Informe rápido de evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias: ¿Deberia usarse Zuclopenthixol vs. Haloperidol para el tratamiento de la psicosis aguda? / Quick report on evaluation of sanitary technologies: ¿Deberia use Zuclopenthixol vs. Haloperidol for the treatment of acute psychosis?

INTRODUCCIÓN Importancia del problema (Conocimiento de base mas epidemiologia o datos locales). Descripcion de la intervención/ Tecnología evaluada: Zuclopenthixol inyectable. Porque podría funcionar esta intervencion. BÚSQUEDA: Se realizó una búsqueda en Pubmed y en Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Trials Register (ultima búsqueda 25 de Septiembre 2019). No hubo restricción de lenguaje, fecha, tipo de documento o publicación. Se realizó además una búsqueda en el repositorio de revisiones sistemáticas Epistemonikos y en Cochrane Library y en Pubmed. RESULTADOS: Un estudio multicêntrico realizado por Heikkila 1981a incluido en el perfil de evidencia sobre eficacia y seguridad de zuclopenthixol comparado con placebo (Tabla 1) realizado en Finlandia incluyo 63 pacientes con chronic schizophrenia (n = 58) u otros trastornos psicoticos (n = 5, paranoic state, depressive/PD) con una duracion de la enfermedad > 10 años n: 40 y n:11 com una duracion de la enfermedad > cinco años en el context de pacientes hospitalizados randomizados a recibir 1. Cis(Z)-zuclopenthixol: dose 40 mg/day. N = 30 o bien 2. Haloperidol: dose 10 mg/day. N = 33. Se evaluaron los desenlaces incluidos en el perfil de evidencia entre ellos incluidos el estado mental global (continuo o dicotomico (desenlace critico) y eventos adversos (desenlaces importantes) que incluyeron movimientos anormales, akatisia y uso de medicacion de rescate. Existe incertidumbre sobre el efecto del zuclopenthixol frente a haloperidol en los scores globales de estado mental, el zuclopenthixol no podria no asociarse con eventos adversos evaluados. Estos resultados estan basados en una muy baja certeza de la evidencia por alto riesgo de sesgo (attrition bias, datos de resultados incomplete, sesgo de seleccion de Berkson y sesgo diagnostic). CONCLUSIONES: ¿Deberia usarse Zuclopenthixol frente a Haloperidol para el tratamiento de los episódios psicóticos agudos? Certeza de la evidencia: Muy baja.

Off-Label Use of Antipsychotic Agents in Dementia: Evidence for the Revision of the Reimbursement Policy.

BACKGROUND: Harmonized requirements apply for the marketing authorization of medicinal products in the EU Member States. On the contrary, the national legislations on the drug reimbursement are not harmonized. The aim of this study was to find out if they are robust enough to ensure high standards of public health protection with focus on the symptomatic treatment of dementia in the elderly. METHODS: A computerized search of authorized therapeutic indications of haloperidol and trihexyphenidyl in the national databases of 8 EU member states and an analysis of the national legislation on reimbursement policies in Lithuania and Latvia was performed. RESULTS: There is a discrepancy in the decisions on the marketing authorization vs the reimbursement in Lithuania and Latvia (reimbursement of haloperidol and trihexyphenidyl for the off-label treatment of dementia). CONCLUSIONS: National legislation on the drug reimbursement in Lithuania and Latvia does not provide safeguards for public health at the same level as the marketing authorization does. Absence of a revision of former decisions in the light of new evidence is a critical weakness of the drug reimbursement in Lithuania and Latvia. Reimbursement for the off-label indications may pose a risk to public health.

