Clozapine and risperidone in moderately refractory schizophrenia: a 6-month randomized double-blind comparison.

OBJECTIVE: Clozapine remains the only medication indicated for refractory schizophrenia. As new antipsychotic drugs become available, their efficacy compared to clozapine, particularly in moderately ill patients, is of great clinical interest. We compared risperidone, the first of these, to clozapine in partially responsive patients. Further, since participation of patients usually excluded from clinical trials is increasingly important, we broadened inclusion to a wider patient population. METHODS: We compared clozapine (n = 53) to risperidone (n = 54) in a randomized, double-blind, 29-week trial in schizophrenia patients (diagnosed using DSM-IV) at 3 research outpatient clinics. Randomization was stratified by "narrow" or "broad" inclusion criteria. The study was conducted between December 1995 and October 1999. Time to treatment discontinuation for lack of efficacy and time to 20% improvement in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale psychotic symptom cluster were the primary outcome measures. RESULTS: There were no differences in all-cause discontinuation; clozapine-treated participants were significantly less likely to discontinue for lack of efficacy (15%) than risperidone-treated participants (38%) (Wilcoxon χ(2)1 = 6.10, P = .01). Clozapine resulted in significantly more global improvement (F2,839 = 6.07, P < .01) and asociality improvement (F2,315 = 6.64, P < .01) than risperidone. There was no difference in proportions meeting an a priori criterion of psychosis improvement (risperidone: 57%; clozapine: 71%). Significant adverse effect differences in salivation (F1 = 4.05, P < .05) (F1 = 12.13, P < .001), sweating (F1 = 5.07, P < .05), and tachycardia (F1 = 6.51, P < .05) favored risperidone. CONCLUSIONS: Clozapine-treated partially responsive patients were less likely to discontinue treatment for lack of efficacy and improved more globally than those treated with risperidone, although psychotic symptoms did not differ. These findings suggest that clozapine should not be restricted to the most severely ill, treatment-refractory patients; it should be considered as an alternative for patients who have some response to other antipsychotics, but still experience troubling symptoms.

Antipsychotic agents used to augment clozapine during long-term inpatient hospitalizations.

INTRODUCTION: Literature assessing effective clozapine augmentation strategies is limited. The aim of this retrospective evaluation was to examine antipsychotics used to augment clozapine and assess whether an augmentation antipsychotic would continue at discharge. METHODS: Demographic, clinical and pharmacy data were collected retrospectively if patients had received clozapine plus an antipsychotic used for augmentation. The dose of the augmentation agent, length of augmentation therapy, and concomitant medications were collected. RESULTS: Of the 49 patients (mean age 45.3±12.1 years), 27 (55%) were male. The mean clozapine dose at discharge was 406.1±121.8 mg. When a first generation antipsychotic (FGA) was selected initially to augment clozapine there was a greater likelihood it would be continued until discharge compared to a second generation antipsychotic (SGA) (78 vs. 50%, OR=3.6, 95% CI 1.03-12.6). FGAs (3.2%) compared to SGAs (35%) were less likely to be discontinued due to a documented lack of benefit when first selected to augment clozapine (OR=16.2, 95% CI 2-131.3). Electroconvulsive therapy plus clozapine was found to be beneficial in several patients (n=14) who failed at least 1 augmentation strategy. DISCUSSION: This real world data suggests that adding an antipsychotic to clozapine is a reasonable approach to those who do not fully respond to clozapine monotherapy. While comparisons of all agents could not be conducted from this small retrospective study, these data suggest FGAs should be investigated in future studies as potential agents to successfully augment clozapine therapy.

Cross-validation of a new procedure for early screening of smoking cessation medications in humans.

Brief procedures for evaluating medication efficacy may reveal which candidate drugs warrant further testing in clinical trials and which do not. We previously carried out a study of smoking abstinence, involving the nicotine patch, and established the sensitivity of our procedure. In this study, we sought to cross-validate our earlier work by comparing short-term smoking abstinence due to varenicline (relative to placebo) in smokers with high intrinsic quit interest (n = 57) and those with low intrinsic quit interest (n = 67). All the subjects were randomly assigned to either abstinence reinforcement ($12/day) or no reinforcement. In a crossover design, all the subjects participated in two 3-week phases: ad libitum smoking (week 1), dose run-up of varenicline (1.0 mg b.i.d.) or placebo (week 2), and quit attempt on medication verified daily by carbon monoxide <5 ppm (week 3). As with the nicotine patch in the previous study, varenicline (relative to placebo) increased abstinence more effectively in those with high intrinsic quit interest than in those with low quit interest but did not affect abstinence due to reinforcement. These data confirm the feasibility of a brief, sensitive test of the efficacy of cessation medications in smokers with high quit interest.

A commentary on the use of depression rating scales in clinical trials conducted in India.

