A current review of olanzapine's safety in the geriatric patient: from pre-clinical pharmacology to clinical data.

OBJECTIVE: Olanzapine (OLZ) is unique among currently available antipsychotic medications in its antagonism of a range of receptor systems including dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, acetylcholine, and histamine. Olanzapine's mechanistic complexity provides a broad efficacy profile in patients with schizophrenia and acute, pure or mixed mania. Patients experience symptomatic relief of mania, anxiety, hallucinations, delusions, and agitation/aggression and reduced depressive, negative, and some cognitive symptoms. This paper will review the safety profile of OLZ, focusing on the elderly, where data are available. METHOD: Preclinical and clinical studies of OLZ are reviewed, with emphasis on its possible effects on the cholinergic system and the histamine H(1) receptor. Weight change and related metabolic considerations, cardiac and cardiovascular safety, and motor function during treatment with OLZ are also reviewed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In vitro receptor characterization methods, when done using physiologically relevant conditions allow accurate prediction of the relatively low rate of anticholinergic-like adverse events, extrapyramidal symptoms, and cardiovascular adverse events during treatment with OLZ. Currently available clinical data suggest olanzapine is predictably safe in treating adult patients of any age with schizophrenia and acute bipolar mania, as well as in treatment of patients with some types of neurodegenerative disorders.

Analysis of the QTc interval during olanzapine treatment of patients with schizophrenia and related psychosis.

BACKGROUND: There may be a temporal association between some antipsychotics and prolongation of the heart-rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) representing a delay in ventricular repolarization. QTc prolongation significantly exceeding normal intra-individual and interindividual variation may increase the risk of ventricular tachydysrhythmias, especially torsade de pointes, and therefore, sudden cardiac death. METHOD: Electrocardiogram recordings obtained as part of the safety assessment of olanzapine in 4 controlled, randomized clinical trials (N = 2,700) were analyzed. These analyses were conducted to characterize any change in QTc temporally associated with olanzapine, compared with placebo, haloperidol, and risperidone, in acutely psychotic patients (DSM-III-R and DSM-IV) and to characterize variability and temporal course of the QTc in this patient population. Changes from baseline to minimum and maximum QTc were tested for significance, and baseline to acute-phase endpoint change in mean QTc was tested for significance within treatments and for differences between olanzapine and comparators. The possibility of a linear relationship between dose of olanzapine and mean change in QTc, as well as incidence of treatment-emergent prolongation of QTc (change from < 430 msec at baseline to > or =430 msec at endpoint), was tested. RESULTS: The incidence of maximum QTc > or = 450 msec during treatment was approximately equal to the incidence of QTc > or =450 msec at baseline. CONCLUSION: Results of these analyses suggest that olanzapine, as therapeutically administered to patients with schizophrenia and related psychoses, does not contribute to QTc prolongation resulting in potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

Cardiac safety parameters of olanzapine: comparison with other atypical and typical antipsychotics.

Alterations of electrocardiogram results and cases of sudden cardiac death have been reported since the beginning of neuroleptic treatment. In particular, a temporal association exists between some antipsychotics and prolongation of the heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc), an event that may increase the risk for developing a potentially fatal ventricular tachycardia arrhythmia known as torsades de pointes if it significantly exceeds normal intraindividual and interindividual variation. Although the incidence of serious adverse cardiac events in response to antipsychotic medications is relatively low, any possibility for the occurrence of cardiotoxicity warrants continued study. The present article reviews important differences among antipsychotic drugs in the potential for, and occurrence of, serious adverse cardiac outcomes and suggests that olanzapine, as therapeutically administered to patients with schizophrenia and related psychoses, does not contribute significantly to a QTc prolongation that could result in potentially fatal ventricular arrhythmias.