Antipsychotics for treatment of delirium in hospitalised non-ICU patients.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest limited and cautious use of antipsychotics for treatment of delirium where nonpharmacological interventions have failed and symptoms remain distressing or dangerous, or both. It is unclear how well these recommendations are supported by current evidence. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to assess the efficacy of antipsychotics versus nonantipsychotics or placebo on the duration of delirium in hospitalised adults. Our secondary objectives were to compare the efficacy of: 1) antipsychotics versus nonantipsychotics or placebo on delirium severity and resolution, mortality, hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, health-related quality of life, and adverse effects; and 2) atypical vs. typical antipsychotics for reducing delirium duration, severity, and resolution, hospital mortality and length of stay, discharge disposition, health-related quality of life, and adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane EBM Reviews, CINAHL, Thomson Reuters Web of Science and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) from their respective inception dates until July 2017. We also searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Health Technology Assessment Database, Web of Science ISI Proceedings, and other grey literature. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing 1) antipsychotics to nonantipsychotics or placebo and 2) typical to atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of delirium in adult hospitalised (but not critically ill) patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We examined titles and abstracts of identified studies to determine eligibility. We extracted data independently in duplicate. Disagreements were settled by further discussion and consensus. We used risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as a measure of treatment effect for dichotomous outcomes, and between-group standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CI for continuous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included nine trials that recruited 727 participants. Four of the nine trials included a comparison of an antipsychotic to a nonantipsychotic drug or placebo and seven included a comparison of a typical to an atypical antipsychotic. The study populations included hospitalised medical, surgical, and palliative patients.No trial reported on duration of delirium. Antipsychotic treatment did not reduce delirium severity compared to nonantipsychotic drugs (standard mean difference (SMD) -1.08, 95% CI -2.55 to 0.39; four studies; 494 participants; very low-quality evidence); nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (SMD -0.17, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.02; seven studies; 542 participants; low-quality evidence). There was no evidence antipsychotics resolved delirium symptoms compared to nonantipsychotic drug regimens (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.98; three studies; 247 participants; very low-quality evidence); nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.52; five studies; 349 participants; low-quality evidence). The pooled results indicated that antipsychotics did not alter mortality compared to nonantipsychotic regimens (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.27; three studies; 319 participants; low-quality evidence) nor was there a difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.82 to 3.35; four studies; 342 participants; low-quality evidence).No trial reported on hospital length of stay, hospital discharge disposition, or health-related quality of life. Adverse event reporting was limited and measured with inconsistent methods; in those reporting events, the number of events were low. No trial reported on physical restraint use, long-term cognitive outcomes, cerebrovascular events, or QTc prolongation (i.e. increased time in the heart's electrical cycle). Only one trial reported on arrhythmias and seizures, with no difference between typical or atypical antipsychotics. We found antipsychotics did not have a higher risk of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) compared to nonantipsychotic drugs (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.04 to 65.57; three studies; 247 participants; very-low quality evidence); pooled results showed no increased risk of EPS with typical antipsychotics compared to atypical antipsychotics (RR 12.16, 95% CI 0.55 to 269.52; two studies; 198 participants; very low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There were no reported data to determine whether antipsychotics altered the duration of delirium, length of hospital stay, discharge disposition, or health-related quality of life as studies did not report on these outcomes. From the poor quality data available, we found antipsychotics did not reduce delirium severity, resolve symptoms, or alter mortality. Adverse effects were poorly or rarely reported in the trials. Extrapyramidal symptoms were not more frequent with antipsychotics compared to nonantipsychotic drug regimens, and no different for typical compared to atypical antipsychotics.

Cost-effectiveness of 3-month paliperidone therapy for chronic schizophrenia in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: A new depot formulation of paliperidone has been developed that provides effective treatment for schizophrenia for 3 months (PP3M). It has been tested in phase-3 trials, but no data on its cost-effectiveness have been published. PURPOSE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of PP3M compared with once-monthly paliperidone (PP1M), haloperidol long-acting therapy (HAL-LAT), risperidone microspheres (RIS-LAT), and oral olanzapine (oral-OLZ) for treating chronic schizophrenia in The Netherlands. METHODS: A previous 1-year decision tree was adapted, based on local inputs supplemented with data from published literature. The primary analysis used DRG costs in 2016 euros from the insurer perspective, as derived from official lists. A micro-costing analysis was also conducted. For the costing scenario, official list prices were used. Clinical outcomes included relapses (treated as outpatients, requiring hospitalization, total), and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Rates and utility scores were derived from the literature. Economic outcomes were the incremental cost/QALY-gained or relapse-avoided. Model robustness was examined in scenario, 1-way, and probability sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The expected cost was lowest with PP3M (8,781€), followed by PP1M (10,325€), HAL-LAT (11,278€), RIS-LAT (11,307€), and oral-OLZ (13,556€). PP3M had the fewest total relapses/patient (0.36, 0.94, 1.39, 1.21, and 1.70, respectively), hospitalizations (0.11, 0.46, 0.40, 0.56, and 0.57, respectively), emergency room visits (0.25, 0.48. 0.99, 0.65, and 1.14, respectively) and the most QALYs (0.847, 0.735, 0.709, 0.719, and 0.656, respectively). In both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses, PP3M dominated all other drugs. Sensitivity analyses confirmed base case findings. In the costing analysis, total costs were, on average, 31.9% higher than DRGs. CONCLUSIONS: PP3M dominated all commonly used drugs. It is cost-effective for treating chronic schizophrenia in the Netherlands. Results were robust over a wide range of sensitivity analyses. For patients requiring a depot medication, such as those with adherence problems, PP3M appears to be a good alternative anti-psychotic treatment.

