Effects of clozapine, olanzapine, risperidone, and haloperidol on hostility among patients with schizophrenia

Effects of cariprazine on reducing symptoms of irritability, hostility, and agitation in patients with manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder

BACKGROUND

Hostility, irritability, and agitation are common in patients with bipolar I disorder. Post hoc analyses evaluated the effect of cariprazine on these symptoms in patients with bipolar I mania.

METHODS

Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 cariprazine trials in adults with bipolar I manic/mixed episodes (NCT00488618, NCT01058096, NCT01058668); pooled cariprazine doses (3-12 mg/d) were analyzed. Patients were categorized into hostility/irritability and agitation subgroups by baseline scores: Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) irritability and disruptive-aggressive behavior items score ≥ 2; Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility item ≥ 2; PANSS-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) total score ≥ 14 and score ≥ 4 on ≥ 1 individual item. Changes from baseline to week 3 in hostility/irritability- and agitation-related outcomes were evaluated. Adjustments were made for the presence of other manic symptoms, sedation, and akathisia.

RESULTS

Most patients met subgroup inclusion criteria (YMRS hostility = 930; PANSS hostility = 841, PANSS-EC agitation = 486). In the YMRS subgroup, least squares mean differences in change from baseline were statistically significant for cariprazine versus placebo on YMRS hostility/irritability-related items (irritability [-0.93], disruptive-aggressive behavior [-0.79], combined [-1.75]; P ≤ 0.001 each), YMRS total score (-5.92, P ≤ 0.0001), and all individual YMRS items (-0.25 to -0.93, P ≤ 0.0001); differences remained significant after adjustment for other manic symptoms, sedation, and akathisia. Differences in PANSS hostility and PANSS-EC subgroups were significant for cariprazine versus placebo (P ≤ 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Post hoc analysis.

CONCLUSION

Cariprazine demonstrated specific antihostility/irritability and anti-agitation effects in patients with manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder and baseline hostility, irritability, or agitation.

The cardiovascular toxicity of clozapine in embryonic zebrafish and RNA sequencing-based transcriptome analysis

Clozapine (CLZ) is the most prescribed medication for treating refractory schizophrenia but is associated with significant cardiovascular toxicity. This study aimed to investigate the cardiovascular toxicity induced by CLZ using zebrafish as a model animal. For this purpose, zebrafish developed to 80-h post-fertilization were exposed to different CLZ concentration solutions for 24 h followed by cardiac morphological observations in yolk sac edema, pericardial edema, and blood coagulation, in addition to increased SV-BA distance, functionally manifested as bradycardia, and decreased cardiac ejection fraction using the untreated embryos as control. At the same time, RNA sequencing was used to study the possible molecular mechanism of CLZ-induced cardiovascular toxicity. The results indicated that compared to the control group, the experimental groups possessed a total of 5888 differentially expressed genes (DEGs), where gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) functional enrichment of analysis indicated that DEGs were mainly enriched in the pathways related to ion channels. These findings may provide new insights and directions for the subsequent in-depth study of the molecular mechanism of CLZ-induced cardiovascular toxicity.

A systematic review of clozapine for aggression and violence in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

Although uncommon, the risk of aggression and violence is greater in people with schizophrenia than in the general population. Clozapine is the "gold standard" pharmacologic treatment for the management of persistent agitation and aggression in people with schizophrenia and is consistently recommended by guidelines and reviews for this purpose. Although clozapine is indicated for treatment-resistant schizophrenia based on its superior efficacy, studies have proposed that clozapine may have specific properties that ameliorate aggression and hostility that are distinct from its antipsychotic effects. A literature review was conducted on June 3, 2023, using the US National Library of Medicine's PubMed resource to identify articles focusing on clozapine for the treatment of aggression, violence, and/or hostility in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The majority of evidence, including from randomized control trials, supports the utilization of clozapine as maintenance treatment for persistent aggressive behavior in patients with schizophrenia, and supports that its anti-aggressive effects may be independent from its antipsychotic properties (e.g. - treatment of hallucinations and delusions). Future randomized control studies evaluating clozapine and clozapine serum levels with aggression as the primary outcome would be of benefit.