Adverse events and treatment discontinuations in clinical trials of fluoxetine in major depressive disorder: an updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A 1993 meta-analysis of US Investigational New Drug clinical trials of fluoxetine reinforced this agent's more favorable adverse-event profile compared with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). OBJECTIVES: The present meta-analysis sought to provide a reanalysis of updated adverse-event and discontinuation data for fluoxetine 20 to 80 mg/d compared with TCAs and placebo in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults. A subanalysis to assess the safety profile of the most commonly used effective dose of fluoxetine in MDD (20 mg) was also conducted. METHODS: Data were obtained from 25 double-blind clinical trials involving 4016 patients with MDD randomized to treatment with fluoxetine 20 to 80 mg/d, TCAs, or placebo. The subanalysis included data from 6 trials involving 1258 patients treated with fixed 20-mg doses of fluoxetine or placebo. Spontaneously reported treatment-emergent adverse events, reasons for discontinuation, and events leading to discontinuation were compared between groups. RESULTS: The age of the 4016 randomized patients ranged from 12 to 90 years, with a mean age of 46 years. Most patients were white (92%), and 62% were female. The age of the 1258 patients in the 20-mg fixed-dose population ranged from 18 to 90 years, with a mean age of 54 years; as in the total population, most of these patients were white (92%), and 57% were female. The adverse-event profiles of fluoxetine and TCAs in these trials were consistent with the typical profiles of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and TCAs. At a dose of 20 mg/d, fluoxetine-treated patients had a discontinuation rate due to adverse events that was not statistically significantly different from that in placebo recipients. Discontinuation rates due to lack of efficacy were not significantly different between fluoxetine and TCAs. However, significantly more TCA-treated patients discontinued therapy because of adverse events and significantly fewer completed treatment compared with fluoxetine-treated patients (both, P < 0.001). The most common events (> or = 2%) leading to discontinuation were asthenia, dizziness, insomnia, nausea, nervousness, somnolence, and tremor in fluoxetine-treated patients and abnormal vision, agitation, constipation, dizziness, dry mouth, headache, nausea, nervousness, rash, somnolence, sweating, and tremor in TCA-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this large series of clinical trials confirm that fluoxetine is well tolerated in the acute treatment of MDD in adults, especially at a dosage of 20 mg/d, and is better tolerated than the recommended doses of TCAs.

Efficacy, adverse events, and treatment discontinuations in fluoxetine clinical studies of major depression: a meta-analysis of the 20-mg/day dose.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of fluoxetine in adults with moderate-to-severe major depression are well established. However, most analyses combined dosages (20-80 mg/day) of the compound. We hypothesized that in patients taking 20 mg/day, efficacy would be maintained but the incidence of adverse events would be lower. We present a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety data for fluoxetine, 20 mg/day. METHOD: Data were from 3 double-blind studies (N = 417) that included patients with moderate-to-severe major depression (DSM-III or DSM-III-R criteria) who received placebo or fixed-dose 20-mg/day treatment with fluoxetine. Efficacy was assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D; HAM-D-17 total score and anxiety/somatization, retardation, sleep disturbance, and cognitive disturbance factors) and response and remission rates. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events, reasons for discontinuation, and adverse events leading to discontinuation. Adverse events were evaluated to determine the emergence of activation and/or sedation. RESULTS: At 20 mg/day, fluoxetine-treated patients demonstrated significantly greater remission and response rates and mean changes on HAM-D-17 total score and anxiety/somatization, retardation, and cognitive disturbance factor scores than placebo-treated patients (p < .001). The incidence of specific adverse events leading to discontinuation and the frequency of study discontinuations due to adverse events were similar among fluoxetine-treated and placebo-treated patients (6.1% vs. 5.8%, p = .879). Several adverse events (insomnia, asthenia, somnolence, gastroenteritis, decreased libido, chills, and confusion) occurred significantly more frequently among fluoxetine-treated patients. A significant change in sedation, but not activation, occurred in patients in the fluoxetine 20-mg/day group compared with the placebo group. CONCLUSION: These data affirm that fluoxetine at 20 mg/day is efficacious, safe, and of similar activation potential when compared with placebo in patients with major depression.

Predictors of relapse during fluoxetine continuation or maintenance treatment of major depression.