Assessing a surrogate predictive value: a causal inference approach.

Several methods have been developed for the evaluation of surrogate endpoints within the causal-inference and meta-analytic paradigms. In both paradigms, much effort has been made to assess the capacity of the surrogate to predict the causal treatment effect on the true endpoint. In the present work, the so-called surrogate predictive function (SPF) is introduced for that purpose, using potential outcomes. The relationship between the SPF and the individual causal association, a new metric of surrogacy recently proposed in the literature, is studied in detail. It is shown that the SPF, in conjunction with the individual causal association, can offer an appealing quantification of the surrogate predictive value. However, neither the distribution of the potential outcomes nor the SPF are identifiable from the data. These identifiability issues are tackled using a two-step procedure. In the first step, the region of the parametric space of the distribution of the potential outcomes, compatible with the data at hand, is geometrically characterized. Further, in a second step, a Monte Carlo approach is used to study the behavior of the SPF on the previous region. The method is illustrated using data from a clinical trial involving schizophrenic patients and a newly developed and user friendly R package Surrogate is provided to carry out the validation exercise. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Análisis de costo-efectividad de ondansetrón, alizaprida, domperidona, granisetrón, aprepitant, propofol, dexametasona, dimenhidrinato, metoclopramida y haloperidol para la profilaxis y/o tratamiento de pacientes con náusea y vómito en Colombia / Cost-effectiveness analysis of ondansetron, alizapride, domperidone, granisetron, aprepitant, propofol, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, metoclopramide, and haloperidol for the prophylaxis and/or treatment of patients with nausea and vomiting in Colombia

INTRODUCCIÓN: El análisis de costo-efectividad de ondansetrón, alizaprida, domperidona, granisetrón, aprepitant, propofol, dexametasona, dimenhidrinato, metoclopramida y haloperidol para la profilaxis y/o tratamiento de pacientes con náusea y vómito en Colombia, se desarrolla en el marco del mecanismo técnico-científico para la ampliación progresiva del plan de beneficios y la definición de la lista de exclusiones, establecido en el artículo 15 de la Ley 1751 de 2015. Estas tecnologías fueron seleccionadas por la Dirección de Beneficios, Costos y Tarifas del Aseguramiento en Salud del Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social (MSPS), y remitidas al Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) para su evaluación. La náusea es una sensación desagradable, de asco intenso a los alimentos, o de vómito inminente, y está asociada a la disminución de la actividad motora gástrica, el incremento del tono de la pared duodenal y reflujo de su contenido al estómago, lo que causa su distensión. Ésta, se acompaña de manifestaciones del sistema nervioso autónomo como hiper-salivación, palidez, sudación, taquicardia y taquipnea El vómito, por su parte, es la expulsión fo

[Cost-effectiveness of Antipsychotics in the Maintenance Treatment of Schizophrenia in Colombia]. / Costo efectividad de los antipsicóticos en el tratamiento de mantenimiento de la esquizofrenia en Colombia.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the cost-effectiveness of the antipsychotics for treatment of schizophrenia. METHODS: A five-year Markov model was built form patients with schizophrenia on the stage of maintenance. Costs were taken from the perspective of the Colombian health care system (Sistema General de Seguridad Social en Salud). The effectiveness was measured in years of life under the same maintenance plan. RESULTS: The Markov model indicated clozapine as the as the most cost-effective alternative between the first line antipsychotics and haloperidol is it when comparing other antipsychotics. CONCLUSION: Clozapine it's the cost-effectiveness strategy among the first line of antipsychotics and haloperidol is it among the other antipsychotics. Strategies prioritizing the use of cost-effective antipsychotics could improve the resources allocation in the Colombian health care system.

