Efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine in the treatment of schizotypal personality disorder

Diagnosis and treatment of schizotypal personality disorder: evidence from a systematic review

The main objective of this review was to evaluate studies on the diagnosis, treatment, and course of schizotypal personality disorder and to provide a clinical guidance on the basis of that evaluation. A systematic search in the PubMed/MEDLINE databases was conducted. Two independent reviewers extracted and assessed the quality of the data. A total of 54 studies were eligible for inclusion: 18 were on diagnostic instruments; 22, on pharmacological treatment; 3, on psychotherapy; and 13, on the longitudinal course of the disease. We identified several suitable and reliable questionnaires for screening (PDQ-4+ and SPQ) and diagnosing (SIDP, SIDP-R, and SCID-II) schizotypal personality disorder. Second-generation antipsychotics (mainly risperidone) were the most often studied drug class and were described as beneficial. Studies on the longitudinal course described a moderate remission rate and possible conversion rates to other schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Because of the heterogeneity of the studies and the small sample sizes, it is not yet possible to make evidence-based recommendations for treatment. This is a systematic evaluation of diagnostic instruments and treatment studies in schizotypal personality disorder. We conclude that there is currently only limited evidence on which to base treatment decisions in this disorder. Larger interventional trials are needed to provide the data for evidence-based recommendations.

Pharmacotherapy of personality disorders: what we know and what we have to search for

Pharmacotherapy for personality disorders is in the early stage of development because the evidence base for effective drug treatment is insufficient, biased toward borderline personality disorder and rampant with methodological issues. In this paper, we reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled trials of drugs efficacy in patients with personality disorders published between 1990 and 2016. Overwhelming majority of studies focused on borderline personality disorder, and the accumulation of evidence resulted in seven meta-analyses, which are interpreted into better strategies for evidence-based practice. Little research attention was given to schizotypal and antisocial personality disorders, with only indirect treatment efficacy evidence for the obsessive–compulsive and avoidant personality disorders. Some avenues for future efficacy research are indicated.

Antipsychotic treatment of schizotypy and schizotypal personality disorder: a systematic review

Schizotypal personality disorder (SPD) is characterised by thought disorders, experiences of illusions, obsessive ruminations, bizarre or eccentric behaviour, cognitive problems and deficits in social functioning - symptoms that SPD shares with schizophrenia. Efforts have been undertaken to investigate the relationship between these conditions regarding genetics, pathophysiology, and phenomenology. However, treatment of SPD with antipsychotics has received less scientific attention. Embase and PubMed databases were searched using all known generic names of antipsychotics as search terms in combination with the following diagnostic terms: latent schizophrenia, schizotypal disorder, latent type schizophrenia, or SPD. Studies were categorised according to evidence level on the basis of their methodology from A, being the best, to E, being the worst. Five hundred and nine studies were retrieved and scrutinised. Sixteen studies, from the period 1972 to 2012, on antipsychotic treatment of SPD were extracted. Four studies were categorised as evidence level A, two as level B, six as level C and three as level D, with one study level E. Only four randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, on subjects with well-defined diagnoses, exists. Only amisulpride, risperidone and thiothixene have been studied according to evidence level A. This result warrants further high quality studies of the effects of antipsychotic treatment of SPD.

Review of pharmacologic treatment in cluster A personality disorders

Introduction:

A personality disorder is a pervasive and enduring pattern of behaviors that impacts an individual's social, occupational, and overall functioning. Specifically, the cluster A personality disorders include paranoid personality disorder, schizoid personality disorder, and schizotypal personality disorder. Patients with cluster A personality disorders tend to be isolative and avoid relationships. The quality of life may also be reduced in these individuals, which provokes the question of how to treat patients with these personality disorders. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the current literature for pharmacologic treatments for the cluster A personality disorders.

Methods:

A Medline/PubMed and Ovid search was conducted to identify literature on the psychopharmacology of paranoid personality disorder, schizoid personality disorder, and schizotypal personality disorder. There were no exclusions in terms of time frame from article publication or country of publication, in order to provide a comprehensive analysis; however, only articles that contained information on the cluster A disorders were included.