Prevention of suicide by clozapine in mental disorders: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Previous research has investigated the efficacy of clozapine in reducing suicidality in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. We aimed to systematically review published evidence, including studies concerning clozapine administration to treat: (a) refractory suicidality in other mental disorders, including bipolar disorder and borderline and other personality disorders; and (b) refractory cases of non-suicidal self-injury.

METHOD

We performed a PUBMED-search (last day: July 17, 2022) of English-language studies, combining the keywords "clozapine", "suicidality", and "suicide" with various psychopathological terms (e.g. "schizophrenia"). All duplications were eliminated.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies were eligible for inclusion in the review. Most studies suggest a superior anti-suicide effect of clozapine in schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder, compared to other antipsychotics, or no antipsychotic therapy, which is not due to the close monitoring of patients for blood dyscrasias. No consensus exists as to whether other antipsychotic drugs share this effect. Discontinuation of clozapine is associated with increases in suicidality. Reductions in refractory suicidality/NSSI are observed in clozapine-treated patients with bipolar disorder or borderline personality disorder, but the evidence is limited. Potential biological underpinnings of the anti-suicide effect of clozapine include its unique profile of modulation of brain neurotransmitters; its non-selectivity for neurotransmitter receptors; specific genetic and hormonal factors; effects on neuroinflammation; and ability to elicit epileptiform activity.

CONCLUSION

The superior anti-suicide effect of clozapine in schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder patients is well established. It may have a role in severe and refractory cases of suicidality and non-suicidal self-injury in patients with bipolar disorder or borderline personality disorder, but the level and quality of supporting evidence is limited.

Second to none: rationale, timing, and clinical management of clozapine use in schizophrenia

Despite its enduring relevance as the single most effective and important evidence-based treatment for schizophrenia, underutilization of clozapine remains considerable. To a substantial degree, this is attributable to a reluctance of psychiatrists to offer clozapine due to its relatively large side-effect burden and the complexity of its use. This underscores the necessity for continued education regarding both the vital nature and the intricacies of clozapine treatment. This narrative review summarizes all clinically relevant areas of evidence, which support clozapine's wide-ranging superior efficacy - for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) and beyond - and make its safe use eminently feasible. Converging evidence indicates that TRS constitutes a distinct albeit heterogeneous subgroup of schizophrenias primarily responsive to clozapine. Most importantly, the predominantly early onset of treatment resistance and the considerable decline in response rates associated with its delayed initiation make clozapine an essential treatment option throughout the course of illness, beginning with the first psychotic episode. To maximize patients' benefits, systematic early recognition efforts based on stringent use of TRS criteria, a timely offer of clozapine, thorough side-effect screening and management as well as consistent use of therapeutic drug monitoring and established augmentation strategies for suboptimal responders are crucial. To minimize permanent all-cause discontinuation, re-challenges after neutropenia or myocarditis should be considered. Owing to clozapine's unique efficacy, comorbid conditions including substance use and most somatic disorders should not dissuade but rather encourage clinicians to consider clozapine. Moreover, treatment decisions need to be informed by the late onset of clozapine's full effects, which for reduced suicidality and mortality rates may not even be readily apparent. Overall, the singular extent of its efficacy combined with the high level of patient satisfaction continues to distinguish clozapine from all other available antipsychotics.

Leukocytosis Associated with Clozapine Treatment: A Case Series and Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Clozapine is the only antipsychotic approved for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Despite its superior efficacy profile as compared with other antipsychotics, clozapine remains underutilized. Clozapine monitoring systems clearly describe the proposed management of clozapine-induced neutropenia; however, no specific mention is made of how to interpret neutrophilic leukocytosis, despite that being a relatively frequent finding. Prescribers unfamiliar with this molecule may misjudge its clinical significance, potentially leading to untimely treatment interruption. Here, we systematically review the literature on the risk of neutrophilic leukocytosis during clozapine treatment, and describe eight additional cases among our patient cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature on PubMed and Embase using the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, and selected all original reports describing either (1) the prevalence of neutrophilic leukocytosis during clozapine treatment, or (2) the clinical significance of neutrophilic leukocytosis. We described eight additional cases of neutrophilic leukocytosis during clozapine treatment while attending an outpatient psychiatric clinic.