BACKGROUND: The goal was to examine predictors of relapse during continuation/maintenance treatment of major depression that had remitted following 12 to 14 weeks of fluoxetine therapy. METHOD: The study utilizes data collected in a collaborative clinical trial including patients with DSM-III-R major depression at 5 university-affiliated outpatient psychiatry clinics. Three hundred ninety-five patients who remitted with fluoxetine therapy were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 treatments: fluoxetine for 14 weeks followed by placebo for 36 weeks, fluoxetine for 38 weeks followed by placebo for 12 weeks, fluoxetine for 50 weeks, or placebo for 50 weeks. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify predictors of time to relapse. RESULTS: In addition to the previously reported longitudinal pattern of response during acute treatment, neurovegetative symptom pattern was a predictor of fluoxetine benefit compared with placebo. Greater chronicity predicted poorer survival, which was not differential by treatment. The most robust advantage of fluoxetine was seen for patients with endogenous vegetative symptoms, chronic depression, and acute treatment response characterized by onset in the third week or later and persistence of response once attained. CONCLUSION: Both nonspecific pattern of response and neurovegetative symptoms characteristic of atypical depression were predictive of lack of fluoxetine efficacy in continuation/ maintenance treatment. These findings have importance for both clinical management and analyses of future maintenance trials.

Olanzapine. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile.

Multicentre trials in patients with schizophrenia confirm that olanzapine is a novel antipsychotic agent with broad efficacy, eliciting a response in both the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Compared with traditional antipsychotic agents, olanzapine causes a lower incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and minimal perturbation of prolactin levels. Generally, olanzapine is well tolerated. The pharmacokinetics of olanzapine are linear and dose-proportional within the approved dosage range. Its mean half-life in healthy individuals was 33 hours, ranging from 21 to 54 hours. The mean apparent plasma clearance was 26 L/h, ranging from 12 to 47 L/h. Smokers and men have a higher clearance of olanzapine than women and nonsmokers. After administering [14C]olanzapine, approximately 60% of the radioactivity was excreted in urine and 30% in faeces. Olanzapine is predominantly bound to albumin (90%) and alpha 1-acid glycoprotein (77%). Olanzapine is metabolised to its 10- and 4'-N-glucuronides, 4'-N-desmethylolanzapine [cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2] and olanzapine N-oxide (flavin mono-oxygenase 3). Metabolism to 2-hydroxymethylolanzapine via CYP2D6 is a minor pathway. The 10-N-glucuronide is the most abundant metabolite, but formation of 4'-N-desmethylolanzapine is correlated with the clearance of olanzapine. Olanzapine does not inhibit CYP isozymes. No clinically significant metabolic interactions were found between olanzapine and diazepam, alcohol (ethanol), imipramine, R/S-warfarin, aminophylline, biperiden, lithium or fluoxetine. Fluvoxamine, an inhibitor of CYP1A2, increases plasma concentrations of olanzapine; inducers of CYP1A2, including tobacco smoke and carbamazepine, decrease olanzapine concentrations. Orthostatic changes were observed when olanzapine and diazepam or alcohol were coadministered. Pharmacodynamic interactions occurred between olanzapine and alcohol, and olanzapine and imipramine, implying that patients should avoid operating hazardous equipment or driving an automobile while experiencing the short term effects of the combinations. Individual factors with the largest impact on olanzapine pharmacokinetics are gender and smoking status. The plasma clearance of olanzapine generally varies over a 4-fold range, but the variability in the clearance and concentration of olanzapine does not appear to be associated with the severity or duration of adverse effects or the degree of efficacy. Thus, dosage adjustments appear unnecessary for these individual factors. However, dosage modification should be considered for patients characterised by a combination of factors associated with decreased oxidative metabolism, for example, debilitated or elderly women who are nonsmokers.

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders: quality of life and clinical outcomes of a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Little information is available on the impact of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine on quality of life (QOL). A 6-week, double-blind randomized multicenter trial, with a long-term extension, was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and QOL of olanzapine and haloperidol in treating schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. METHODS: A total of 828 outpatients provided QOL data. Study patients were aged greater than 18 years with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder and baseline BPRS (items scored on 0-6 scale) total scores, > or = 18 were randomized to 6 weeks of treatment with olanzapine 5 to 20 mg/day or haloperidol 5 to 20 mg/day. Patients entered a 46-week double-blind extension if they demonstrated minimal clinical response and were tolerant to study medication. The Quality of Life Scale (QLS) and SF-36 Health Survey were used to evaluate QOL. RESULTS: During the 6-week acute phase, olanzapine treatment significantly improved BPRS total (p = 0.004), PANSS total scores (p = 0.043), QLS total (p = 0.005), intrapsychic foundations (p < 0.001) and interpersonal relations scores (p = 0.036), and SF-36 mental component summary scores (p < 0.001) compared with haloperidol. During the extension phase, olanzapine treatment significantly improved PANSS negative scores (p = 0.035) and improved QLS total (p = 0.001), intrapsychic foundations (p < 0.001), and instrumental role category scores (p = 0.015) versus haloperidol treatment. Significantly more haloperidol patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events during the acute and extension phases (p = 0.041 and p = 0.014, respectively). Changes in QLS total and MCS scores were associated with changes in clinical symptoms, depression scores and extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine was more effective than haloperidol in reducing severity of psychopathology and in improving QOL in patients with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders. The QOL benefits of olanzapine, although modest, may be important for long-term treatment.

