Ondansetron treatment in Tourette's disorder: a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron, a selective 5-HT(3) antagonist, in the treatment of Tourette's disorder. METHOD: Participants (N = 30) aged 12 to 46 years, diagnosed with DSM-IV Tourette's disorder and resistant to previous haloperidol treatment, were enrolled in a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient study. Assessments were conducted at baseline and once a week during the study period. Scales used included the Tourette's Syndrome Global Scale (TSGS), the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS), and the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. Ondansetron dose was 8, 16, and 24 mg/day in the first, second, and third weeks, respectively. RESULTS: A significant positive effect of ondansetron on tic severity, as assessed by the TSGS, was noted (baseline vs. endpoint: mean +/-SD = 29.62 +/-20.33 vs. 20.58 +/-12.82, p = .002 vs. placebo). However, no significant effect was detected upon assessing ondansetron/ placebo effect on tic severity with the YGTSS (baseline vs. endpoint: mean +/-SD = 24.04 +/-9.44 vs. 17.50 +/-9.48, p = .15 vs. placebo). No change in obsessive-compulsive symptoms was noted in either group. Adverse effects included mild and transient abdominal pain. CONCLUSIONS: Ondansetron may have antitic effects in patients with Tourette's disorder. Large-scale, double-blind studies should further assess the antitic efficacy of ondansetron.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of extract of Ginkgo biloba added to haloperidol in treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have indicated that excess free radical formation may be involved in the pathogenesis of patients with schizophrenia. Some investigators suggested that the use of free radical scavengers might provide improvement in schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness and to evaluate the side effects of extract of Ginkgo biloba (EGb) plus haloperidol in chronic, treatment-resistant inpatients with schizophrenia. METHOD: One hundred nine patients meeting DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia completed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of EGb plus haloperidol. Fifty-six of the patients were randomly assigned to receive a fixed dose of 360 mg/day of EGb plus a stable dose of haloperidol, 0.25 mg/kg/day, and 53 were assigned to receive placebo plus the same dose of haloperidol for 12 weeks. Patients were assessed using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), and the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS) at baseline, week 6, and week 12 and the Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale (TESS) for side effects at week 12. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in both groups in BPRS total score after 12 weeks of treatment (p < .05). However, a significant reduction in total SAPS and SANS scores was noted in the EGb group (p < .05), but not in the placebo group. There was a lower SAPS total score in the EGb group than in the placebo group at the end of 12 weeks of treatment (p < .05). Of those treated with EGb plus haloperidol, 57.1% were rated as responders as compared with only 37.7% of those receiving placebo plus haloperidol when assessed by the SAPS (chi2 = 4. 111, p = .043). After 12 weeks of treatment, TESS subscore 1 (behavioral toxicity) and subscore 3 (symptoms of nerve system) were significantly decreased in the EGb group compared with the placebo group (p < .05). CONCLUSION: EGb treatment may enhance the effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs and reduce their extrapyramidal side effects.     

奥氮平合并氯氮平对男性难治性精神分裂症阴性症状的疗效及安全性的研究

目的观察奥氮平合并氯氮平治疗男性以阴性症状为主的难治性精神分裂症的疗效以及安全性。方法对43例男性原服用氯氮平且以阴性症状为主的难治性精神分裂症患者合并奥氮平5～20mg／d治疗8周,同时于2周内将氯氮平减量且氯氮平剂量2周后不再变化,并于合并治疗前及后2周、4周、8周评定阳性症状与阴性症状量表（PANSS）、副反应量表（TESS）。结果合并奥氮平治疗后2周、4周、8周末PANSS总分和TESS评分较合并前有明显差异。结论奥氮平合并氯氮平对于男性难治性精神分裂症患者的阴性症状有明显的改善,副反应也有减少。     

Added ondansetron for stable schizophrenia: a double blind, placebo controlled trial