RESULTS

Our research ultimately yielded the selection of 13 articles included in this systematic review. The case series highlighted the presence of stable and clinically unremarkable neutrophilia during a follow-up ranging from one to ten years.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing evidence indicates that leukocytosis associated with clozapine treatment can be considered as an asymptomatic and benign condition, suggesting that no change in clozapine treatment is needed upon its detection.

The Importance of Conduct Disorder in the Treatment of Violence in Schizophrenia: Efficacy of Clozapine Compared With Olanzapine and Haloperidol

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of violence in schizophrenia remains a challenging problem, especially in patients with conduct disorder. Previous clinical studies did not select patients on the basis of violence and did not focus on conduct disorder. This study is a head-to-head comparison of clozapine, olanzapine, and haloperidol in the treatment of violent schizophrenia patients with and without conduct disorder.

METHODS

Physically assaultive schizophrenia patients (N=99) were randomly assigned to receive clozapine, olanzapine, or haloperidol in a 12-week double-blind trial. They were characterized on the basis of the presence or absence of conduct disorder before age 15. Assaults were recorded; their frequency and severity were scored on the Modified Overt Aggression Scale. Psychiatric symptoms were evaluated through the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale.

RESULTS

Patients with a history of conduct disorder had more frequent and severe assaults than those without conduct disorder during the 12-week trial. Clozapine was superior to haloperidol and olanzapine in reducing assaults; olanzapine was superior to haloperidol. Clozapine's greater antiaggressive efficacy over haloperidol was substantially more pronounced in patients with conduct disorder than in patients without conduct disorder. In patients with conduct disorder, clozapine was four times more likely than haloperidol to result in lower violence; in patients without conduct disorder, it was three times more likely to do so. Olanzapine's superiority over haloperidol was also more pronounced in patients with conduct disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to examine the effect of clozapine in violent schizophrenia patients with conduct disorder. When conduct disorder is present, clozapine is the optimal treatment.

Pharmacological interventions to reduce violence in patients with schizophrenia in forensic psychiatry

BACKGROUND

The purpose was to systematically investigate which pharmacological strategies are effective to reduce the risk of violence among patients with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders (SSD) in forensic settings.

METHODS

For this systematic review six electronic data bases were searched. Two researchers independently screened the 6,003 abstracts resulting in 143 potential papers. These were then analyzed in detail by two independent researchers. Of these, 133 were excluded for various reasons leaving 10 articles in the present review.

RESULTS

Of the 10 articles included, five were merely observational, and three were pre-post studies without controls. One study applied a matched case-control design and one was a non-randomized controlled trial. Clozapine was investigated most frequently, followed by olanzapine and risperidone. Often, outcome measures were specific to the study and sample sizes were small. Frequently, relevant methodological information was missing. Due to heterogeneous study designs and outcomes meta-analytic methods could not be applied.

CONCLUSION

Due to substantial methodological limitations it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions about the most effective pharmacological strategies to reduce the risk of violence in patents with SSD in forensic psychiatry settings. Studies applying more rigorous methods regarding case-definition, outcome measures, sample sizes, and study designs are urgently needed.

Specific Anti-hostility Effects of Atypical Antipsychotics in Persons with Schizophrenia: From Clozapine to Cariprazine

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Evaluate the anti-hostility effects of available atypical antipsychotic agents.

ABSTRACT

In addition to hallucinations and delusions, persons with schizophrenia may exhibit hostility. In clinical trials of antipsychotics, hostility is routinely measured as part of rating scales such as the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale or Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The availability of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in 1989 led to the observation that it is possible to have a treatment effect on hostility that is independent of the treatment effect on hallucinations or delusions, and independent of general sedative effects. The data supporting this notion of a specific anti-hostility effect are the most robust for clozapine as the data include specifically designed randomized, controlled clinical trials. A specific anti-hostility effect is also observable to various degrees with most of the other atypical antipsychotics, as evidenced in post hoc analyses of clinical trials originally conducted for regulatory purposes, supplemented by post hoc analyses of large effectiveness trials. The generalizability of these studies, however, may be limited. Participants in these trials were not selected for aggressive and hostile behavior. Some of the studies also excluded patients with substance use disorders. The latter is particularly important because alcohol and substance use are well known to increase risk for hostility and aggression. Nevertheless, the repeated demonstrations of the specificity of an anti-hostility effect (in terms of statistical independence of effects on other positive symptoms and of sedation) are of potential clinical importance.