Economic analysis of paliperidone long-acting injectable for chronic schizophrenia in Portugal.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with chronic schizophrenia suffer a huge burden, as do their families/caregivers. Treating schizophrenia is costly for health systems. The European Medicines Agency has approved paliperidone palmitate (PP-LAI; Xeplion), an atypical antipsychotic depot; however, its pharmacoeconomic profile in Portugal is unknown. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the viewpoint of the Portuguese National Health Service. METHODS: PP-LAI was compared with long acting injectables risperidone (RIS-LAI) and haloperidol (HAL-LAI) and oral drugs (olanzapine; oral-OLZ) adapting a 1-year decision tree to Portugal, guided by local experts. Clinical information and costs were obtained from literature sources and published lists. Outcomes included relapses (both requiring and not requiring hospitalization) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were expressed in 2014 euros. Economic outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs); including cost-utility (outcome = QALYs) and cost-effectiveness analyses (outcomes = relapse/hospitalization/emergency room (ER) visit avoided). RESULTS: The base-case cost of oral-OLZ was 4447€ (20% drugs/20% medical/60% hospital); HAL-LAI cost 4474€ (13% drugs/13% medical/74% hospital); PP-LAI cost 5326€ (49% drugs/12% medical/39% hospital); RIS-LAI cost 6223€ (44% drugs/12% medical/44% hospital). Respective QALYs/hospitalizations/ER visits were oral-OLZ: 0.761/0.615/0.242; HAL-LAI: 0.758/0.623/0.250; PP-LAI: 0.823/0.288/0.122; RIS-LAI: 0.799/0.394/0.168. HAL-LAI was dominated by oral-OLZ and RIS-LAI by PP-LAI for all outcomes. The ICER of PP-LAI over oral-OLZ was 14,247€/QALY, well below NICE/Portuguese thresholds (≈24,800€/30,000€/QALY). ICERs were 1973€/relapse avoided and 2697€/hospitalization avoided. Analyses were robust against most variations in input values, as PP-LAI was cost-effective over oral-OLZ in >99% of 10,000 simulations. CONCLUSION: In Portugal, PP-LAI dominated HAL-LAI and RIS-LAI and was cost-effective over oral-OLZ with respect to QALYs gained, relapses avoided, and hospitalizations avoided.

Dexmedetomidine for the Treatment of Hyperactive Delirium Refractory to Haloperidol in Nonintubated ICU Patients: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness, safety, and cost of dexmedetomidine for the treatment of agitated delirium refractory to haloperidol in nonintubated critically ill patients. DESIGN: Nonrandomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Intensive care department of a tertiary care nonprofit hospital. PATIENTS: All consecutive admissions to a medical-surgical ICU with a diagnosis of agitated delirium. INTERVENTIONS: Initial haloperidol titration: all patients received IV bolus doses of haloperidol until agitation was controlled (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale scoring range, 0 to -2) or reaching the maximum daily dose. Group comparison: patient responders to haloperidol (control group) were compared with nonresponders (dexmedetomidine group). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 132 nonintubated patients were treated with haloperidol in the initial haloperidol titration phase. Forty-six patients (34.8%; 95% CI, 26.0-43.1%) did not respond to haloperidol, and 86 patients (65.2%; 95% CI, 56.3-73.0%) were responders. During the group comparison phase, dexmedetomidine achieved a higher percentage of time in satisfactory sedation levels than did haloperidol (92.7% [95% CI, 84.5-99.8%] vs 59.3% [95% CI, 48.6-69.3%], respectively; p = 0.0001). Haloperidol was associated with 10 cases (11.6% [95% CI, 6.5-21.2%]) of oversedation and two (2.0% [0.4-8%]) of corrected QT lengthening. Direct cost of dexmedetomidine was 17 times greater than haloperidol, but it achieved a mean savings of $4,370 per patient due to the reduction in length of ICU stay. CONCLUSIONS: In the study conditions, dexmedetomidine shows to be useful as a rescue drug for treating agitation due to delirium in nonintubated patients in whom haloperidol has failed, and it seems to have a better effectiveness, safety, and cost-benefit profile than does haloperidol.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Antipsychotics for Treatment of Schizophrenia in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: Reductions in prices following the expiry of patents on second-generation antipsychotics means that they could be made available to patients with schizophrenia in low-income countries. In this study we examine the cost effectiveness of antipsychotics for schizophrenia in Uganda. METHODS: We developed a decision-analytic 10-state Markov model to represent the clinical and treatment course of schizophrenia and the experience of the average patient within the Uganda healthcare system. The model was run for a base population of 25-years-old patients attending Butabika National Referral Mental Hospital, in annual cycles over a lifetime horizon. Parameters were derived from a primary chart abstraction study, a local community pharmacy survey, published literature, and expert opinion where necessary. We computed mean disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) and costs (in US$ 2012) for each antipsychotic, incremental cost, and DALYs averted as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: In the base-case analysis, mean DALYs were highest with chlorpromazine (27.608), followed by haloperidol (27.563), while olanzapine (27.552) and risperidone had the lowest DALYs (27.557). Expected costs were highest with quetiapine (US$4943), and lowest with risperidone (US$4424). Compared to chlorpromazine, haloperidol was a dominant option (i.e. it was less costly and more effective); and risperidone was dominant over both haloperidol and quetiapine. The ICER comparing olanzapine to risperidone was US$5868 per DALY averted. CONCLUSION: When choosing between first-generation antipsychotics, clinicians should consider haloperidol as the first-line agent for schizophrenia. However, overall, risperidone is a cost-saving strategy; policymakers should consider its addition to essential medicines lists for treatment of schizophrenia in Uganda.