It is well documented that 5-hydroxytryptamine3 (5-HT3) receptors are involved in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and cognitive impairment. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of ondansetron, a 5-HT3 receptor antagonist as an adjuvant agent in the treatment of chronic schizophrenia in particular for cognitive impairments. This investigation was a 12-week, double blind study of parallel groups of patients with stable chronic schizophrenia. Thirty patients were recruited from inpatient and outpatient departments. All participants met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for schizophrenia. To be eligible, patients were required to have been treated with a stable dose of risperidone as their primary antipsychotic treatment for a minimum period of 8 weeks. The subjects were randomized to receive ondansetron (8 mg/day) or the placebo in addition to risperidone. Clinical psychopathology was assessed with Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Cognition was measured by a cognitive battery. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 8, and 12 weeks after the medication started. The PANSS scores and cognitive performance were used as the outcome measures. The ondansetron group had significantly greater improvement in the negative symptoms, general psychopathological symptoms and PANSS total scores over the trial. Administration of ondansetron significantly improved visual memory based on improvement on visual reproduction, visual paired associate and figural memory sub tests of Wechsler Memory Scale--Revised. The present study indicates ondansetron as potential adjunctive treatment strategy for chronic schizophrenia particularly for negative symptoms and cognitive impairments.     

阿立哌唑与氟哌啶醇治疗难治性精神分裂症的对照研究

目的比较阿立哌唑与氟哌啶醇治疗难治性精神分裂症的疗效。方法78例符合入组条件的难治性精神分裂症病人，随机分2组，分别应用阿立哌唑或氟哌啶醇治疗12用，应用阳性和阴性症状量表（PANSS）和刮反应量表（TESS）评定疗效和副反应。结果阿立哌唑组总有效率为61．54％，明显高于氟哌啶醇组的43．59％。2组间在PANSS总分，阴性症状量表分及一般病理症状量表分值方面的差异具有显著性意义（P〈0．01）。结论阿立哌唑对难治性精神分裂症的疗效优于氟哌啶醇，对阴性症状的效果尤其明显。     

奥氮平与氯氮平治疗难治性精神分裂症对照研究

目的评价奥氮平治疗难治性精神分裂症的疗效及安全性。方法将64例难治性精神分裂症患者随机分为研究组和对照组,分别予以奥氮平和氯氮平治疗8周,采用PANSS量表和TESS量表评定疗效和不良反应。结果奥氮平组治疗前后PANSS减分率为39.3%,有效率为72.8%;氯氮平组治疗前后PANSS减分率为36.6%,有效率为59.4%。奥氮平组未见严重的不良反应。结论奥氮平与氯氮平治疗难治性精神分裂症均有良好疗效,奥氮平的副作用小,病人依从性好。     

Aripiprazole for the prevention of relapse in stabilized patients with chronic schizophrenia: a placebo-controlled 26-week study

BACKGROUND: Aripiprazole is a novel antipsychotic for the management of schizophrenia. This study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole in preventing relapse in adult chronic schizophrenia patients experiencing ongoing stable symptomatology. METHOD: In this 26-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multi-center study, 310 patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia (mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total score = 82) were randomly assigned to receive a once-daily fixed dose of aripiprazole, 15 mg, or placebo. The primary outcome measure was time to relapse following randomization. Secondary objectives were to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole, 15 mg, compared with placebo, in the study population. The study was conducted between Dec. 21, 2000, and Aug. 20, 2001. RESULTS: The time to relapse following randomization was significantly (p < .001) longer for aripiprazole compared with placebo. More patients relapsed with placebo (N = 85; 57%) than aripiprazole (N = 50; 34%); the relative risk of relapse for the aripiprazole group was 0.59 (p < .001). Aripiprazole was significantly superior to placebo from baseline to endpoint in PANSS total, PANSS positive, PANSS-derived Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) scores and demonstrated significantly better mean Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement scale scores (p < or = .01 for all comparisons except CGI-S: .01 < p < or = .05). Aripiprazole was well tolerated, with no evidence of marked sedation and no evidence of hyperprolactinemia or prolonged heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc). Extrapyramidal symptoms were comparable in the aripiprazole and placebo groups. Modest mean weight loss at endpoint was evident in both groups. CONCLUSION: Aripiprazole, 15 mg once daily, is an effective, well-tolerated treatment for prevention of relapse in patients with chronic, stable schizophrenia.     

