Predictors of neuroleptic treatment response in acute schizophrenia: results of a treatment study with perazine

Objective assessment of the degree of improvement or deterioration with patients by means of Ipsative Trend Analysis of resting electroencephalograms

We report on a new quantitative EEG-approach, called Ipsative Trend Assessment which is based on the spatio-temporally defined patterns which are generated by the global interaction of cortical neurons.

METHODS

The data were acquired from EEGs being recorded under resting conditions. Target variables are not the usually employed absolute values of the spectral parameters but rather their change being calculated from successive recordings with a single subjects design.

RATIONALE

Since the resting-EEG does not provide specific information, we had to decide what else might be addressed by that method.

CONCLUSIONS

Our hypothesis according to which the SR-EEG indicates Selye's behaviorally non-specific General Adaptation Syndrome is based on good evidence.

MAIN FINDINGS

Dynamic pattern comparison between subsequent EEGs on the single case level is a hitherto neglected method, which may be utilize, for instance, with regard to objective therapeutic outcome assessment.

SIGNIFICANCE

In order to substantiate the clinical meaningfulness of our new approach we report two case vignettes of psychiatric impairments. Apart from that, our procedure should provide the desperately needed objective assessment of the therapeutic effect with any disease displaying a certain proportion of unspecific symptoms.

Perazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Perazine is an old phenothiazine derivative used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia and is reputed to have a low level of extrapyramidal adverse effects. As far as we are aware, its use is limited to Germany, Poland, the former Yugoslavia and the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of perazine for those with schizophrenia or related psychoses in comparison with placebo, no treatment or other antipsychotic medications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register, which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the bibliographic databases Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, LILACS, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts and Sociofile. We searched the references of all included studies for further trials. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials. We updated this search on 16th July 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomised controlled trials that compared perazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses, or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The review authors (SL, BH, BHe) independently inspected the citations and where possible abstracts and ordered papers for re-inspection and quality assessment. We independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We inspected all data for heterogeneity, assessed trials for risk of bias and created summary of findings tables using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now includes seven trials with a total of 479 participants. In only one trial, with 95 participants, perazine appeared superior to 'active placebo' (trimipramine) at five weeks for the outcome of 'no important global improvement' (n = 95, RR 0.43 CI 0.2 to 0.8, low quality evidence), but there was no statistically significant difference in most measures of mental state. Perazine did not induce more general adverse events than placebo but more participants received at least one dose of antiparkinson medication (n = 95, RR 4.50 CI 1.0 to 19.5, very low quality evidence).Six small trials comparing perazine with other antipsychotics, including 384 participants in total, were incompletely reported and the outcomes were presented in various ways so that meta-analysis was not possible on most occasions. In the six studies, a similar number of participants receiving perazine or comparator antipsychotics (amisulpride, haloperidol, olanzapine, ziprasidone, zotepine) left the studies early (n = 384, RR 0.97 CI 0.68 to 1.38, low quality evidence). The results on efficacy could not be meta-analysed because the authors presented their results in very different ways. No obvious differences in adverse events between perazine and other antipsychotics could be derived from the limited data. Two haloperidol comparisons did not present extrapyramidal side-effects in a way that was suitable for use in meta-analysis, but three small comparisons with the second-generation antipsychotics zotepine and amisulpride showed no higher risk of akathisia (n = 111, RR 0.31 CI 0.1 to 1.1), dyskinesia (n = 111, RR 0.47 CI 0.1 to 3.5), parkinsonism (n = 81, RR 1.21 CI 0.5 2.8) or tremor (n = 40, RR 0.80 CI 0.3 to 2.6) with perazine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The number, size and reporting of randomised controlled perazine trials are insufficient to present firm conclusions about the properties of this antipsychotic. It is possible that perazine is associated with a similar risk of extrapyramidal side-effects as some atypical antipsychotics but this is based on small comparisons. This should be clarified in larger, well-designed trials.

Optimizing early prediction for antipsychotic response in schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Researchers, by studying first-generation antipsychotics, have established an early prediction model, which had a favorable specificity but a low sensitivity. This study aims to optimize early prediction of treatment response for schizophrenia using a novel statistic method that can be done even under the Microsoft Excel system of a personal computer.

METHODS

One hundred twenty-three inpatients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia were given optimal therapy of risperidone, a commonly used second-generation antipsychotic agent. Response was defined as a reduction of 20% or more in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score. We applied the generalized estimating equation method's logistic regression to establish an early prediction model based on the treatment results of the first and the second weeks.

