喹硫平、利培酮治疗精神分裂症的1年随访

目的 比较喹硫平与利培酮长期治疗首发精神分裂症患者的疗效及不良反应.方法 研究纳入符合国际疾病分类第十次修订本(ICD-10)精神分裂症或分裂样精神障碍研究用诊断标准的首次发病患者262例,喹硫平组和利培酮组各131例,开放性治疗12个月.疗效评估:以两药的停药率、持续治疗时间为丰要指标,阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)减分及减分率为次要指标,PANSS总分减分率≥50%为显效,25%～50%为有效,＜25%为无效.以副反应量表(TESS)、锥体外系副反应量表(RSESE)、不自主运动量表(AIMS)评估不良反应.结果 ①停药率:喹硫平组33.6%,利培酮组35.2%;持续治疗时间:喹硫平组为(9.49±3.83)个月,利培酮组为(9.52±3.84)个月;复发时间:喹硫平组(3.29±2.34)个月,利培酮组(5.11±2.77)个月;两药的停药率、持续治疗时间、复发时间差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).②治疗第2、6、12个月末时,喹硫平组治疗有效率分别为78.6%(103/131)、86.2%(113/131)、89.3%(117/131),利培酮组有效率为82.4%(108/131)、87.7%(115/131)、85.5%(112/131),二者的总体疗效相当(P＞0.05).③不良反应:利培酮引起的锥体外系不良反应如静坐不能、肌强直、震颤较喹硫平高(X2=14.94,P＜0.05),喹硫平组的头晕和晕厥发生率高丁利培酬组(X2=10.08,P＜0.05).结论 喹硫平和利培酮对首发精神分裂症急性期和长期治疗疗效肯定,两药疗效相当,两药不良反应各有特点但均可耐受.     

喹硫平和利培酮治疗精神分裂症的对照研究

目的以利培酮为对照,探讨喹硫平治疗精神分裂症的疗效和副作用。方法将60例符合CCMD-3诊断标准的精神分裂症病人随机分为两组,分别给予喹硫平和利培酮治疗8周。于治疗前和治疗后1、2、4、8周末采用阳性症状和阴性症状量表(PANSS)评定临床疗效,副反应量表(TESS)评定副反应。结果治疗8周后,两组疗效近似(P>0.05),喹硫平组和利培酮组的显效率差异无显著性(P>0.05);喹硫平组的副反应发生率低于利培酮组,但差异无显著性(P>0.05)。利培酮组锥体外系副反应和内分泌改变的发生均明显高于喹硫平组(P<0.05)。结论喹硫平对精神分裂症患者的疗效与利培酮相当,副作用较小。     

奥氮平和喹硫平对慢性精神分裂症患者认知功能的疗效研究

目的了解奥氮平和喹硫平对慢性精神分裂症患者认知功能的改善情况,并比较二者对患者认知功能的改善程度是否具有差异性。方法87例经典抗精神病药物治疗疗效不显著或不能耐受不良反应的慢性精神分裂症患者随机分配替换为奥氮平及喹硫平治疗,分别在入组前、12周和6个月时进行精神症状的评定,包括PANSS、CGI、HAMD-17量表,以及认知功能的测定,包括言语学习、记忆、注意、执行功能、精神运动。结果78例患者完成12周的治疗（奥氮平=38,喹硫平=40）,65例临床稳定的患者（PANSS量表≤60分或PANSS减分率≥50％）完成6个月的治疗（奥氮平=32,喹硫平=33）。与基线比较,这些患者的精神症状在换药治疗6个月时均得到显著改善,认知功能在12周和6个月时也都得到显著改善。认知功能总体的改善在12周时最显著,6个月时的改善程度与12周时相当。具体分析单个认知功能的改善时发现12周时喹硫平组在言语流畅性、言语记忆、CPT反应时间方面较奥氮平组有显著性差异,而6个月时两者之间无显著差异。患者认知功能的改善和精神症状的改善之间的相关性较小。结论奥氮平和喹硫平均可改善慢性精神分裂症的认知功能,且两者改善的总体程度相当,但在具体的单个认知层面上稍有差异。     

