Schizophrenia: when clozapine fails.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the recent evidence for therapeutic strategies for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) not responding to or only partially responding to clozapine. RECENT FINDINGS: A number of pharmacological and nonpharmacological biological approaches for clozapine-resistant TRS have been evaluated in clinical trials. Among these, the evidence supporting clozapine augmentation by pharmacological approaches is weak and the reported benefits were modest at best. However, the results of a recent randomized trial suggest that electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) may be efficacious for the short-term treatment of patients with clozapine-resistant TRS. SUMMARY: There is currently insufficient evidence for efficacy of pharmacological augmentation strategies to clozapine. ECT may be a promising option, but further research is necessary to confirm its long-term effects. Moreover, further controlled studies are warranted to clarify the potential of other biological and psychosocial approaches to serve as adjuvant treatments in patients with clozapine-resistant TRS.

A naturalistic comparison of the long-term metabolic adverse effects of clozapine versus other antipsychotics for patients with psychotic illnesses.

OBJECTIVE: Clozapine, an evidence-based treatment of refractory schizophrenia, is associated with increased weight gain and metabolic dysregulation compared with most antipsychotics in short-term clinical trials. However, there are limited data describing comparative long-term metabolic risks. In this report, we examined whether short-term differences persist with long-term exposure to clozapine. METHODS: The data of all patients in a university-based clinic with a psychotic illness or a mood disorder with psychotic features, based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision diagnosis, and treated with an antipsychotic in calendar year 2012 were examined. A total of 307 patients met the criteria; 96 patients were treated with clozapine and the remaining 211 patients were treated with 1 or more non-clozapine antipsychotics. Body mass index, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity were compared. RESULTS: The mean duration of the clozapine treatment was 7.6 years (range, 2 months to 21 y). On all metabolic measures, there were no statistically significant differences between the clozapine and non-clozapine groups (mean body mass index, 31 vs 32; type 2 diabetes, 17% vs 18%; dyslipidemia, 35% vs 38%; hypertension, 32% vs 39%; and obesity, 48% vs 54%). Removing the olanzapine-treated patients (n = 51) from the non-clozapine group did not change the findings. CONCLUSIONS: In this university-based clinic sample with a large number of clozapine-treated patients, we found no evidence of increased risk in any individual measure for those receiving clozapine. Although speculative, the relative contribution of the increased short-term metabolic risk associated with clozapine may be diminished over time because multiple other variables likely also impact metabolic risk during the life span. Although speculative, the relative contribution of the increased short-term metabolic risk associated with clozapine may be diminished over time due to the accumulated impact of other variables that also impact metabolic risk across the life span.

Intranasal oxytocin blocks alcohol withdrawal in human subjects.

BACKGROUND: The neuropeptide, oxytocin (OT), has been reported to block tolerance formation to alcohol and decrease withdrawal symptoms in alcohol-dependent rodents. Numerous recent studies in human subjects indicate that OT administered by the intranasal route penetrates into and exerts effects within the brain. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind clinical trial, intranasal OT (24 IU/dose, N = 7) or placebo (N = 4) was given twice daily for 3 days in alcohol-dependent subjects admitted to a research unit for medical detoxification using Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol (CIWA) score-driven PRN administration of lorazepam. Subjects rated themselves on the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist (AWSC) each time CIWA scores were obtained. Subjects also completed the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale, an Alcohol Craving Visual Analog Scale (ACVAS) and the Profile of Mood States (POMS) on inpatient days 2 and 3. RESULTS: All subjects had drunk heavily each day for at least 2 weeks prior to study and had previously experienced withdrawal upon stopping/decreasing alcohol consumption. OT was superior to placebo in reducing alcohol withdrawal as evidenced by: less total lorazepam required to complete detoxification (3.4 mg [4.7, SD] vs. 16.5 [4.4], p = 0.0015), lower mean CIWA scores on admission day 1 (4.3 [2.3] vs. 11.8 [0.4], p < 0.0001) and day 2 (3.4 [2.2] vs. 11.1 [3.6], p < 0.002), lower AWSC scores on days 1 and 2 (p < 0.02; p = 0.07), and lower ACVAS ratings (p = 0.01) and lower POMS Tension/Anxiety subscale scores on day 2 (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first demonstration that OT treatment may block alcohol withdrawal in human subjects. Our results are consistent with previous findings in rodents that OT inhibits neuroadaptation to and withdrawal from alcohol. OT could have advantages over benzodiazepines in managing alcohol withdrawal because it may reverse rather than maintain sedative-hypnotic tolerance. It will be important to test whether OT treatment is effective in reducing drinking in alcohol-dependent outpatients.