Results:

Minimal evidence regarding pharmacotherapy in paranoid and schizoid personality disorders was found. Literature was available for pharmacologic treatment of schizotypal personality disorder. Studies evaluating the use of olanzapine, risperidone, haloperidol, fluoxetine, and thiothixene did yield beneficial results; however, treatment with such agents should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

Discussion:

Most of the literature analyzed in this review presented theoretical ideas of what may constitute the neurobiologic factors of personality and what treatments may address these aspects. Further research is needed to evaluate specific pharmacologic treatment in the cluster A personality disorders. At this time, treatment with pharmacologic agents is based on theory rather than evidence.

Clozapine: an effective treatment for seriously violent and psychopathic men with antisocial personality disorder in a UK high-security hospital

OBJECTIVE

A number of studies have demonstrated the anti-aggressive properties of clozapine in schizophrenia and its positive effect in borderline personality disorder. There is no published literature on the treatment of antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) with clozapine. We present a case series of 7 patients with primary ASPD and high psychopathic traits treated with clozapine, having a significant history of serious violence and currently detained in a UK based high-security hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective review of case notes was carried out to formulate Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores and record incidents of violence and aggression. Effect on specific symptom domains (cognitive-perceptual, impulsive-behavioural dyscontrol, affective dysregulation) was also noted. Metabolic parameters and serum clozapine levels were also sampled.

RESULTS

All 7 patients showed significant improvement on clozapine. It was shown to benefit all symptom domains, especially impulsive behavioral dyscontrol and anger. The number of violent incidents committed by 6 of the 7 patients reduced significantly, and all patients' risk of violence reduced. Clozapine serum levels for 6 of the 7 patients were in the range 150-350 ng/mL.

CONCLUSION

Clozapine is of benefit in reducing the clinical severity of ASPD. It improved all symptom domains, especially impulsive-behavioral dyscontrol and anger, and reduced levels of aggression and violence, especially at lower doses (serum levels <350 ng/m). To our knowledge, this is the first account of clozapine treatment in patients with ASPD and high psychopathy.

Olanzapine: a 5-year perspective

Olanzapine is a novel antipsychotic, approved for the acute and maintenance treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. Despite the publicity regarding reported adverse events with the novel antipsychotics, such as weight gain and Type II diabetes mellitus, olanzapine remains a useful and important medicine. It is a selective monoaminergic antagonist with high-affinity binding to a number of receptors thought to be implicated in some psychotic and mood symptoms. The complex pharmacology of olanzapine has lead to studies exploring its use in treating substance abuse, aggression/violence, borderline personality disorder, schizotypal personality disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder and as a neuroprotective agent in schizophrenia. As the pharmacology of olanzapine and other novel antipsychotics becomes better understood, future effective treatment strategies are likely to match an individual's genetic makeup and receptor profiles to the most compatible agent.

Schizotypal personality disorder

Early phenomenological descriptions of schizophrenia have acknowledged the existence of milder schizophrenia spectrum disorders characterized by the presence of attenuated symptoms typically present in chronic schizophrenia. The investigation of the schizophrenia spectrum disorders offers an opportunity to elucidate the pathophysiological mechanisms giving rise to schizophrenia. Differences and similarities between subjects with schizotypal personality disorder (SPD), the prototypical schizophrenia personality disorder, and chronic schizophrenia have been investigated with genetic, neurochemical, imaging, and pharmacological techniques. Patients with SPD and the more severely ill patients with chronic schizophrenia share cognitive, social, and attentional deficits hypothesized to result from common neurodevelopmentally based cortical temporal and prefrontal pathology. However, these deficits are milder in SPD patients due to their capacity to recruit other related brain regions to compensate for dysfunctional areas. Individuals with SPD are also less vulnerable to psychosis due to the presence of protective factors mitigating subcortical DA hyperactivity. Given the documented close relationship to other schizophrenic disorders, SPD will be included in the psychosis section of DSM-5 as a schizophrenia spectrum disorder as well as in the personality disorder section.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of personality disorders