Changes in weight during a 1-year trial of fluoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: Fluoxetine has been associated with weight loss during acute treatment, but no controlled studies of weight change during long-term treatment with fluoxetine or other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have been reported. Weights were assessed for patients whose depressive symptoms had disappeared with acute fluoxetine treatment. Patients were then randomly assigned to continuation treatment with fluoxetine or placebo. METHOD: Patients whose illness had remitted after 12 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine, 20 mg/day, were randomly assigned to receive up to 38 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine or placebo. Weight was assessed at each visit. Change in weight was analyzed during the initial 12 weeks of acute treatment and after 14, 26, and 38 weeks. Relationships between weight change and body mass index and between weight change and appetite change were assessed. RESULTS: During the initial 4 weeks of therapy, a mean absolute weight decrease of 0.4 kg was observed for all patients. Among patients who completed 50 weeks of therapy, the mean absolute weight increase during continuation treatment was similar for both the placebo- and fluoxetine-treated groups. Weight increase was not related to initial body mass index but was related to both poor appetite at study entry and to improvement in appetite after recovery. No patients discontinued therapy because of weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Acute therapy with fluoxetine is associated with modest weight loss. After remission of depressive symptoms, weight gain for patients taking fluoxetine for longer periods is not different from that for patients taking placebo and is most likely related to recovery from depression.

Changes in adverse events reported by patients during 6 months of fluoxetine therapy.

BACKGROUND: Although a period of 6 to 12 months of antidepressant therapy is recommended for most patients with depression, systematic examinations of the course of adverse events over time, the resolution of early-onset events, and the possible emergence of later-onset events are limited. We examined the safety of fluoxetine, 20 mg/day, in a large, prospective, long-term treatment trial, and we report a comparison of early- and late-onset adverse events and the course of adverse events over 26 weeks of treatment. METHOD: Adverse events were recorded at each visit in a uniform format by open-ended questioning, regardless of perceived causality. New or worsened events reported in either the first 4 weeks of treatment (early-reporting interval) or weeks 22 through 26 of treatment (late-reporting interval) were compared. RESULTS: Patients (N = 299) whose depression (DSM-III-R) remitted with 12 weeks of fluoxetine treatment entered continuation therapy, and 174 completed 26 weeks of therapy. All events that occurred in > or =5% of patients early in treatment decreased in frequency over time (p<.05), and no events occurred significantly more frequently during continuation therapy. No previously uncommon adverse events became common during long-term treatment. CONCLUSION: Common adverse events associated with initiating fluoxetine treatment in depressed patients, including nausea, insomnia, nervousness, and somnolence, resolve in the majority of patients and become significantly less frequent with continued treatment over a 6-month period. No adverse events present initially become more frequent late in treatment. Therapy with fluoxetine, 20 mg/day, is well tolerated over 6 months, and most adverse events observed early in treatment resolve.

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizoaffective disorder. Acute and long-term therapy.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of antipsychotic monotherapy in schizoaffective disorder is limited, and further constrained by safety concerns. AIMS: We aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety profile of the new pharmaceutical, olanzapine, with haloperidol. METHOD: Data were assessed from 300 DSM-III-R schizoaffective subjects from a larger double-blind prospective international study. Subjects were randomly allocated to six weeks of olanzapine (5-20 mg) or haloperidol (5-20 mg) treatment; responders were followed for up to one year of double-blind, long-term maintenance therapy. RESULTS: Olanzapine-treated patients achieved a statistically significant greater improvement than haloperidol treated patients on overall measures of efficacy, including clinical response. Significantly fewer olanzapine patients left the study early, and fewer adverse events were observed among those receiving olanzapine. During maintenance, olanzapine-treated patients continued to experience additional improvement, with fewer EPS but more weight gain than those on haloperidol. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine demonstrated substantial advantages over the conventional antipsychotic haloperidol in the management of schizoaffective disorder.