RESULTS

The proposed method correctly predicted nonresponse at 4 and 6 weeks in 80.8% and 81.8% of the patients, respectively. The method also identified responder at 4 and 6 weeks in 80.0% and 82.8%, respectively. The predictive powers (or correct prediction rates) at 4 and 6 weeks were 80.3% and 82.4%, respectively. In addition, the results based on the responses in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores were slightly better than those in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the first 2 weeks' treatment results to predict the fourth or sixth week's treatment response is acceptable in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and predictive power. Further studies are needed. Moreover, whether this model could be applied to establish a prediction system for other psychotropics, such as antidepressants, also deserves research.

Evaluation of factors influencing medication compliance in inpatient treatment of psychotic disorders

RATIONALE

Short- and long-term compliance to prescribed antipsychotic drugs is of particular concern in regard to medication choice and treatment outcome in the care of psychotic disorders.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated patient-related and treatment-related factors associated with medication compliance in inpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or other psychotic disorder.

METHODS

Within a naturalistic study in seven psychiatric hospitals, individuals with a psychotic disorder were assessed weekly on mental state, social functioning, side effects, and medication compliance. Logistic regression analyses were computed to assess patient and clinical predictors of medication compliance.

RESULTS

We found a significant association between medication compliance and substance abuse (OR 0.52, CI 0.32-0.85), involuntary admission (OR 0.60, CI 0.41-0.89), history of aggressive behavior (OR 0.57, CI 0.38-0.85), and no school graduation (OR 0.59, CI 0.41-0.86). Individuals with pronounced paranoid or negative symptoms were also less compliant in taking their prescribed medication. There was no association between the initial inpatient antipsychotic medication regime and patients' compliance. Individuals who switched from a typical to an atypical antipsychotic drug were more compliant than those with their typical antipsychotic drug maintained. Those with higher medication compliance showed significantly greater improvement of their psychiatric symptoms during the inpatient stay.

CONCLUSION

Patient-related in addition to disease-related factors may strongly influence medication compliance. Besides more compliance with atypicals supposed by the literature, there may be a higher propensity for atypical drugs to be prescribed to those assumed to be more compliant.

Perazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Perazine is an old phenothiazine derivative used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia and is reputed to have a low level of extrapyramidal adverse effects. As far as we are aware, its use is limited to Germany, Poland, the former Yugoslavia and the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of perazine for those with schizophrenia, and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the bibliographic databases Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, LILACS, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts and Sociofile (last update of the review March 2005). We searched references of all included studies for further trials. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected all randomised controlled trials that compared perazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently (SL, BH) inspected citations and where possible abstracts and ordered papers for re-inspection and quality assessment. We independently extracted data. We excluded data if loss to follow up was greater than 50%. For homogeneous dichotomous data we calculated the Relative Risk (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD). We inspected all data for heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials with a total of 288 participants. In only one trial with 95 participants, perazine appeared superior to 'active placebo' (trimipramine) at five weeks for the outcome of 'no important global improvement' (n=95, RR 0.43 CI 0.2 to 0.8, NNT 4 CI 2 to 13), but there was no statistically significant difference in most measures of mental state. Perazine did not induce more general adverse events than placebo, but more participants received at least one dose of antiparkinson medication (n=95, RR 4.50 CI 1.0 to 19.5, NNH 6 CI 4 to 33). Five small trials comparing perazine with other antipsychotics, including in total only 193 participants, were incompletely reported and the outcomes were presented in various ways so that meta-analysis was not possible in most occasions. A similar number of participants receiving perazine or comparator antipsychotics left the studies early (n=193, RR 0.85, CI 0.5 to 1.4). The results on efficacy were controversial and need further assessment by randomised controlled trials. No obvious differences in adverse events between perazine and other antipsychotics could be derived from the limited data. Two haloperidol comparisons did not present extrapyramidal side-effects in a suitable way for use in meta-analysis, but three small comparisons with the atypical antipsychotics zotepine and amisulpride showed no higher risk of akathisia (n=111, RR 0.31 CI 0.1 to 1.1), dyskinesia (n=111, RR 0.47 CI 0.1 to 3.5), parkinsonism (n=81, RR 1.21 CI 0.5 2.8) or tremor (n=40, RR 0.80 CI 0.3 to 2.6) with perazine.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The number, size and reporting of randomised controlled perazine trials is insufficient to present firm conclusions about the properties of this antipsychotic. It is possible that perazine is associated with a similar risk of extrapyramidal side-effects as some atypical antipsychotics, and this should be clarified in larger, well-designed trials.