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.     

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.     

Efficacy and safety of aripiprazole and haloperidol versus placebo in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder

BACKGROUND: Aripiprazole is an investigational agent for treating schizophrenia that has a novel pharmacologic profile. The present study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole and haloperidol compared with placebo. METHOD: A 4-week, double-blind, randomized study, conducted at 36 U.S. centers between July 1997 and June 1998, compared aripiprazole (15 mg/day, 30 mg/day) to placebo, with haloperidol (10 mg/day) as an active control. Fixed doses of each agent were administered from day 1 throughout the study. A total of 414 patients with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomized. Efficacy measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total, PANSS positive, PANSS negative, PANSS-derived Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) core, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Severity of Illness, and mean CGI-Improvement scores. Safety and tolerability evaluations included extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), weight gain, serum prolactin level, and QTc interval. RESULTS: Both doses of aripiprazole and haloperidol, 10 mg, produced statistically significant (p < or = .05) improvements from baseline in PANSS total, PANSS positive, PANSS-derived BPRS core, and CGI-Severity scores and significantly lower CGI-Improvement scores at endpoint, compared with placebo. Aripiprazole, 15 mg, and haloperidol, 10 mg, significantly improved PANSS negative score compared with placebo. Both aripiprazole doses and haloperidol separated from placebo for PANSS total scores at week 2. Unlike haloperidol, aripiprazole was not associated with significant EPS or prolactin elevation at endpoint compared with placebo. There were no statistically significant differences in mean changes in body weight across the treatment groups versus placebo, and no patients receiving aripiprazole experienced clinically significant increases in QTc interval. CONCLUSION: Aripiprazole, effective against positive and negative symptoms, is a safe and well-tolerated potential treatment for schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.     

Effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of ziprasidone for treating schizophrenia patients undergoing usual care: a 12-month, open-label, flexible-dose, naturalistic observational trial

OBJECTIVE: This is a first report from a long-term study aimed to evaluate efficacy, safety, tolerability, cognitive functioning, and quality of life outcomes during ziprasidone treatment of chronic schizophrenia patients in the "real-world". METHOD: Seventy clinically unstable schizophrenia patients with persistent symptoms or troublesome side effects were assigned to a 12-month, open-label, flexible-dose (40-160 mg/day), large-scale, naturalistic trial. Outcome measures were taken at baseline, 6, and 12 months, and included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Clinical Global Impression (CGI-S) scale, the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF) scores, treatment-emergent adverse events, body weight, and drug attitude. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients fully completed the study protocol. A discontinuation of treatment for any cause occurred in 54.3% of patients; the mean time until discontinuation was 4.4 +/- 2.7 months. A discontinuation due to lack of clinical efficacy was more predominantly linked to patient perception (25.7%) than to physicians' conclusions alone (8.6%), adverse events (11.4%), and other reasons (8.6%). After controlling daily dose of ziprasidone, concomitant medications and sex, ANCOVA revealed improvement in PANSS factors, and global functioning among patients who had completed the study. Improvement in PANSS and GAF dimensions was evident at a 6-month visit, and it continued until the endpoint. When a cutoff of 20% improvement of PANSS total scores was used, the response rate among completers was 43.8%. Most common side effects were: fatigue, sleep disturbances, and headache. Ziprasidone did not appear to be linked to weight gain. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that ziprasidone may be beneficial for long-term treatment of schizophrenia patients in terms of severity of symptoms, and general functioning. Ziprasidone is well tolerated during the long-term treatment of chronic schizophrenia patients undergoing usual care.     