Organisational interventions for preventing and minimising aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates

BACKGROUND

Workplace aggression is becoming increasingly prevalent in health care, with serious consequences for both individuals and organisations. Research and development of organisational interventions to prevent and minimise workplace aggression has also increased. However, it is not known if interventions prevent or reduce occupational violence directed towards healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of organisational interventions that aim to prevent and minimise workplace aggression directed towards healthcare workers by patients and patient advocates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases from inception to 25 May 2019: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Wiley Online Library); MEDLINE (PubMed); CINAHL (EBSCO); Embase (embase.com); PsycINFO (ProQuest); NIOSHTIC (OSH-UPDATE); NIOSHTIC-2 (OSH-UPDATE); HSELINE (OSH-UPDATE); and CISDOC (OSH-UPDATE). We also searched the ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portals (www.who.int/ictrp/en).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) of any organisational intervention to prevent and minimise verbal or physical aggression directed towards healthcare workers and their peers in their workplace by patients or their advocates. The primary outcome measure was episodes of aggression resulting in no harm, psychological, or physical harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods for data collection and analysis. This included independent data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessment by at least two review authors per included study. We used the Haddon Matrix to categorise interventions aimed at the victim, the vector or the environment of the aggression and whether the intervention was applied before, during or after the event of aggression. We used the random-effects model for the meta-analysis and GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies. Four studies were conducted in nursing home settings, two studies were conducted in psychiatric wards and one study was conducted in an emergency department. Interventions in two studies focused on prevention of aggression by the vector in the pre-event phase, being 398 nursing home residents and 597 psychiatric patients. The humour therapy in one study in a nursing home setting did not have clear evidence of a reduction of overall aggression (mean difference (MD) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 0.34; very low-quality evidence). A short-term risk assessment in the other study showed a decreased incidence of aggression (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.78; very low-quality evidence) compared to practice as usual. Two studies compared interventions to minimise aggression by the vector in the event phase to practice as usual. In both studies the event was aggression during bathing of nursing home patients. In one study, involving 18 residents, music was played during the bathing period and in the other study, involving 69 residents, either a personalised shower or a towel bath was used. The studies provided low-quality evidence that the interventions may result in a medium-sized reduction of overall aggression (standardised mean difference (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.05; 2 studies), and physical aggression (SMD -0.85, 95% CI -1.46 to -0.24; 1 study; very low-quality evidence), but not in verbal aggression (SMD -0.31, 95% CI; -0.89 to 0.27; 1 study; very low-quality evidence). One intervention focused on the vector, the pre-event phase and the event phase. The study compared a two-year culture change programme in a nursing home to practice as usual and involved 101 residents. This study provided very low-quality evidence that the intervention may result in a medium-sized reduction of physical aggression (MD 0.51, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.91), but there was no clear evidence that it reduced verbal aggression (MD 0.76, 95% CI -0.02 to 1.54). Two studies evaluated a multicomponent intervention that focused on the vector (psychiatry patients and emergency department patients), the victim (nursing staff), and the environment during the pre-event and the event phase. The studies included 564 psychiatric staff and 209 emergency department staff. Both studies involved a comprehensive package of actions aimed at preventing violence, managing violence and environmental changes. There was no clear evidence that the psychiatry intervention may result in a reduction of overall aggression (odds ratio (OR) 0.85, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.15; low-quality evidence), compared to the control condition. The emergency department study did not result in a reduction of aggression (MD = 0) but provided insufficient data to test this.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found very low to low-quality evidence that interventions focused on the vector during the pre-event phase, the event phase or both, may result in a reduction of overall aggression, compared to practice as usual, and we found inconsistent low-quality evidence for multi-component interventions. None of the interventions included the post-event stage. To improve the evidence base, we need more RCT studies, that include the workers as participants and that collect information on the impact of violence on the worker in a range of healthcare settings, but especially in emergency care settings. Consensus on standardised outcomes is urgently needed.