These practical guidelines for the biological treatment of personality disorders in primary care settings were developed by an international Task Force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). They embody the results of a systematic review of all available clinical and scientific evidence pertaining to the biological treatment of three specific personality disorders, namely borderline, schizotypal and anxious/avoidant personality disorder in addition to some general recommendations for the whole field. The guidelines cover disease definition, classification, epidemiology, course and current knowledge on biological underpinnings, and provide a detailed overview on the state of the art of clinical management. They deal primarily with biological treatment (including antidepressants, neuroleptics, mood stabilizers and some further pharmacological agents) and discuss the relative significance of medication within the spectrum of treatment strategies that have been tested for patients with personality disorders, up to now. The recommendations should help the clinician to evaluate the efficacy spectrum of psychotropic drugs and therefore to select the drug best suited to the specific psychopathology of an individual patient diagnosed for a personality disorder.

Schizotypal personality: neurodevelopmental and psychosocial trajectories

Schizotypal personality research holds the promise of critically important insights into the etiology and ultimate prevention of schizophrenia. This article provides a critical overview of diagnostic, developmental, demographic, psychosocial, genetic, neurodevelopmental, psychophysiological, neurochemical, neurocognitive, brain imaging, and prevention-treatment issues pertaining to this personality disorder. It is argued that genetic and early environmental influences act in concert to alter brain structure/function throughout development, resulting in disturbances to basic cognitive and affective processes that give rise to three building blocks of schizotypy-cognitive-perceptual, interpersonal, and disorganized features. Two clinical subtypes are hypothesized: (a) neurodevelopmental schizotypy, which has its roots in genetic, prenatal, and early postnatal factors, is relatively stable, has genetic affinity to schizophrenia, and may benefit preferentially from pharmacological intervention, and (b) pseudoschizotypy, which is unrelated to schizophrenia, has its roots in psychosocial adversity, shows greater symptom fluctuations, and may be more responsive to psychosocial intervention.

The expert consensus guideline series. Treatment of behavioral emergencies 2005

OBJECTIVES

Due to inherent dangers and barriers to research in emergency settings, few data are available to guide clinicians about how best to manage behavioral emergencies. Key constructs such as agitation are poorly defined. This lack of empirical data led us to undertake a survey of expert opinion, results of which were published in the 2001 Expert Consensus Guidelines on the Treatment of Behavioral Emergencies. Several second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics (SGAs) are now available in new formulations for treating behavioral emergencies (e.g., intramuscular [i.m.] olanzapine and ziprasidone; rapidly dissolving tablets of olanzapine and risperidone). Critical questions face the field. The SGAs are significantly different from the FGAs and from each other and have not been studied in unselected patients as were the FGAs. Can the SGAs can be thought of as a class, do all antipsychotics have similar anti-agitation effects in different conditions, and, if equally effective, what limits might their safety profiles impose? Should antipsychotics be used more specifically to treat psychotic conditions, while benzodiazepines (BNZs) alone are used nonspecifically? Few data are available concerning combinations of SGAs and BNZs, and findings concerning the traditional combination of haloperidol plus a BNZ may not be relevant to combinations with SGAs. The culture is also evolving with more emphasis on patient involvement in treatment decisions. An international consensus has been developing that calming rather than sedation is the appropriate endpoint of behavioral emergency interventions. We undertook a new survey of expert opinion to update recommendations from the earlier survey.

METHOD

A written survey of 61 questions (1,020 options) was mailed to 50 experts in the field, 48 (96%) of whom completed it. The survey sought to define level of agitation at which emergency interventions are appropriate, scope of assessment depending on urgency and patients' ability to cooperate, guiding principles for selecting interventions, and appropriate physical and medication strategies at different levels of diagnostic confidence for a variety of provisional diagnoses and complicating conditions. A modified version of the RAND Corporation's 9-point scale for rating appropriateness of medical decisions was used to score most options. Consensus was defined as a non-random distribution of scores by chi-square "goodness-of-fit" test. We assigned a categorical rank (first line/preferred, second line/alternate, third line/usually inappropriate) to each option based on the 95% confidence interval around the mean. Ratings were used to develop guidelines for preferred strategies in key clinical situations. This study received financial support from multiple sponsors, with the panel kept blind to sponsorship to reduce possible bias. Medication ratings were based on responses of only those respondents with direct experience with each drug. In reporting practice patterns, the panel was asked to respond based on actual data rather than estimates.