Effects of atypical antipsychotics on the syndromal profile in treatment-resistant schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: There has been considerable support for the observation that atypical antipsychotics have a broader range of therapeutic effects than traditional antipsychotics. We are exploring whether this expanded clinical efficacy can also be seen in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia. METHOD: The subjects were 157 treatment-resistant inpatients diagnosed with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. They were randomly assigned to treatment with clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, or haloperidol in a 14-week double-blind trial and rated with a standard measure of clinical antipsychotic efficacy (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]). Factor analysis at baseline and endpoint together with changes in 5 PANSS-derived factors were examined. Data were gathered from June 1996 to December 1999. RESULTS: The underlying PANSS factor structure, as indicated by the factor loadings, was essentially identical at baseline and endpoint. At baseline, the excitement factor was followed by the positive, negative, cognitive, and depression/anxiety factors, explaining 49.4% of the total variance. At endpoint, the positive factor was followed by the negative, excitement, cognitive, and depression/anxiety factors, explaining 55.5% of the total variance. The endpoint data indicated statistically significant (p <.05) improvements over time on the positive factor for all 3 atypicals, but not for haloperidol. The negative factor showed significant improvement for clozapine and olanzapine, with significant worsening for haloperidol. Clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone were superior to haloperidol on the negative factor, while clozapine was also superior to risperidone. The cognitive factor showed significant improvement for all atypicals, as did the depression/anxiety factor. Only clozapine showed improvement on the excitement factor and was superior to both haloperidol and risperidone. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with atypical antipsychotics did not substantially change the underlying PANSS 5-factor structure. However, antipsychotic treatment with all 3 atypical medications was associated with significant improvements on 3 of 5 syndromal domains (positive, cognitive, and depression/anxiety) of schizophrenia. Clozapine and olanzapine also showed improvement on the negative factor. Only clozapine was associated with improvement on the excitement domain. This finding confirms that atypicals are associated with improvement of an expanded spectrum of symptoms in treatment-resistant 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.     

International multisite double-blind trial of the atypical antipsychotics risperidone and olanzapine in 175 elderly patients with chronic schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the effects of the two most commonly used atypical antipsychotics, risperidone and olanzapine, in elderly patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: In an 8-week, international, double-blind study, patients (outpatients, hospital inpatients, and residents of nursing or boarding homes) were randomly assigned to receive risperidone (1 mg to 3 mg/day) or olanzapine (5 mg to 20 mg/day). The main outcome measures were changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores and rates of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). RESULTS: Subjects were 175 patients age 60 years or over with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The mean duration of illness was 36.5 years. Median doses were 2 mg/day of risperidone and 10 mg/day of olanzapine. PANSS total scores and four of the five PANSS factor scores (positive symptoms, negative symptoms, disorganized thoughts, and anxiety/depression) improved significantly at all time-points and at endpoint in both groups; between-treatment differences were not significant. EPS-related adverse events were reported by 9.2% of patients in the risperidone group and 15.9% in the olanzapine group; the between-treatment difference was not significant. Total scores on the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale were reduced in both groups at endpoint; between-treatment differences were not significant. Clinically relevant weight gain was seen in both groups, but was significantly less frequent in risperidone patients than in olanzapine patients. CONCLUSIONS: Stable elderly patients with chronic schizophrenia receiving appropriate doses of risperidone or olanzapine over an 8-week period experienced significant reductions in the severity of psychotic and extrapyramidal symptoms, with a relatively low risk of side effects.     

利培酮与氯氮平治疗精神分裂症对照研究

目的 评价利培酮治疗精神分裂症的疗效和副作用。方法 将５９例精神分裂症住院病人随机分配到利培酮１组,利培酮２组和氯氮平组（２０例）,治疗８周。用阳性与阴性症状量表（ＰＡＮＳＳ）评定疗效,用副反应量表及锥体外系副反应量表评定副反应。结果 利培酮两个剂量组与氯氮平组之间疗效无显著性差异。在认知因子,阴性因子,ＰＡＮＳＳ总分减分率方面,利培酮组与氯氮平组有显著性差异,利培酮的副反应有锥体外系反应、失眠、     

Combination of a mood stabilizer with risperidone or haloperidol for treatment of acute mania: a double-blind,placebo-controlled comparison of efficacy and safety

