奥氮平与利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症的临床对比分析

目的 评价奥氮平(欧兰宁)与利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症的临床疗效及安全性.方法 将64例首发精神分裂症患者随机分为奥氮平组32例,利培酮组32例,分别给予两药治疗8周.采用阳性、阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定临床疗效,有关实验检查评定不良反应.结果 治疗4周后,奥氮平组和利培M组PANSS总分及各因子分均显著降低,与治疗前比较有显著差异(P<0.05);但两组间无显著性,治疗8周后,奥氮平组比利醅酮组效果显著(P<0.05).奥氮平主要不良反应为体质量增加、嗜睡、血糖升高等,利培酮组主要不良反应为静坐不能、嗜睡、体重增加、恶心呕吐等,两组相比无显著性差异.结论 奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症疗效好,且不良反应轻微,依从性好,值得临床推广.     

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。     

利培酮口服液与奥氮平治疗老年精神分裂症的临床疗效

目的 观察利培酮口服液与奥氮平治疗老年精神分裂症的临床疗效.方法 60例精神分裂症患者随机分为2组,分别给予利培酮口服液与奥氮平片剂治疗.在不同的治疗阶段(2周、4周、8周、12周)使用BPRS量表评价疗效,同时使用TESS量表评价药物不良反应.结果 2组疗效比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);治疗第2、4、8、12周BPRS评分均较治疗前显著下降,第1 2周下降更显著,差异均有统计学意义(P＜0.01);早期治疗利培酮不良反应少于奥氮平组,治疗结束后2组不良反应比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 利培酮与奥氮平治疗老年精神分裂症均安全、有效.早期治疗利培酮口服液可因给药方式不同降低药物不良反应,故如精神症状轻微且伴随躯体疾病较严重的患者,早期治疗可选用利培酮口服液.     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗首次发病未服药精神分裂症患者起效时间及对疗效预测作用的比较

目的:比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗首发精神病患者早期改善对临床疗效的预测。方法:80例首发从未服药精神分裂症患者随机分为只接受奥氮平治疗(奥氮平组,39例)和利培酮治疗(利培酮组,41例),疗程8周。每周采用阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)对患者精神症状进行评定。结果:利培酮治疗第2周(OR=0. 001,95%CI:0. 000～0. 154;χ2=6. 188,P=0. 033),奥氮平第3周(OR=0. 002,95%CI:0. 000～0. 216:χ2=6. 583,P=0. 010)精神症状的改善是药物疗效的保护因素。结论:利培酮组第2周和奥氮平组第3周的早期应答均能有效地预测药物治疗第8周的结果,早期治疗的改善可以作为预测药物疗效的指标之一。     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症对照研究

目的:比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症的疗效及不良反应. 方法:将60例女性精神分裂症患者随机平分为两组.以奥氮平和利培酮治疗,疗程8周.采用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)及治疗中出现的症状量表(TESS)评定疗效及不良反应. 结果:奥氮平和利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症患者疗效相当,2药均无严重不良反应.但奥氮平的锥体外系反应(EPS)、泌乳及月经紊乱发生率低于利培酮. 结论:奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症患者均有效,前者不良反应更少、更安全.     

喹硫平与利培酮对血清催乳素影响的研究

目的了解喹硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症患者的疗效及对血清催乳素的影响。方法对71例符合CCMD-3诊断标准的精神分裂症患者随机分为喹硫平治疗组（33例）与利培酮治疗组（38例）,观察12周,分别于治疗前及治疗后4周、8周、12周予以阳性症状与阴性症状量表（PANSS）,副反应量表（TESS）及血清催乳素测定。结果喹硫平组和利培酮组疗效差异无显著性,两组治疗后4周、8周及12周PANSS总分及各因子分显著下降（P〈0.01）,利培酮组的不良反应高于喹硫平组,主要表现在肌强直、震颤、泌乳（χ^2=5.69,P〈0.01）及闭经（χ^2=6.74,P〈0.01）等不良反应上,利培酮组治疗后4周、8周及12周血清催乳素明显增加（t=13.48,P〈0.01）,而喹硫平组治疗前后无差异。结论喹硫平与利培酮对精神分裂症均有效,但利培酮不良反应大,明显升高血清催乳素,且有较高高血清催乳素不良反应,而喹硫平对血清催乳素影响较少。     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症对照研究

目的：比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症的疗效及不良反应？方法：将60例女性精神分裂症患者随机平分为两组。以奥氮平和利培酮治疗，疗程8周。采用阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）及治疗中出现的症状量表（1磷）评定疗效及不良反应。结果：奥氮平和利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症患者疗效相当，2药均无严重不良反应。但奥氮平的锥体外系反应（EPS）、泌乳及月经紊乱发生率低于利培酮。结论：奥氮平与利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症患者均有效，前者不良反应更少、更安全。     