Randomised double-blind comparison of the incidence of tardive dyskinesia in patients with schizophrenia during long-term treatment with olanzapine or haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Tardive dyskinesia is important in the side-effect profile of antipsychotic medication. AIMS: The development of tardive dyskinesia was evaluated in patients treated with double-blind, randomly assigned olanzapine or haloperidol for up to 2.6 years. METHODS: Tardive dyskinesia was assessed by the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) and Research Diagnostic Criteria for Tardive Dyskinesia (RD-TD), it was defined as meeting RD-TD criteria at two consecutive assessments. The risk of tardive dyskinesia, the relative risk, incidence rate, and incidence rate ratio were estimated. RESULTS: The relative risk of tardive dyskinesia for the overall follow up period for haloperidol (n = 522) v. olanzapine (n = 1192) was 2.66 (95% CI = 1.50-4.70). Based on data following the initial six weeks of observation (during which patients underwent medication change and AIMS assessments as frequently as every three days), the one-year risk was 0.52% with olanzapine (n = 513) and 7.45% with haloperidol (n = 114). The relative risk throughout this follow-up period was 11.37 (95% CI = 2.21-58.60). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated a significantly lower risk of tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine than with haloperidol.

Elder abuse: two Native American views.

In order to gain a greater understanding of what "elder abuse" means to the American public, a random sample of adults from seven culturally diverse counties in North Carolina was interviewed. Two of the six Native American groups residing in North Carolina were represented in the sample. The two Native American groups' responses were compared with each other and with the views of a panel of elder mistreatment experts. There were areas of agreement and disagreement. The relevance of the findings is discussed in relation to research, practice, education, and policy.

Oral olanzapine versus oral haloperidol in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia and related psychoses.

BACKGROUND: Three studies compared olanzapine and haloperidol given orally in maintenance therapy for schizophrenia and related psychoses. METHOD: Data were from double-blind extensions of acute studies. The subjects met criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder or schizoaffective disorder. Subjects had responded to acute therapy (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total score decreased > or = 40% from baseline (Studies 1, 2, and 3) or was < or = 18 (Studies 1 and 2)) and were out-patients at their last acute phase visit. Relapse was defined as hospitalisation for psychopathology. Subjects treated with olanzapine in the three studies were pooled to form the olanzapine group and subjects treated with haloperidol were pooled to form the haloperidol group. RESULTS: Olanzapine-treated subjects experienced less relapse (P = 0.034). The Kaplan-Meier estimated one-year risk of relapse was 19.7% with olanzapine and 28% with haloperidol. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in the maintenance therapy of schizophrenia and related psychoses. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: This work was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company.

Optimal length of continuation therapy in depression: a prospective assessment during long-term fluoxetine treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine prospectively the optimal length of therapy in a long-term, placebo-controlled continuation study of patients who responded to acute fluoxetine treatment for major depression (defined by DSM-III-R). METHOD: The study was conducted at five outpatient psychiatric clinics in the United States. Patients who met criteria for remission after 12 or 14 weeks of open-label acute fluoxetine therapy, 20 mg/day (N=395 of 839 patients), were randomly assigned to one of four arms of a double-blind treatment study (50 weeks of placebo, 14 weeks of fluoxetine and then 36 weeks of placebo, 38 weeks of fluoxetine and then 12 weeks of placebo, or 50 weeks of fluoxetine). Relapse rate was the primary outcome measure. Both Kaplan-Meier estimates and observed relapse rates were assessed in three fixed 12-week intervals after double-blind transfers from fluoxetine to placebo at the start of the double-blind period and after 14 and 38 weeks of continued fluoxetine treatment. RESULTS: Relapse rates (Kaplan-Meier estimates) were lower among the patients who continued to take fluoxetine compared with those transferred to placebo in both the first interval, after 24 total weeks of treatment (fluoxetine, 26.4%; placebo, 48.6%), and the second interval, after 38 total weeks of treatment (fluoxetine, 9.0%; placebo, 23.2%). In the third interval, after 62 total weeks of treatment, rates were not significantly different between the groups (fluoxetine, 10.7%; placebo, 16.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with fluoxetine for 12 weeks whose depressive symptoms remit should continue treatment with fluoxetine for at least an additional 26 weeks to minimize the risk of relapse.