Perazine for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Perazine is an old phenothiazine derivative used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia which has a reputed low level of extrapyramidal side-effects. However, its use is restricted in the sense that - to the best knowledge of the reviewers - it is only marketed in Germany, Poland, Yugoslavia and the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of perazine for those with schizophrenia, and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the bibliographic databases Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, LILACS, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts and Sociofile were undertaken. References of all included studies were searched for further trials. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials that compared perazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by two reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were independently extracted. Data were excluded if loss to follow up was greater than 50%. For homogeneous dichotomous data the Relative Risk (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, weighted mean differences were calculated (WMD). All data were inspected for heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Six trials with a total of 288 participants are included. According to only one trial with 95 participants perazine appeared superior to active placebo (trimipramine) at five weeks for the outcome of 'no important global improvement' (n=95, RR 0.6, CI 0.3-0.9, NNT 4, CI 2-17), but there was no difference in various measures of mental state. The side-effect risk of perazine compared to placebo could not be estimated because they were not reported. Five small trials including only 193 participants which compared perazine with other antipsychotics were incompletely reported and the outcomes were presented in various ways so that meta-analysis was not possible in most occasions. A similar number of participants receiving perazine or comparator antipsychotics left the studies early (n=193, RR 0.9, CI 0.5-1.4). The results on efficacy were controversial and need further assessment by randomised controlled trials. No obvious differences in adverse events between perazine and other antipsychotics could be derived from these limited data. Two haloperidol comparisons did not present extrapyramidal side-effects in a way usable for meta-analysis, but three small comparisons with the atypical antipsychotics zotepine and amisulpride showed no higher risk of akathisia (n=111, RR 0.3, CI 0.1-1.1), dyskinesia (n=111, RR 0.5, CI 0.1-3.5), parkinsonism (n=81, RR 1.2, CI 0.5-2.8) or tremor (n=40, RR 0.8, CI 0.3-2.3) with perazine.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The number, size and reporting of randomised controlled perazine trials is insufficient to present firm conclusions about the properties of this antipsychotic. It is possible that perazine is associated with a similar risk of extrapyramidal side-effects as some atypical antipsychotics, and this should be clarified in larger, well-designed trials.

Loss of striatal cholinergic neurons as a basis for tardive and L-dopa-induced dyskinesias, neuroleptic-induced supersensitivity psychosis and refractory schizophrenia

In the first section of this paper several aspects of tardive dyskinesia (TD) (clinical, epidemiological, pharmacological) are reviewed. We propose that this syndrome is not the consequence of dopamine receptor proliferation, but results from damage or degeneration of striatal cholinergic interneurons. We suggest that this cellular damage is caused by prolonged overactivation of these neurons, which occurs when they are released from dopaminergic inhibition following neuroleptic administration. Overactivity of central cholinergic systems during akinetic and motor retarded depression could be a contributory cause. The predisposition to L-DOPA-induced peak-dose dyskinesia in Parkinson's disease may depend on the same type of striatal neuronal loss. In the second part of the paper, the subject of supersensitivity psychosis and drug-resistant schizophrenia is reviewed. These two syndromes, are commonly associated with TD, have similar predisposing factors and pharmacology to TD, and are potentially persistent. We suggest that these conditions also result from degeneration of cholinergic striatal interneurons following chronic neuroleptic administration. The efficacy of clozapine for such treatment-refractory psychoses is explained in terms of its blockade of D-1 dopamine receptors. Other drugs effective against refractory psychoses (e.g. risperidone) are predicted to reduce activation at D-1 receptors.

Early serum levels of neuroleptics do not predict therapeutic response in schizophrenia

Thirty-six acute schizophrenics were included in a 28-day open treatment study with the neuroleptic perazine. Peak serum levels of parent drug and its main inactive metabolite desmethyl-perazine were assessed 2 hours after an oral test dose given at the beginning of the study. Whereas peak levels of perazine were not significantly different in treatment responders and nonresponders, desmethyl-perazine was significantly higher in nonresponders. The ratio between desmethyl-perazine and perazine was not predictive of (non-) response to neuroleptic treatment in schizophrenia.

Drug therapy in schizophrenia--variability of outcome and prediction of response

In spite of the proven benefits of neuroleptics in reducing acute psychotic symptoms and in preventing relapse in schizophrenic patients, not all schizophrenics benefit equally from neuroleptic therapy. Predictors of response include: demographics, clinical characteristics, neurologic soft signs, neurocognitive functioning, morphologic brain changes, drug blood levels, indices of blockade of the dopamine receptors, subjective response to medications as well as early symptomatic improvement. Methodological difficulties in outcome research in drug therapy are reviewed. No single factor has been identified as a reliable predictor of drug response, and it is unlikely that such a single predictor will prove useful in a heterogeneous illness such as schizophrenia. This paper reviews the factors, which have been suggested as useful in developing better understanding of variability of drug response among schizophrenics.