OBJECTIVE: The study assessed the efficacy and safety of risperidone as an adjunctive agent to mood stabilizers in the treatment of acute mania. METHOD: This 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 156 bipolar disorder patients with a current manic or mixed episode who received a mood stabilizer (lithium or divalproex) and placebo, risperidone, or haloperidol. The primary efficacy measure was the Young Mania Rating Scale. Other assessments used the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and safety measures. RESULTS: The trial was discontinued by 25 (49%) of the 51 placebo group patients, 18 (35%) of the 52 risperidone group patients, and 28 (53%) of the 53 haloperidol group patients. Mean modal doses were 3.8 mg/day (SD=1.8) of risperidone and 6.2 mg/day (SD=2.9) of haloperidol. Significantly greater reductions in Young Mania Rating Scale scores at endpoint and over time were seen in the risperidone group and in the haloperidol group, compared with the placebo group. Young Mania Rating Scale total scores improved with risperidone and with haloperidol both in patients with psychotic features and in those without psychotic features at baseline. Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale total scores at endpoint were significantly higher in the haloperidol patients than in the placebo patients. Antiparkinsonian medications were received by 8%, 17%, and 38% of patients in the placebo, risperidone, and haloperidol groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone plus a mood stabilizer was more efficacious than a mood stabilizer alone, and as efficacious as haloperidol plus a mood stabilizer, for the rapid control of manic symptoms and was well tolerated.     

Olanzapine vs. haloperidol in the treatment of elderly chronic schizophrenia patients

OBJECTIVE: Most of the data supporting the use of atypical antipsychotics (AA) is based on studies in young adult patients. The present study is an open-label naturalistic follow-up study of olanzapine treatment vs. haloperidol for elderly chronic schizophrenia patients. MEHTOD: 20 patients (mean age 72.7+/-5.9 years, mean disease duration 33.1+/-12.0 years) who met the DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia were randomly assigned to olanzapine (n=10) or haloperidol (n=10) treatment during acute exacerbation. Primary outcome measure was rating on the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale and the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS). RESULTS: Between-group differences were computed using analysis of covariance. PANSS Total score decreased from 84 at baseline to 65 after treatment with olanzapine while decreased only from 79 to 74 with haloperidol treatment (F= 6.66, P=.02). PANSS Negative subscale decreased from 19 at baseline to 15 with olanzapine treatment while increased (deteriorated) from 18 to 20 with haloperidol treatment (F=23.37, P=.0003). CGI decreased from baseline with both olanzapine and haloperidol treatments (1.1 vs. 0.4) but the decrease in the olanzapine group was significantly greater (F=4.63, P=.05). Mean weight increased in both groups but without statistical difference between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In elderly chronic schizophrenia patients, olanzapine treatment is superior to haloperidol in reducing negative symptoms as well as less induction of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS).     

A randomized trial of risperidone, placebo, and haloperidol for behavioral symptoms of dementia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare effects of risperidone with placebo (efficacy and tolerability) and haloperidol (tolerability) for treating demented patients with aggression and other behavioral symptoms. METHODS: A 13-week double-blind study involving 344 patients with dementia randomly assigned to receive placebo or flexible doses (0.5 to 4 mg/d) of risperidone or haloperidol. Behavioral symptoms were assessed by the Behavior Pathology in Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (BEHAVE-AD), the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI), and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale. Tolerability assessments included the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale, sedation levels, Functional Assessment Staging, Mini-Mental State Examination, and incidence of adverse events. RESULTS: The mean dose at endpoint was 1.1 mg/d of risperidone and 1.2 mg/d of haloperidol. Although not significant, a higher percentage of patients receiving risperidone than those receiving placebo showed clinical improvement (> or =30% reduction from baseline to endpoint in BEHAVE-AD total score) at endpoint and week 12. Reductions in the BEHAVE-AD total score were significantly greater with risperidone than with placebo at week 12. In a further analysis of aggression, the most dominant symptom in these patients, BEHAVE-AD and CMAI aggression cluster scores were significantly reduced compared with placebo at endpoint and week 12. CGI scores were also significantly reduced at endpoint and week 12. Severity of extrapyramidal symptoms with risperidone did not differ significantly from that of placebo and was less than that of haloperidol. A post hoc analysis showed significantly greater reductions in the BEHAVE-AD aggressiveness score with risperidone than haloperidol at week 12. CONCLUSION: Low-dose risperidone (mean 1.1 mg/d) was well tolerated and associated with reductions in the severity and frequency of behavioral symptoms, particularly aggression, in elderly patients with dementia.     