Effect of Brexpiprazole on Agitation and Hostility in Patients With Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies

BACKGROUND

Managing agitation and hostility represents a significant treatment challenge in schizophrenia. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy of brexpiprazole for reducing agitation and hostility in schizophrenia.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT01396421 and NCT01393613) and a 52-week, open-label, extension study (NCT01397786). In the short-term studies, 1094 patients received placebo, 2 mg/d of brexpiprazole, or 4 mg/d of brexpiprazole; 346 brexpiprazole-treated patients rolled over into the long-term study and received 1 to 4 mg/d of brexpiprazole. Agitation was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Excited Component (EC), and hostility was assessed using the PANSS hostility item (P7).

RESULTS

Brexpiprazole improved PANSS-EC score over 6 weeks, with least squares mean differences versus placebo of -0.69 (95% confidence limits, -1.28, -0.11) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.020) and -1.11 (-1.70, -0.53) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.0002). In the subgroup with hostility at baseline (P7 score ≥3; 50.8% of the randomized sample), least squares mean differences versus placebo at week 6 on the PANSS-EC were -0.63 (-1.54, 0.28) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.18) and -1.03 (-1.92, -0.14) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.024), and on P7 (adjusted for positive symptoms) were -0.27 (-0.53, -0.01) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.038) and -0.34 (-0.59, -0.09) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.0080). The improvements were maintained over 58 weeks. Adverse events were generally comparable between treatment groups over 6 weeks; the incidence of akathisia among patients with hostility was 5.9% with placebo, 5.2% with 2 mg/d, and 8.6% with 4 mg/d.

CONCLUSIONS

Brexpiprazole has the potential to be an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for agitation and hostility among patients with schizophrenia.

Risperidone in the management of agitation and aggression associated with psychiatric disorders

Objective

This review provides an overview of the prevalence and treatment of agitation and aggression, and focuses on the use of risperidone to treat these symptoms in patients from different age groups.

Methods

MEDLINE® and EMBASE® databases were used to identify controlled studies of risperidone in the treatment of disruptive behavior disorders and pervasive developmental disorders in pediatric patients, acute agitation or aggression in adults, and psychological and behavioral symptoms of dementia in the elderly. Additionally, key open-label, long-term trials assessing the efficacy and safety of risperidone were considered.

Results

The results of the 19 double-blind studies identified showed that risperidone is effective in treating agitation and aggression in the different populations, regardless of age. The safety and tolerability of risperidone appear to be good overall but certain safety issues, such as a higher risk of cerebrovascular adverse events in the elderly with dementia, were highlighted.

Conclusions

Risperidone is useful for treating aggression and agitation associated with various psychiatric disorders in patients from different age groups.

Pharmacological treatment of violence in schizophrenia

Chronic aggression and violence in schizophrenia are rare, but receive disproportionate negative media coverage. This contributes to the stigma of mental illness and reduces accessibility to mental health services. Substance Use Disorders (SUD), antisocial behavior, non-adherence and recidivism are known risk factors for violence. Treatment with antipsychotic medication can reduce violence. Aside from clozapine, long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) appear to be superior to oral antipsychotics for preventing violence, addressing adherence and recidivism. LAI also facilitate the implementation of functional skills training. For the high-risk recidivist target population with schizophrenia, better life skills have the potential to also reduce the risk for contact with the legal system, including an improved ability to live independently in supported environments and interact appropriately with others. High-risk patients who are resistant to treatment with other antipsychotics should receive treatment with clozapine due to its direct positive effects on impulsive violence, along with a reduction in comorbid risk factors such as SUDs.

[Not Available]

Objective:

The potential of clozapine in severe bipolar disorder is suggested by its efficacy in refractory schizophrenia, but the evidence is limited thus far. This report utilizes data from the standard care pathway of the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program to examine the clinical impact of clozapine in bipolar disorder, comparing it to two groups, one that received olanzapine and an additional group that received neither drug.

Method:

A total of 4,032 outpatients were available for this analysis. Groups for longitudinal analyses are based on the medication used at each visit. Outcomes assessed were clinical status, symptoms subscales, hospitalizations, and death. We utilized mixed models and generalized estimating equations to adjust for baseline differences and investigate longitudinal differences in symptoms, clinical status, and hospitalization rates between groups.

Results:

During the study, 1.1% (n = 43) of the patients used clozapine at any time. Those on clozapine had significantly fewer manic and depressive symptoms during follow-up as compared with those on neither clozapine nor olanzapine, while those on olanzapine had more symptoms. The use of clozapine was not associated with an increased risk of hospitalization. No deaths were recorded for clozapine group during the trial.