India representing over a sixth of the world's population is a popular venue for clinical trials, including those of psychotropic agents. In this commentary, we have focused on the rating scales employed to assess major depressive disorder, especially the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in the Indian clinical setting. The prominence given to somatic symptoms in the HAM-D scale may be appropriate for the less "westernized" Indian patients who do not speak English fluently, while the MADRS with more emphasis on cognitive symptoms may be better suited for the urban and westernized Indian subjects. Research into the prevalence of "persecutory ideation" or "fearful mood" or "decreased interest in religious activity" should be undertaken to determine if some of the individual items enquired in these scales require change and/or modification. Finally, even though these are observer rated scales, translations into various Indian languages will likely result in improved quality and validity of clinical trials of major depressive disorder conducted in India. This commentary may be relevant to other non-English speaking populations as well.

Development of procedures for early screening of smoking cessation medications in humans.

Candidate medications for smoking cessation may be screened more efficiently if initial evaluations in humans combine the practical advantages of laboratory studies with the clinical validity of clinical trials, such as by increasing participants' "quit motivation" during brief testing. We manipulated "intrinsic" quit motivation by recruiting smokers who either did intend to quit soon ("treatment seekers," N = 47) or did not ("nonseekers," N = 93), and "extrinsic" quit motivation by providing or not providing reinforcement for abstinence ($12/day). All the subjects smoked as they would usually do during weeks 1 and 3, and tried to quit during weeks 2 and 4 using either a nicotine patch (21 mg) or a placebo patch, in accordance with the crossover design of the study. The nicotine patch increased abstinence in treatment seekers but not in nonseekers. Reinforcement had a main effect on abstinence but did not moderate the effects of the nicotine patch or treatment-seeking status. Intrinsic, but not extrinsic, quit motivation of participants may enhance the validity of brief tests of medication efficacy for smoking cessation.

Quetiapine with lithium or divalproex for the treatment of bipolar mania: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine (QTP) combined with lithium (Li) or divalproex (DVP) in the treatment of acute mania. METHODS: Patients were randomized to 21 days of double-blind treatment with QTP plus Li/DVP, or placebo (PBO) plus Li/DVP. QTP was rapidly dosed up to a maximum of 800 mg/day; Li was dosed to 0.7-1.0 mEq/L; or DVP to 50-100 microg/mL. RESULTS: Fifty-six of 91 (61.5%) individuals in the QTP + Li/DVP group compared with 49 of 100 (49%) taking PBO + Li/DVP completed the study. A significantly greater mean reduction in total Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score was observed at end-point in patients receiving QTP + Li/DVP compared with those in the PBO + Li/DVP group (-13.76 versus -9.93; p = 0.021). The response rate (> or =50% YMRS improvement) was significantly higher in the QTP + Li/DVP group than in PBO + Li/DVP-treated patients (54.3% versus 32.6%; p = 0.005), as was the proportion of patients achieving clinical remission (YMRS < 12) (45.7% versus 25.8%; p = 0.007). Patients receiving QTP + Li/DVP also had a significantly greater improvement in Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar (CGI-BP) Severity of Illness scores (-1.38 versus -0.78; p = 0.001). The mean last-week dose of QTP was 584 mg/day in patients meeting response criteria. Common adverse events (at least 10% and twice the rate of Li/DVP) in the QTP + Li/DVP group included somnolence, dry mouth, asthenia, and postural hypotension. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine combined with either Li or DVP has superior efficacy compared with Li or DVP monotherapy for treating patients with bipolar mania. Combination therapy was well-tolerated and most adverse events were mild, withdrawal because of adverse events being only 5% compared with 6% on Li or DVP monotherapy.

Clozapine: its impact on aggressive behavior among patients in a state psychiatric hospital.

Clozapine has shown consistent efficacy against positive symptoms of psychoses, and emerging reports indicate improvements in aggression and suicidality. This study evaluated the impact of clozapine aggression in a psychiatric hospital. Over a three year period, 137 subjects with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder received clozapine, of whom nearly 50% (n=69) experienced seclusion or restraint. Using a mirror-image study design, seclusion and restraint rates were computed per patient-month pre-clozapine and compared during clozapine treatment to a maximum of 12 months in either direction. The rest of the hospital not receiving clozapine served as a comparator group. Statistically significant reductions occurred in both seclusion (0.44+/-0.46 vs. 0.16+/-0.32, z=-3.91, p=0.0003) and restraint (0.34+/-0.47 vs. 0.08+/-0.23, z=-2.27, p=0.032) during clozapine treatment as compared with the pre-clozapine period. The comparator group experienced a low rate of seclusion and restraint throughout. While there are limitations to a mirror-image design, this study supports the emerging data on the benefits of clozapine for aggressive and violent patients with psychoses. Preliminary data suggests other second generation antipsychotic agents may have similar effects.