喹硫平合并利培酮治疗难治性精神分裂症

目的探讨喹硫平合并利培酮对难治性精神分裂症的疗效和安全性。方法共68例难治性精神分裂症标准的患者，疗程12周，分别在治疗前及治疗后进行阳性与阴性症状量表（PANSS）和不良反应症状量表（TESS）评定。结果治疗12周后总有效率为76．5％。PANSS阳性、阴性及一般精神病理总分治疗前后均有显著差异（P〈0．01），TESS评分治疗前后无显著性差异（P〉0．05）。结论喹硫平合并利培酮对难治性精神分裂症有较好的临床效果，且安全性较高。     

喹硫平与利培酮治疗儿童青少年精神分裂症的对照研究

目的比较喹硫平与利培酮对儿童青少年早发性精神分裂症的临床疗效、安全性和耐受性。方法对61例发病年龄为10～18岁符合中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准第3版精神分裂症诊断标准的患者,采用喹硫平或利培酮治疗,其中喹硫平治疗者31例,利培酮治疗者30例。以临床疗效总评量表(CGI)、简明精神病评定量表(BPRS)评估有效性,采用副反应量表(TESS)和一些重要生理指标包括血压、体重等评估安全性和耐受性,观察期限为4周。结果喹硫平每日平均治疗剂量为(835±281)mg,平均加药时间为(8.35±5.89)d。利培酮每日平均治疗剂量为(5.83±1.13)mg,平均加药时间为(10.9±3.82)d。治疗4周后同组BPRS评分均明显低于治疗前,组间BPRS减分率差异无统计学意义(t=-0.157,P=0.876);但喹硫平的锥体外系不良反应明显少于利培酮(χ2=4.510,P=0.034)。结论本研究提示两种药物对治疗儿童青少年精神分裂症均有确切疗效,其中喹硫平的锥体外系不良反应更少。     

喹硫平与利培酮治疗老年精神分裂症的对照研究

目的 探讨国产喹硫平治疗老年精神分裂症的疗效和安全性.方法 将64例符合中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准第3版(CCMD-3)的老年精神分裂症患者,随机分成两组,分别给予喹硫平(治疗组,32例)和利培酮(对照组,32例)治疗,疗程8周.采用阳性与阴性综合征量表(PANSS)及副反应量表(TESS)评定疗效和不良反应.结果 喹硫平组显效率65.6%,有效率84.4%,利培酮组分别为68.8%、87.5%.两组间显效率(χ2=0.07,P>0.05)及有效率(χ2=0.13,P>0.05)的差异均无统计学意义.两组治疗后各时点PANSS总分、阳性症状、阴性症状及一般病理症状各项分值均低于治疗前,而治疗后各时点组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).喹硫平组的锥体外系反应和体重增加的发生率分别为6.3%和3.1%,低于利培酮组(分别为25.0 %和18.8 %),两组差异均有统计学意义(χ2=4.27,P<0.05; χ2=4.07,P<0.05).结论 国产喹硫平治疗老年精神分裂症疗效确切,不良反应少,有利于老年患者对治疗的依从性,对老年精神分裂症患者较为适用.     

喹硫平与利培酮治疗老年精神分裂症对照研究

目的探讨喹硫平对老年首发精神分裂症的临床疗效及安全性。方法6例首发老年精神分裂症患者随机分成两组,分别给与喹硫平与利培酮治疗8周,用阳性和阴性症状量表（PANSS）和副反应量表（TESS）评定疗效和不良反应。结果两组疗效相当（P〉0．05）,喹硫平不良反应显著少于利培酮（P〈0．05）。结论喹硫平对老年精神分裂症安全有效。     

利培酮、喹硫平、氯氮平及奥氮平对老年精神分裂症患者的QTc间期延长的影响

目的 研究利培酮、喹硫平、氯氮平及奥氮平对老年精神分裂症患者的心电图校正QT(QTc)间期延长的影响.方法 纳入河南省洛阳荣康医院收治的132例老年精神分裂症患者为研究对象,按照随机数表法分为4组,各33例.分别单一采用利培酮、喹硫平、氯氮平及奥氮平治疗.比较4组患者一般资料,并分析4组治疗前及治疗1、3、6个月时QT...     