[Emergency psychopharmacotherapy in Hungary -- preliminary data]. / Sürgosségi pszichofarmakoterápia Magyarországon -- elozetes adatok.

OBJECTIVES: Although the number of patients admitted for psychiatric emergency care is increasing according to data from various countries, there are no large-scale studies assessing clinical emergency practice and in several countries no national guidelines have been published concerning emergency care in psychiatry. The aim of our study was to assess practice related to emergency care of agitated-psychotic patients in Hungary. METHODS: Anonymous survey questionnaire with questions related to care of an agitated patient showing psychotic symptoms was dispatched to 210 institutions providing psychiatric care in Hungary in 2013. RESULTS: The overwhelming majority of the 155 participating clinicians would use haloperidol (92.9%) and benzodiazepines (81.3%), 74.8% in a dual combination. 18.7% would apply monotherapy and 5.2% a triple combination of medications. 59.4% would use i.v. and 23.9% i.m. therapy, and 9% would apply the combination of these two. In case of failure of first-line therapy, 76.8% of participants would repeat the previous medication. CONCLUSIONS: The aim of our study was to assess emergency interventions in psychiatry focusing on different psychopharmacological approaches. Our results provide a cross-sectional view on current practice in Hungary, and therefore may contribute to outlining practice-coherent guidelines and also provide the opportunity for a comparison with international trends.

Pharmacoeconomics of depot antipsychotics for treating chronic schizophrenia in Sweden.

AIMS: To determine the cost-effectiveness of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics for chronic schizophrenia in Sweden. METHODS: A 1-year decision tree was developed for Sweden using published data and expert opinion. Five treatment strategies lasting 1 year were compared: paliperidone palmitate (PP-LAI), olanzapine pamoate (OLZ-LAI), risperidone (RIS-LAI), haloperidol decanoate (HAL-LAI) and olanzapine tablets (oral-OLZ). Patients intolerant/failing drugs switched to another depot; subsequent failures received clozapine. Resources and employment time lost (indirect costs) were costed in 2011 Swedish kroner (SEK), from standard government lists. The model calculated the average cost/patient and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), which were combined into incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Multivariate and 1-way sensitivity analyses tested model stability. RESULTS: PP-LAI followed by OLZ-LAI had the lowest cost/patient (189,696 SEK) and highest QALYs (0.817), dominating in the base case. OLZ-LAI followed by PP-LAI cost 229,775 SEK (0.812 QALY), RIS-LAI followed by HAL-LAI cost 221,062 SEK (0.804 QALY), HAL-LAI followed by oral-OLZ cost 243,411 SEK (0.776 QALY), and oral-OLZ followed by HAL-LAI cost 249,422 SEK (0.773 QALY). The greatest proportions of costs (52.5-83.8%) were for institutional care; indirect costs were minor (2.4-3.8%). RESULTS were sensitive to adherence and hospitalization rates, but not drug cost. PP-LAI followed by OLZ-LAI dominated OLZ-LAI followed by PP-LAI in 59.4% of simulations, RIS-LAI followed by HAL-LAI in 65.8%, HAL-LAI followed by oral-OLZ in 94.0% and oral-OLZ followed by HAL-LAI in 95.9%; PP-LAI followed by OLZ-LAI was dominated in 1.1% of the 40,000 iterations. CONCLUSION: PP-LAI followed by OLZ-LAI was cost-effective in Sweden for chronic schizophrenia and cost-saving overall to the healthcare system.

Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling of haloperidol in patients with schizophrenia using positive and negative syndrome rating scale.

The aim of this study was to develop a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) model that quantifies the efficacy of haloperidol, accounting for the placebo effect, the variability in exposure-response, and the dropouts. Subsequently, the developed model was utilized to characterize an effective dosing strategy for using haloperidol as a comparator drug in future antipsychotic drug trials. The time course of plasma haloperidol concentrations from 122 subjects and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores from 473 subjects were used in this analysis. A nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach was utilized to describe the time course of PK and PANSS scores. Bootstrapping and simulation-based methods were used for the model evaluation. A 2-compartment model adequately described the haloperidol PK profiles. The Weibull and Emax models were able to describe the time course of the placebo and the drug effects, respectively. An exponential model was used to account for dropouts. Joint modeling of the PKPD model with dropout model indicated that the probability of patients dropping out is associated with the observed high PANSS score. The model evaluation results confirmed that the precision and accuracy of parameter estimates are acceptable. Based on the PKPD analysis, the recommended oral dose of haloperidol to achieve a 30% reduction in PANSS score from baseline is 5.6 mg/d, and the corresponding steady-state effective plasma haloperidol exposure is 2.7 ng/mL. In conclusion, the developed model describes the time course of PANSS scores adequately, and a recommendation of haloperidol dose was derived for future antipsychotic drug trials.

Lower rate of depressive switch following antimanic treatment with second-generation antipsychotics versus haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acute mania with second-generation antipsychotics has been claimed to involve a lower risk of switch to depression than haloperidol. However, clinical guidelines clearly state that this is not a proven fact. METHODS: Meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials in acute mania, comparing rates of switch to depression with atypical antipsychotics and with haloperidol. Search was conducted in MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases (last search: September 2011). RESULTS: 8 randomized clinical trials fulfilled inclusion criteria. 2 of them were excluded because of low methodological quality or lack of data. 5 second-generation antipsychotics (aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone) were compared to haloperidol. In the mixed effects model the Risk Ratio for depressive switch was 0.71 (0.52, 0.96) favouring atypical antipsychotics. In the random effects model the difference did not reach statistical significance. In the heterogeneity analysis, exclusion of an outlying aripiprazole trial yielded a Risk Ratio of 0.58 (0.42, 0.82) with a non-significant heterogeneity test. Although no atypical antipsychotic was individually significantly superior to haloperidol, a trend could be seen favouring olanzapine (RR=0.56 [0.29, 1.08]), quetiapine (RR=0.36 [0.10, 1.33]), and ziprasidone (RR=0.51 [0.22, 1.18]). LIMITATIONS: All trials were industry supported, with some variability in dosage of haloperidol. Switch to depression was not the primary outcome of the trials. Heterogeneity could be explained as a lack of class-effect for atypicals. CONCLUSIONS: Treating acute mania with atypicals is associated to 42% less risk of switch to depression than with haloperidol. Nevertheless, caution should be taken when considering this a class effect, as only olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone may show a better profile.