奥氮平替换利培酮对催乳素及糖脂代谢的影响

目的探讨用奥氮平替换利培酮治疗精神分裂症后,催乳素水平及糖脂代谢的变化。方法对52例服用利培酮治疗的精神分裂症患者换为奥氮平治疗8周。于基线及换药后第8周测空腹催乳素、胰岛素、血糖、甘油三酯、胆固醇、脂蛋白及体重。结果换用奥氮平8周后,催乳素水平显著下降,胰岛素、甘油三酯、栽脂蛋白A1、载脂蛋白B水平均显著升高,体重显著增加（均P〈0．05）。总胆固醇、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平略有升高,空腹血糖略有下降,但差异均无统计学意义（均P〉0．05）。结论奥氮平替换治疗能够明显的改善利培酮所致的高催乳素血症,但也可能会引起脂代谢异常。     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症伴阳性症状的对照研究

目的比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症伴阳性症状的疗效及不良反应。方法对74例符合CCMD-3精神分裂症诊断标准的患者，随机分为奥氮平组(n=36)及利培酮组(n=38)进行治疗，分别在治疗前及治疗后第1、2、4、6及8周采用简明精神病量表(BPRS)，阳性症状量表(SAPS)及不良反应量表(TESS)评定其疗效及药物不良反应。结果奥氮平和利培酮治疗精神分裂症伴阳性症状的疗效相当，均对阳性症状有效，但奥氮平对焦虑抑郁、缺乏活动、激越冲动及行为障碍的效果优于利培酮；两药均无严重不良反应，但奥氮平的EPS、泌乳及月经紊乱发生率低于利培酮。结论奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症伴阳性症状均有效，前者不良反应更少、更安全。     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症对照研究

目的:比较奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症的疗效和安全性。方法:将60例精神分裂症随机分两组,分别给予奥氮平与利培酮治疗8周。用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)、治疗中出现的症状量表(TESS)评定疗效及不良反应。结果:奥氮平与利培酮的疗效差异无显著性。奥氮平主要不良反应是嗜睡、体质量增加,利培酮主要是锥外系反应、失眠。结论:奥氮平与利培酮均是治疗精神分裂症安全有效的非典型抗精神病药,可根据患者的情况分别选择。     

抗精神病药对男性精神分裂症患者垂体-性腺轴的影响

目的:研究氯丙嗪、利培酮、奎硫平及奥氮平对男性精神分裂症患者垂体性腺轴的影响。方法:88例首发男性精神分裂症患者随机分为氯丙嗪组、利培酮组、奎硫平组及奥氮平组,检测治疗前、治疗4周及8周血清促卵泡素(FSH)、黄体生成素(LH)、催乳素(PRL)、睾酮(T)的水平变化。结果:氯丙嗪组治疗8周后,血清PRL水平显著高于治疗前。利培酮组在治疗4周及8周后PRL水平均显著高于治疗前,治疗8周后T及LH水平显著低于治疗前。奎硫平组在治疗4周及8周后血清PRL、LH、T水平与治疗前比较差异均无显著性。奥氮平组治疗4周后PRL水平显著高于治疗前,治疗8周后即与治疗前差异无显著性。结论:奎硫平对垂体性腺轴激素水平无明显影响。     

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.     

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine and risperidone in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia: an open study of six months duration

BACKGROUND: Following an earlier study in which elderly patients with schizophrenia had their typical antipsychotic medication changed to olanzapine or risperidone, the 61 patients were followed for up to a further six months to see if either treatment was superior in terms of efficacy or side effects. AIMS: To determine whether either olanzapine or risperidone was superior in terms of efficacy or side effects when treating schizophrenia in late life. METHODS: Psychiatric symptoms, side effects and quality of life were rated every six weeks for 24 weeks of open label comparative treatment using standard measures. Group differences were examined using analysis of covariance and within-group changes over time were assessed using paired t-tests. RESULTS: There were 34 olanzapine and 32 risperidone patients who entered the study, but intention to treat data was only available for 61 of the 66 patients. There were no clinical or demographic differences between the groups. Parkinsonism, positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia improved in both groups both from baseline switch to olanzapine or risperidone and during the six month follow-up after completion of crossover. No significant differences were seen between groups on most measures. However, patients treated with olanzapine showed a significantly greater improvement in quality of life from baseline compared to risperidone patients. CONCLUSIONS: Both drugs were well tolerated and their use was associated with fewer symptoms of schizophrenia and less adverse effects than were seen when the patients were taking a typical antipsychotic at baseline. Olanzapine appears to have particular benefit with regard to quality of life.     

奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症的疗效分析

目的 评价奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症的疗效及安全性。方法 用奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症32例,疗程8周;用简明精神病评定量表(BPRS)和副反应量表(TESS)评定疗效及副反应。结果 完成8周治疗的32例首发精神分裂症患者,显效18例(56.2％)、有效11例(34.4％)、无效3例(9.4％),总有效率为90.6％,副作用轻微,无明显心血管系统不良反应。结论 奥氮平治疗首发精神分裂症安全有效。     

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.     

奥氮平与利培酮治疗精神分裂症首次发病患者的疗效

目的:探讨奥氮平与利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症的疗效以及对生活质量的影响。方法:68例首发精神分裂症患者随机分为奥氮平组和利培酮组各34例,分别给予奥氮平和利培酮治疗8周,随访6个月。于治疗前后采用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)及治疗中出现的症状量表(TESS)评定疗效及不良反应;于治疗6个月前后,采用生活质量综合评定问卷(GQOLI)评定生活质量。结果:两组PANSS评分治疗后均有显著下降(P<0.05或P<0.01)。奥氮平组GQOLI总分及各维度与利培酮组GQOLI总分及躯体功能、心理功能维度治疗前后差异均有统计学意义(P均<0.01);两组间比较,治疗前两组GQOLI评分差异无统计学意义,6个月后随访,在躯体功能及社会功能差异有统计学意义(P均<0.01)。结论:奥氮平与利培酮治疗首发精神分裂症疗效相当,但奥氮平在提高生活质量方面略优于利培酮。     

Gender-specific prolactin response to antipsychotic treatments with risperidone and olanzapine and its relationship to drug concentrations in patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia

Hyperprolactinemia is a frequent consequence of treatment with antipsychotic agents, partially because the prolactin response to antipsychotics is related to dopamine blockade. Recent studies have suggested that the prolactin response to olanzapine is weaker than that to risperidone. Thus, we studied the effects of various factors on the elevated plasma prolactin levels caused by these medications. The subjects were 94 patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia (46 males, 48 females). For four weeks, they received 6 mg of risperidone and 20 mg of olanzapine daily. Plasma samples were collected before the medications were given and 12 h after the bedtime dosing each week. Treatment with either risperidone or olanzapine boosted plasma prolactin levels above baseline in both males and females. Prolactin levels were significantly higher in females than in males at all sampling points in both treatments. Risperidone increased prolactin significantly more than did olanzapine in both males and females. Delta prolactin (prolactin level at four weeks minus the baseline prolactin level) during olanzapine treatment significantly correlated with olanzapine concentration at 4th week (r = − 0.518, p < 0.01) only in males. Multiple regression analyses showed that delta prolactin during risperidone was significantly correlated with gender (p < 0.001) and age (p < 0.05) and that delta prolactin during olanzapine significantly correlated with gender (p < 0.001) and drug concentration (p < 0.01). The present study suggests that the predominant factors influencing hyperprolactinemia are young female for risperidone treatment, and being female and lower drug concentration as a predictor for hyperprolactinemia under 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 study of hyperprolactinemia in children and adolescents treated with atypical antipsychotic agents

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have prospectively compared the change of prolactin levels in children and adolescents associated with the use of atypical antipsychotic agents. In our study, we present preliminary data of an ongoing study, which compares changes in prolactin levels in children and adolescents after treatment to risperidone versus olanzapine versus quetiapine. We hypothesized: (1) risperidone would be associated with hyperprolactinemia most frequently, and (2) postpubertal females may be at higher risk of prolactin elevation and associated adverse effects. METHODS: Prolactin levels were obtained at baseline and after a mean of 11.2 weeks (SD = 2.2; range, 4-15 weeks) from 40 subjects (mean age, 13.4 years; SD = 3.4; range, 5-18 years) who were started on risperidone (n = 21), olanzapine (n = 13), or quetiapine (n = 6). End-point prolactin levels were compared using a Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: End-point prolactin levels were significantly higher with risperidone, compared to olanzapine (p = 0.027) or quetiapine (p = 0.008). With the Bonferroni correction, the latter remains significant. Twenty-five percent of our subjects experienced sexual side effects at end point, independent of prolactin levels and antipsychotic agents. CONCLUSION: Risperidone significantly increased prolactin levels in children and adolescents. The duration of this prolactin elevation, and its long-term effects in children and adolescents, are unknown.