奥氮平和奎硫平治疗首发精神分裂症对照研究

目的:比较奥氮平和奎硫平治疗首发精神分裂症的疗效和安全性。方法:将80例符合中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准第3版诊断标准的首发精神分裂症患者,随机平分为奥氮平组和奎硫平组各40例。疗程6周。采用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)、副反应量表(TESS)评定疗效与不良反应。结果:奥氮平组阳性症状评分下降显著大于奎硫平组;两组阴性症状、一般精神病理症状和PANSS总分下降差异无显著性(P>0.05)。奥氮平组主要不良反应为体质量(体重)增加、肝功能损害和锥体外系症状;奎硫平组主要不良反应为嗜睡和头昏。结论:奥氮平对精神分裂症阳性症状的疗效优于奎硫平,两药不良反应均相对较轻。     

利培酮和喹硫平对女性精神分裂症患者催乳素影响的两年随访研究

目的 探讨长期使用利培酮对女性精神分裂症患者的催乳素水平的影响.方法 120例女性精神分裂症患者被随机分为利培酮组和喹硫平组进行2年的随访研究.于治疗前,治疗后2月、12月及24月分别测其催乳素水平进行比较.血清催乳素浓度使用放免法进行测定.结果 喹硫平组与治疗前相比差异无显著性而利培酮组与治疗前相比明显增加,差异有显著性,但随疗程的增加差异逐渐缩小,两组间治疗各时点PRL浓度比较有显著性差异;利培酮组治疗前与治疗后的PRL差值与BPRS减分率显示无相关性.患者PRL水平与利培酮及喹硫平剂量无明显相关性.结论 利培酮治疗女性精神分裂症患者初期血清催乳素水平显著升高,但随着治疗时间的延长,血清PRL水平会逐步降低;PRL水平的变化与疗效及利培酮的剂量无相关性.     

奎硫平与利培酮治疗慢性精神分裂症研究

目的：比较奎硫平与利培酮对慢性精神分裂症的疗效和安全性。方法：将70例慢性精神分裂症患者随机分为两组,分别选用奎硫平或利培酮治疗,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）评定疗效和不良反应。结果：2药对慢性精神分裂症的疗效相当,不良反应发生率及严重程度均相仿。结论：奎硫平与利培酮治疗慢性精神分裂症均有肯定的疗效,且安全性高。     

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。     

Comparing efficacy of first-line atypical antipsychotics: no evidence of differential efficacy between risperidone,olanzapine, quetiapine,ziprasidone, and aripiprazole

Objective

To evaluate the comparative efficacy of the first-line atypical antipsychotics risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole.

Methods

We reviewed published short-term, randomised, controlled clinical trials of first-line atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder that used the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale to assess efficacy. We used a combined overview analysis to compare the extent of improvement in global symptoms and positive and negative symptoms. We did not analyse adverse event data.

Results

Although we found considerable variation in the degree of improvement with a particular atypical antipsychotic across different studies, the range and average improvement were similar among all first-line atypicals for all efficacy parameters considered. Dosage was a critical determinant of efficacy, although the most effective dose of each agent varied across studies. There were insufficient data for ziprasidone and aripiprazole to allow their inclusion in the formal overview comparison.

Conclusion

Despite confounding and methodological limitations, the data we reviewed do not support assertions of differential efficacy between the first-line atypical antipsychotics. Additional controlled comparative studies of the atypical antipsychotics should be of particular interest.     

国产奥氮平与利培酮治疗伴激越的精神分裂症的对照研究

目的:观察国产奥氮平与利培酮治疗伴兴奋激越症状精神分裂症患者的疗效及安全性.方法:对63例首发或复发伴兴奋激越症状精神分裂症患者分为两组.奥氮平组31例,利培酮组32例,分别予国产奥氮平与利培酮治疗8周,并用阳性与阴性症状量表(PANSS)及治疗中出现的症状量表(TESS),及PANSS-兴奋激越5项目(PANSS-E...     