Differential risk of death in older residents in nursing homes prescribed specific antipsychotic drugs: population based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess risks of mortality associated with use of individual antipsychotic drugs in elderly residents in nursing homes. DESIGN: Population based cohort study with linked data from Medicaid, Medicare, the Minimum Data Set, the National Death Index, and a national assessment of nursing home quality. SETTING: Nursing homes in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: 75,445 new users of antipsychotic drugs (haloperidol, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone). All participants were aged ≥ 65, were eligible for Medicaid, and lived in a nursing home in 2001-5. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare 180 day risks of all cause and cause specific mortality by individual drug, with propensity score adjustment to control for potential confounders. RESULTS: Compared with risperidone, users of haloperidol had an increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio 2.07, 95% confidence interval 1.89 to 2.26) and users of quetiapine a decreased risk (0.81, 0.75 to 0.88). The effects were strongest shortly after the start of treatment, remained after adjustment for dose, and were seen for all causes of death examined. No clinically meaningful differences were observed for the other drugs. There was no evidence that the effect measure modification in those with dementia or behavioural disturbances. There was a dose-response relation for all drugs except quetiapine. CONCLUSIONS: Though these findings cannot prove causality, and we cannot rule out the possibility of residual confounding, they provide more evidence of the risk of using these drugs in older patients, reinforcing the concept that they should not be used in the absence of clear need. The data suggest that the risk of mortality with these drugs is generally increased with higher doses and seems to be highest for haloperidol and least for quetiapine.

A pharmacoeconomic analysis of sertindole in the treatment of schizophrenia in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics have similar clinical efficacy in the treatment of schizophrenia; variability in their tolerability represents the discerning factor in treatment choices. Sertindole has a relatively good tolerability profile that favours long-term patient adherence and, therefore, is associated with lower rates of relapse and rehospitalization. AIM: A model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a 5-year treatment strategy starting with sertindole versus olanzapine, risperidone, aripiprazole or the typical antipsychotic agent, haloperidol. METHODS: The model was based on published trials and local clinical practice, and considered costs from the perspective of the Swedish National Health Insurance Board. RESULTS: All atypical agents were clinically superior and more cost-effective than haloperidol with a cost per quality-adjusted life year gained of approximately 490,000 Swedish kroner. Sertindole was associated with the lowest direct and indirect medical costs, driven by its tolerability profile. CONCLUSIONS: Sertindole represents a useful alternative to the current treatment options available in Sweden. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The relatively good tolerability profile of sertindole translates into lower costs of schizophrenia management, primarily driven by substantially lower direct and indirect costs. Sertindole appears to be a clinically and cost-effective alternative in the management of patients with schizophrenia in Sweden.

Impact of geographical and cultural factors on clinical trials in acute mania: lessons from a ziprasidone and haloperidol placebo-controlled study.

Clinical trials today are conducted in multiple countries to enhance patient recruitment and improve efficiency of trials. However, the demographic and cultural diversity may contribute to variations in study outcomes. Here we conducted post-hoc analyses for a placebo-controlled study with ziprasidone and haloperidol for the treatment of acute mania to address the demographic, dosing, and outcome disparities in India, Russia and the USA. We compared the baseline characteristics, outcomes and discontinuations in patients and explored the relationship between the outcome measures across these countries. We found substantial differences in baseline characteristics of subjects, administered dosage and disease severity in India compared to the USA and Russia. Conversely, US subjects had a higher placebo response compared to subjects in Russia and India. These results are probably due to demographic differences in patient populations and psychiatric clinical practice across countries. While we offer initial ideas to address the disparities identified in this analysis, it is clear that further research to improve our understanding of geographical differences is essential to ensure globally applicable results for clinical trials in psychiatry.

Comparison of short-acting intramuscular antipsychotic medication: impact on length of stay and cost.

A retrospective cohort study was conducted to determine if there is an association between short-acting intramuscular (SAIM) antipsychotics used for acute agitation and length of stay (LOS). Patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were dispensed at least one dose of a SAIM antipsychotic were divided into groups based on the initial SAIM antipsychotic received once admitted to a psychiatric unit. Electronic records were used to gather demographic information, LOS, and number of injections received during an admission. Cost was calculated from the number of injections received. One-hundred and thirty-six patients were enrolled. When comparing the haloperidol group to the second generation antipsychotic group, there was no statistically significant difference, in LOS 16.98 ± 9.56 days versus 17.59 ± 11.52 days (P = 0.75), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in both cost and number of injections between groups, favoring the haloperidol group. Ziprasidone was associated with a shorter LOS compared with olanzapine, 13.57 and 19.10 days, respectively (P = 0.026). Patient characteristics should be evaluated when determining an agent for acute agitation. However, because literature indicates second generation SAIM antipsychotics are only noninferior to haloperidol; other factors should also be evaluated; including impact on LOS and impact on hospital resources. This study indicates use of a second generation SAIM antipsychotic for acute agitation is more costly, requires more injections, and was not associated with a shorter length of stay when compared with SAIM haloperidol.