Switching to olanzapine from previous antipsychotics: a regional collaborative multicenter trial assessing 2 switching techniques in Asia Pacific

BACKGROUND: This open-label, multicenter, randomized study compared the efficacy and safety of switching moderately ill Asian patients with schizophrenia from their current regimen of antipsychotic medication to the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine using either a direct switch method or a start-taper switch method. METHOD: Asian inpatients and outpatients with DSM-IV schizophrenia (N = 108) currently treated with predominantly typical antipsychotics were switched to olanzapine (initial dose of 10 mg/day) for 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: the direct switch group (N = 54) received only olanzapine, while the start-taper switch group (N = 54) received olanzapine and their usual antipsychotic in decreasing doses for the first 2 weeks. A successful switch was defined as completing 6 weeks of therapy without worsening of symptoms (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale [CGI-S]) or extrapyramidal side effects (Simpson-Angus Scale). Overall efficacy was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and safety was assessed by recording adverse events and measuring vital signs. RESULTS: Statistically significant (p < .001) improvements from baseline to endpoint occurred in both switch groups in the CGI-S score and the PANSS total score and subscores. However, no significant differences were observed between the switch groups for any efficacy measure. Both techniques had comparable rates of successful switching (direct switch, 74.1% vs. start-taper switch, 67.9%). The frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between switch groups with no clinically significant differences in any laboratory value or vital sign. Weight gain occurred in both switch groups (p < .001), but the groups were not statistically different from each other. Both switch groups showed statistically significant (p < .01) improvements from baseline to endpoint on the Simpson-Angus Scale and Barnes Akathisia Scale. CONCLUSION: Moderately ill Asian patients with schizophrenia may experience a decrease in symptom severity and improvement in extrapyramidal symptoms when switched from their current medication to olanzapine therapy.     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗难治性精神分裂症的对照研究

目的 比较奥氮平与利培酮对难治性精神分裂症的疗效及安全性.方法 68例难治性精神分裂症患者按照排列表法随机分为奥氮平组[34例,(24.1±5.4)mg/d]和利培酮组[34例,(7.9±1.8)mg/d],疗程均为12周.采用阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)、临床总体印象量表(CGI)及治疗中需处理的不良反应症状量表(TESS),在治疗前及治疗第1,2,4,8,12周末分别评定疗效和不良反应.结果 (1)奥氮平组PANSS总分、阳性症状分、阴性症状分及一般病理分均从治疗第2周末起较治疗前下降(P<0.05～0.01);利培酮组PANSS总分、阳性症状分、一般病理分从治疗第2周末起,阴性症状分从第4周末起,较治疗前下降(P<0.05～0.01);奥氮平组从治疗第2周末起各时点PANSS总分、阴性症状分均低于利培酮组(P<0.05～0.01).(2)治疗第2周末起,2组临床总体印象量表-严重程度和改善程度(CGI-SI)总分均较治疗前下降(P<0.05～0.01);2组间各时点CGI-SI分的差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).(3)治疗第12周末,奥氮平组、利培酮组临床总有效率分别为65%、41%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).(4)奥氮平组、利培酮组不良反应发生率分别为53%(18/34)和59%(20/34),差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);奥氮平组体质量增加发生率高于利培酮组(P<0.05);利培酮组静坐不能、异常泌乳和(或)闭经、肌张力增高的发生率高于奥氮平组(P<0.05).结论 奥氮平对难治性精神分裂症有良好疗效,不良反应轻微.