Comparative effects of risperidone and olanzapine on cognition in elderly patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of risperidone and olanzapine on cognitive functioning in elderly patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: One hundred seventy-six elderly inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were enrolled in this multicenter, double-blind trial. After their antipsychotic medications were tapered for 1 week, patients were randomly assigned to receive either risperidone 1 to 3 mg/day or olanzapine 5 to 20 mg/day for 8 weeks. Performance on the Continuous Performance Test (CPT), Serial Verbal Learning Test (SVLT), TMT (Trail Making Test) Parts A and B, Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), and Verbal Fluency Examinations (VFE) was assessed at baseline and at end point. RESULTS: Patients in the risperidone group had improved scores on at least one test of attention, memory, executive function, and verbal fluency, and those in the olanzapine group had improved scores on at least one test of attention and memory function. Scores on the TMT Part B, WCST total errors (executive function domain), and the VFE improved significantly from baseline in the risperidone group but not in the olanzapine group. No significant differences in change scores between the two groups were found. Higher baseline scores on each test predicted more improvement at endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Low doses of risperidone and olanzapine improve cognitive function in elderly patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Consistent with research in younger populations, these improvements occur in aspects of cognitive functioning related to functional outcome.     

Improved outcomes following a switch to olanzapine treatment from risperidone treatment in a 1-year naturalistic study of schizophrenia patients in Japan

Aims: This study assessed clinical and functional outcomes following a switch from risperidone to olanzapine in a 1‐year naturalistic study of schizophrenia patients in Japan. Methods: We used data from a large 1‐year prospective, multicenter, observational non‐interventional study of individuals who were initiated on olanzapine for the treatment of schizophrenia in Japan. Current analyses focused on patients who were switched at study entry from risperidone to olanzapine (n = 258). Repeated measures analysis was employed to assess outcomes on validated measures. Results: At study entry, 45% were inpatients and 55% outpatients. Participants were in their early 40s with mean illness duration of 14 years. Approximately half were male. Most were switched from risperidone to olanzapine due to poor medication efficacy (67.8%) rather than medication intolerability (29.1%). Most patients (67.8%) completed the 1‐year study. Patients experienced clinically and statistically significant (P < 0.05) improvements in global symptom severity, positive, negative, depressive, and cognitive symptoms, health‐related quality of life, and paid work rates. Most patients (59.2%) demonstrated treatment response to olanzapine and 43.4% experienced symptom remission. Mean weight gain was 2.19 kg, with one‐third of patients (33.3%) experiencing clinically significant weight gain (≥7%). Conclusions: In this 1‐year naturalistic study, inpatients and outpatients who were switched from risperidone to olanzapine experienced clinically and statistically significant improvements in their clinical and functional outcomes. One‐third of all patients experienced clinically significant weight gain. Current findings highlight the favorable benefit‐to‐risk profile of switching to olanzapine therapy following treatment failure on risperidone among patients with schizophrenia in Japan.     

Risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine in the treatment of behavioral and psychological symptoms in patients with Alzheimer's disease: preliminary findings from a naturalistic, retrospective study

The objectives of this retrospective, naturalistic study were to provide preliminary data on the effects of 6 months treatment with risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine on behavioral disturbances, within a sample of outpatients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease, and on predictors of response. Between July 2005 and December 2005, data were collected from 58 consecutive outpatients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease with behavioral disturbances, who received a 6-month treatment with risperidone, olanzapine or quetiapine. Primary outcome measures were Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) total score and its items forming the basic core of behavioral disturbances in Alzheimer's disease: delusions, hallucinations and agitation/aggressiveness. Secondary outcome measures were Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Activities of Daily Living, Instrumental Activities of Daily Living and Clinical Insight Rating scale. Correlations between baseline MMSE score and improvements in behavioral disturbances were investigated. At 6 months mean NPI total score had fallen 43.5% in the risperidone group, 45.6% in the olanzapine group and 33.3% in the quetiapine group, with no significant between-group differences. Global cognitive function showed no significant change from baseline to end-point. Incidence of adverse events was low. A significant correlation was found between MMSE score and NPI total score and NPI item agitation decreases. Risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine produced significant improvements in behavioral disturbances and were well tolerated. No significant differences emerged among treatments. The preliminary results also suggest that baseline cognitive function might influence treatment response.     