A double-blind, controlled comparison of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine versus haloperidol or placebo on anxious and depressive symptoms accompanying schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are a common feature of schizophrenia and may represent a core part of the illness. Where present, it has been associated with greater overall morbidity and mortality. Monotherapy with conventional dopamine antagonists may either worsen or bestow a limited therapeutic benefit. Accordingly the use of adjunctive thymoleptics has been explored. In contrast, olanzapine (OLZ), an atypical antipsychotic agent, offers a distinctive and pleotropic pharmacology suggestive of a broader efficacy profile than conventional neuroleptic agents. METHODS: In a 6-week placebo- and haloperidol (HAL)-controlled trial with 335 randomized subjects with chronic schizophrenia in an acute exacerbation, three fixed dose ranges of OLZ (5, 10, or 15 +/- 2.5 mg) were evaluated versus HAL (10-20 mg) or placebo. RESULTS: Baseline to endpoint change in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale including the anxiety-depression cluster (items 1, 2, 5, 9) was analyzed. Two dose ranges of OLZ (10 +/- 2.5, 15 +/- 2.5) were superior to placebo (p < 05) in improving mood status, whereas HAL was not. CONCLUSION: Contributions from a more selective mesolimbic dopaminergic profile, D1 or D4 activity, the release of dopamine/norepinephrine in the prefrontal cortex, and/or serotonin 5-HT2A,C antagonism may explain the differential benefit seen with OLZ in the treatment of comorbid anxious and depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

Olanzapine versus placebo and haloperidol: quality of life and efficacy results of the North American double-blind trial.

This double-blind study evaluated the impact of treatment with olanzapine compared with haloperidol, and placebo on improvements in symptomatology and quality of life in patients with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of schizophrenia. A total of 335 patients was randomized to five treatment groups; olanzapine 5 +/- 2.5 mg/day, olanzapine 10 +/- 2.5 mg/day, olanzapine 15 +/- 2.5 mg/day, haloperidol 15 +/- 5 mg/day, and placebo. Patients responding to treatment during the 6-week acute phase were eligible to enter a 46-week extension. Efficacy measures included the brief psychiatric rating scale total, scale for assessment of negative symptoms summary, and clinical global impressions severity scores. Quality of life was evaluated using the quality of life scale. Data analyzed after 24 weeks of therapy showed that olanzapine was significantly superior to placebo in reducing clinical severity and significantly superior to haloperidol in reducing negative symptoms in patients responding to acute treatment. Furthermore, improvement in quality of life was observed in olanzapine-treated responders.

Standard olanzapine versus placebo and ineffective-dose olanzapine in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Two studies compared the efficacy of standard-dose oral olanzapine (5 to 15 mg a day) with placebo and with ineffective-dose olanzapine (1 mg a day) in maintenance therapy of schizophrenia. METHODS: The studies were 46-week double-blind extensions of multicenter studies that assessed the efficacy of olanzapine in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. Subjects were 120 adults who met DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia with an acute exacerbation and who had a minimum score of 24 on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, who had responded to acute therapy (defined as at least a 40 percent reduction in the BPRS score from baseline or a score of 18 or less during up to six weeks of treatment), and who were outpatients at their last acute-phase visit. Relapse was defined as hospitalization for psychopathology. Relapse risk was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and life table analysis. Patients who relapsed were discontinued from the studies. RESULTS: In the first study (N = 58), patients in the standard-dose olanzapine group experienced a significantly lower relapse risk (p = .002) over one year than patients treated with placebo. The estimated one-year risk of relapse with olanzapine was 28.6 percent, compared with 69.9 percent with placebo. Results were similar in the second study (N = 62); patients treated with standard-dose olanzapine had a significantly reduced risk of relapse (p = .018) over one year compared with patients treated with ineffective-dose olanzapine. The estimated one-year risks of relapse were 19.6 percent for standard-dose olanzapine and 45.5 percent for ineffective-dose olanzapine. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine is superior to placebo and ineffective-dose olanzapine in the maintenance therapy of schizophrenia.