RESULTS

The expert panel reached consensus on 78% of the options rated on the 9-point scale. The responses suggest that physicians can make provisional diagnoses with some confidence and that pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions are selected differentially based on diagnosis and other salient demographic and medical features. BNZs are recommended when no data are available, when there is no specific treatment (e.g., personality disorder), or when they may have specific benefits (e.g., intoxication). No single SGA emerges as a nonspecific replacement for haloperidol; instead, different SGAs are preferred in various circumstances consistent with current evidence. To the degree that haloperidol is recommended, it is almost always in combination with a BNZ; haloperidol alone is preferred only in the medically compromised. In contrast, the SGAs are more often recommended for use alone, and the panel would avoid combining BNZs with some SGAs. Oral risperidone alone or combined with a BNZ receives strong support in a variety of situations. Oral olanzapine was rated very similarly to risperidone, with slightly higher ratings than risperidone in situations where it has been studied (e.g., schizophrenia, mania) and slightly lower ratings where it has not been studied or safety may be a concern; there was less support for combining oral olanzapine with a BNZ. For oral treatment of agitation related to schizophrenia or mania, olanzapine alone, risperidone alone or combined with a BNZ, and haloperidol plus a BNZ are first line, with strong support also for combining divalproex with the antipsychotic for presumed mania. Oral ziprasidone and quetiapine generally received similar second-line ratings in most situations. If a parenteral agent is needed, i.m. olanzapine alone received somewhat more support than i.m. ziprasidone alone; however, there was more support for i.m. ziprasidone alone or combined with a BNZ than for i.m. olanzapine plus a BNZ, probably reflecting safety concerns. For example, for a provisional diagnosis of schizophrenia, first-line parenteral options are i.m. olanzapine or ziprasidone alone or i.m. haloperidol or ziprasidone combined with a BNZ. Neither of the new parenteral formulations received as much support as traditional agents (i.m. BNZs, i.m. haloperidol) when no data are available or the diagnosis involves medical comorbidity or intoxication. When initial intervention with risperidone, ziprasidone, or haloperidol is unsuccessful, the panel recommended adding a BZD to the antipsychotic. However, when initial treatment with olanzapine or quetiapine is unsuccessful, increasing the dosage is recommended. Perphenazine was consistently rated second line and droperidol and chlorpromazine received third-line ratings throughout.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of expert opinion and with the expectation that future research data will take precedence, these guidelines suggest that the SGAs are now preferred for agitation in the setting of primary psychiatric illnesses but that BNZs are preferred in other situations.

How does studying schizotypal personality disorder inform us about the prodrome of schizophrenia?

An increasing emphasis in the schizophrenia literature has been on the prodromal phase of the illness. The study of schizophrenia spectrum illness, including schizotypal personality disorder, has added important insight into the etiology, neuropathology, and treatment of schizophrenia, which can facilitate early identification, intervention, and perhaps prevention of the illness. The heterogeneity of the schizophrenia spectrum makes its definition elusive at best. The primary aim of the Cognitive Assessment and Risk Evaluation Program at the authors' institution is to combine the current knowledge of clinical and demographic risk factors for schizophrenia with the rapidly emerging data on vulnerability markers, or endophenotypes, that are associated with schizophrenia. The use of brain-based vulnerability markers may help to identify neurobiologically and clinically meaningful subgroups within this heterogeneous population of individuals in the early stages of schizophrenia. Another important aim of the Cognitive Assessment and Risk Evaluation program is to thoroughly assess those individuals who have not converted to psychosis to understand potential protective factors, reduce the rate of false positives, and decrease disability. The current review details a strategy for researching the schizophrenia prodrome by using information gained from research in schizotypal personality disorder.