奎硫平治疗精神分裂症疗效有关因素分析

目的：分析影响奎硫平治疗精神分裂症疗效的有关因素。方法：对50例住院经奎硫平治疗〉8周的精神分裂症患者作回顾性分析。结果：经过单因素回归分析发现年龄大、病程长、有家族史、病情反复发作及以阴性症状为主等因素均影响奎硫平的疗效,最后得到包括有家族史、反复发作和阴性症状为主的主效应方程,回顾性评判正确率达到86％。结论：患者的年龄偏大、病程长、病情反复发作和以阴性症状为主等因素均会影响奎硫平的疗效。     

The impact upon extra-pyramidal side effects,clinical symptoms and quality of life of a switch from conventional to atypical antipsychotics (risperidone or olanzapine) in elderly patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics are commonly used in the management of schizophrenia in late life with evidence suggesting they induce lower rates of motor disturbance, but have similar efficacy to conventional antipsychotics. Trials in the elderly have been either retrospective, small, of short duration or of a single-arm design. AIMS: To demonstrate the effects upon motor side-effects, efficacy, safety and quality of life (QOL) of switching elderly patients with schizophrenia from conventional antipsychotics to olanzapine or risperidone. METHODS: Elderly patients with schizophrenia were randomly allocated to olanzapine or risperidone and followed through an open-label crossover period. Between and within group intention to treat analyses were conducted. RESULTS: 66 patients were randomised (mean age 69.6 [SD +/- 6.2]). Four (11.8%) patients on olanzapine and 8 (26.7%) patients on risperidone failed to complete the crossover because of treatment failure [Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.73[0.73-10.2] p = 0.14]. The mean doses upon completion of switching in each arm were 9.9 mg (SD = 4.2) and 1.7 mg (SD = 1.2) for olanzapine and risperidone respectively. In both arms there was improvement in Parkinsonism, though only olanzapine was associated with a reduction in dyskinetic symptoms. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Scale for the assessment of Negative Symptoms and Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores all improved through the crossover period in both arms with no between group differences. Treatment with olanzapine was associated with a better response over risperidone on the psychological domain of the World Health Organisation-Quality Of Life [Brief] (WHO-QOL-BREF) scale ( p = 0.02). Patients in the olanzapine arm also demonstrated improvement from baseline in the WHO-QOL-BREF physical, psychological and health satisfaction domains, but risperidone had no effect on any Quality of Life (QOL) measure. CONCLUSIONS: After switching from a conventional antipsychotic, olanzapine and risperidone were associated with improvement in core symptoms of schizophrenia and motor side effects. Subjects switched to olanzapine were more likely to complete the switching process and show an improvement in psychological QOL.     

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor serum and plasma levels in the treatment of acute schizophrenia with olanzapine or risperidone: 6-week prospective study

Antipsychotics have been the mainstay of the treatment of schizophrenia, and their potential role in neuroprotection could be related to brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF). So far different effects on both serum and plasma levels of BDNF were reported related to the various antipsychotic treatments. Aim of this study was to investigate the influence of olanzapine or risperidone on both plasma and serum levels of BDNF in patients with acute schizophrenia. For 50 participants with acute episode of schizophrenia both plasma and serum BDNF, along with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Clinical Global Impression scale, were assessed pretreatment and post treatment – after 6 weeks of either risperidone or olanzapine. Results show that a weak correlation between pretreatment plasma and serum levels of BNDF was found no longer significant after 6 weeks of treatment. Antipsychotics, olanzapine and risperidone showed no significant effect on post treatment plasma and serum levels of BDNF. Pretreatment plasma level of BDNF and PANSS positive subscale were positively correlated. Post treatment serum level of BDNF and Clinical Global Impression were negatively correlated. In conclusion, plasma and serum BDNF levels could be different markers to some extent with regard to clinical symptoms, response to therapy and outcome. The interrelation between serum and plasma BDNF should be established in further studies.