared with the other agents (p = 0.030 vs typical agents and p < 0.001 vs risperidone). The risk of menstrual disturbance was relatively high with risperidone when compared with olanzapine treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this observational study indicate that, in Asian patients with schizophrenia, olanzapine may offer benefits when compared with typical agents or risperidone. However, the significantly greater odds of weight gain should be considered in the clinical management of olanzapine-treated patients.     

Adverse effects of risperidone and haloperidol treatment in schizophrenia

PURPOSE: Side effects of pharmacological treatment in schizophrenia continue to be a major issue in spite of the development of new antipsychotics. The aim of this study is to explore the adverse effects of conventional and atypical antipsychotic drugs and their associated factors. METHODS: Over 3 months, 41 patients with schizophrenia were randomized to treatment with risperidone 1-12 mg (n=21) or haloperidol 2-20 mg (n=20) daily. Efficacy was assessed by improvement of psychotic symptoms, measured on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). The safety and tolerability were assessed with the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale, the UKU Side-Effect Rating Scale and clinical laboratory assessments. RESULTS: Each treatment reduced psychotic symptoms. PANSS total scores, positive scores, and general psychopathology scores declined as trial went on without significant differences between the two groups. While PANSS negative scores improved better in the risperidone group than in the haloperidol group. The tolerability of antipsychotics was statistical significantly better in the risperidone than in the haloperidol-treated patients. The most frequent adverse effects for both groups were tremor and rigidity. Antipsychotics, their doses, and hyperprolactinemia predict short-term extrapyramidal side effects. Serum prolactin levels could predict parkinsonism and dyskinesia severity. However, dyskinesia was best predicted by the doses of neuroleptics. The predictive factor of dystonia was the antipsychotic drug itself. After adjusting drug doses and concomitant medications, side effects could be markedly improved. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that risperidone was superior to haloperidol in improving negative symptoms and better tolerated during the 12 weeks' treatment of schizophrenia. Serum prolactin levels could predict the severity of parkinsonism and dyskinesia.     

利培酮与奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症的1年随访研究

目的评价利培酮与奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症的疗效与不良反应。方法本研究为开放性，平行对照，药物剂量可调整的临床试验。采用自然观察研究方法，结合全病程管理模式对研究对象进行1年随访研究。分别有131例和136例首发精神分裂症患者被分入利培酮组和奥氮平组。利培酮组剂量为3—6mg，平均（3．8±1．3）mg，奥氮平组剂量为10—20mg，平均（12．9±5．6）mg。疗效主要统计指标为阳性和阴性症状评定量表（PANSS）的总分值及有效率，持续治疗时间。PANSS减分率≥50％定义为有效。次要统计指标为复发率、复发时间及药物不良反应。用副反应量表（TESS）评估药物不良反应。结果12月末时，利培酮组有85例患者（64．9％）完成随访，奥氮平组为93例（68．4％），两组差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。治疗终点利醅酮和奥氮平组有效率分别为62．6％和69．8％，差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05），随访中其他时点（2、3、6、8个月）两组有效率差异亦无统计学意义。12个月末利培酮组和奥氮平组的复发率（14．5％、12．5％）、持续治疗时间（9．5±3．8月、9．7±3．8月）、复发时间（4．0±2．9月、5．1±2．8月）等差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）。不良反应方面，利培酮组锥体外系反应比例高于奥氮平组，奥氮平组体重增加比例高于利培酮组。结论利培酮与奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症1年疗效均好，利培酮组锥体外系反应发生较多，奥氮平组体重增加较多。     

Intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular haloperidol in acute schizophrenia: antipsychotic efficacy and extrapyramidal safety during the first 24 hours of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the antipsychotic efficacy and extrapyramidal safety of intramuscular (i.m.) olanzapine and i.m. haloperidol during the first 24 hours of treatment of acute schizophrenia. METHOD: Patients (n = 311) with acute schizophrenia were randomly allocated (2:2:1) to receive i.m. olanzapine (10.0 mg, n = 131), i.m. haloperidol (7.5 mg, n = 126), or i.m. placebo (n = 54). RESULTS: After the first injection, i.m. olanzapine was comparable to i.m. haloperidol and superior to i.m. placebo for reducing mean change scores from baseline on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BRPS) Positive at 2 hours (-2.9 olanzapine, -2.7 haloperidol, and -1.5 placebo) and 24 hours (-2.8 olanzapine, -3.2 haloperidol, and -1.3 placebo); the BPRS Total at 2 hours (-14.2 olanzapine,-13.1 haloperidol, and -7.1 placebo) and 24 hours (-12.8 olanzapine, -12.9 haloperidol, and -6.2 placebo); and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale at 24 hours (-0.5 olanzapine, -0.5 haloperidol, and -0.1 placebo). Patients treated with i.m. olanzapine had significantly fewer incidences of treatment-emergent parkinsonism (4.3% olanzapine vs 13.3% haloperidol, P = 0.036), but not akathisia (1.1% olanzapine vs 6.5% haloperidol, P = 0.065), than did patients treated with i.m. haloperidol; they also required significantly less anticholinergic treatment (4.6% olanzapine vs 20.6% haloperidol, P < 0.001). Mean extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) safety scores improved significantly from baseline during i.m. olanzapine treatment, compared with a general worsening during i.m. haloperidol treatment (Simpson-Angus Scale total score mean change: -0.61 olanzapine vs 0.70 haloperidol; P < 0.001; Barnes Akathisia Scale global score mean change: -0.27 olanzapine vs 0.01 haloperidol; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: I.m. olanzapine was comparable to i.m. haloperidol for reducing the symptoms of acute schizophrenia during the first 24 hours of treatment, the efficacy of both being evident within 2 hours after the first injection. In general, more EPS were observed during treatment with i.m. haloperidol than with i.m. olanzapine.     

Safety and efficacy of long-acting risperidone in schizophrenia: a 12-week, multicenter, open-label study in stable patients switched from typical and atypical oral antipsychotics

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of the first long-acting injectable atypical antipsychotic, risperidone, were assessed in stable patients with schizophrenia switched from oral antipsychotic medications. METHOD: Data were collected between July 1, 2001, and October 25, 2002. The study population included patients from clinics, hospitals, and physicians' offices. After a 4-week run-in period, symptomatically stable patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV) who had been taking haloperidol (N = 46), quetiapine (N = 45), or olanzapine (N = 50) received 25 mg of long-acting risperidone. The oral antipsychotics were continued for 3 weeks after the first injection of long-acting risperidone. Injections were administered every 2 weeks at 25 mg up to a maximum dose of 50 mg for 12 weeks in this multicenter, open-label study. RESULTS: Long-acting risperidone was well tolerated. Of the 141 patients who participated in the study, the most frequently reported adverse events were insomnia (16%), headache (15%), psychosis (11%), and agitation (11%). The mean increase in body weight was 0.4 kg. No other clinically relevant laboratory abnormalities or significant electrocardiogram changes were observed during the 12-week treatment. Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale total scores were reduced during treatment with long-acting risperidone. Improvements in symptoms of schizophrenia were observed with long-acting risperidone at week 4 and continued through the 12-week treatment with significant reductions in total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores at week 8 (-2.5, p <.01) and week 12 (-3.9, p <.001). At endpoint, 37% (50/135) of these stable patients were rated as clinically improved (> or = 20% decrease in PANSS total scores). CONCLUSIONS: Switching treatment from oral antipsychotics to long-acting risperidone without an intervening period of oral risperidone was safe and well tolerated. Long-acting risperidone also significantly reduced the severity of symptoms in these stable patients with schizophrenia.     

Effectiveness of clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and haloperidol monotherapy in reducing hostile and aggressive behavior in outpatients treated for schizophrenia: a prospective naturalistic study (IC-SOHO).

OBJECTIVE: Antipsychotic medications may reduce hostile and aggressive behavior in schizophrenia. This study compared the effectiveness of antipsychotics in the treatment of aggression. METHOD: The Intercontinental Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (IC-SOHO) study compares the effectiveness of antipsychotic treatments in practice setting. Schizophrenia outpatients who initiated or changed to a new antipsychotic are followed in this non-interventional, prospective observational study for up to 3 years, with 6-months data now available on the entire cohort (N=7655). The presence or absence of verbal or physical hostility/aggression was assessed retrospectively for the period of 6 months before enrollment, and prospectively in the period of 6 months after enrollment (the study treatment period). At baseline, patients in five monotherapy treatment groups (combined N=3135) were prescribed one of the treatments: clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or haloperidol, and had complete data. RESULTS: Hostile/aggressive behavior was reduced during the treatment period. Olanzapine and risperidone were significantly superior to haloperidol and to clozapine in this respect. These results remained essentially unchanged when adjusting for baseline imbalances in age, gender, age of onset, and substance abuse. CONCLUSIONS: As monotherapy, both olanzapine and risperidone were superior to haloperidol and clozapine in reducing aggression. The relative lack of effectiveness of clozapine may be specific to this study population.