Conclusions:

Although prescribed to very few patients, the impact of clozapine was notable, with fewer symptoms in patients who had more severe illnesses at baseline. Clozapine could prove to be as successful an intervention for late-stage bipolar disorder as it has been in schizophrenia.

How and when to use clozapine

OBJECTIVE

Clozapine is the only approved strategy for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, although it is highly underutilized. We aim to generate practical and actionable evidence-based recommendations for the use of this drug considering prescription barriers.

METHOD

Narrative review.

RESULTS

A consistent body of evidence supports the efficacy of clozapine reducing morbidity and mortality in schizophrenia. The main obstacles to its use are the lack of experience by prescribers and perceived treatment burden. Systematic screening of eligibility, utilization of available resources for consultation, developing a professional network with other stakeholders, as well as optimizing how clozapine is presented to patients is discussed. Furthermore, specific evidence-based recommendations for initiation, maintenance, and safety monitoring with clozapine are provided.

CONCLUSION

Clozapine prescription is one of the areas in psychiatry with the greatest mismatch between efficacy and utilization in clinical practice. Although multiple barriers to the use of clozapine exist, some of these may be overcome by updates of routine clinical practice.

Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: Updated recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

These updated guidelines from the British Association for Psychopharmacology replace the original version published in 2011. They address the scope and targets of pharmacological treatment for schizophrenia. A consensus meeting was held in 2017, involving experts in schizophrenia and its treatment. They were asked to review key areas and consider the strength of the evidence on the risk-benefit balance of pharmacological interventions and the clinical implications, with an emphasis on meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials where available, plus updates on current clinical practice. The guidelines cover the pharmacological management and treatment of schizophrenia across the various stages of the illness, including first-episode, relapse prevention, and illness that has proved refractory to standard treatment. It is hoped that the practice recommendations presented will support clinical decision making for practitioners, serve as a source of information for patients and carers, and inform quality improvement.

Efficacy of cariprazine across symptom domains in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: Pooled analyses from 3 phase II/III studies

Schizophrenia affects various symptom domains, including positive and negative symptoms, mood, and cognition. Cariprazine, a dopamine D₃/D₂ receptor partial agonist and serotonin 5-HT_1A receptor partial agonist, with preferential binding to D₃ receptors, is approved for the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia (US, Europe) and mania associated with bipolar I disorder (US). For these investigations, data were pooled from 3 positive, 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II/III trials of cariprazine in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia (NCT00694707, NCT01104766, NCT01104779); 2 trials were fixed-dose and 1 trial was flexible-dose. Post hoc analyses evaluated mean change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) -derived symptom factors (positive symptoms, negative symptoms, disorganized thought, uncontrolled hostility/excitement, anxiety/depression) and PANSS single items for cariprazine (1.5-9.0 mg/d) versus placebo. P values were not adjusted for multiple comparisons. At week 6, statistically significant differences versus placebo were seen for cariprazine on all 5 PANSS factors (P < 0.01 all). Effects sizes ranged from 0.21 (anxiety/depression) to 0.47 (disorganized thought). Dose-response analysis from the fixed-dose studies found significant differences for all cariprazine doses (1.5, 3.0, 4.5, and 6.0 mg/d) versus placebo in PANSS total score, and in negative symptom and disorganized thought factor scores (P < 0.001). Differences between cariprazine and placebo were also statistically significant on 26 of 30 PANSS single items (P < 0.05). In these post hoc analyses, cariprazine was effective versus placebo in improving all 5 PANSS factor domains, suggesting that it may have broad-spectrum efficacy in patients with acute schizophrenia.

Efficacy of typical and atypical antipsychotic medication on hostility in patients with psychosis-spectrum disorders: a review and meta-analysis

As violence against self and others is an important outcome in the treatment of patients with psychosis-spectrum disorders and hostility is an important indicator for violence, we set out to evaluate the effects of different types of antipsychotic agents in reducing hostility. We performed a systematic literature search, which provided 18 suitable randomized studies comparing typical to atypical antipsychotics for at least 4 weeks in patients with psychotic disorders. Results showed a small (0.26) but significant effect for atypical as compared to typical antipsychotics, with high heterogeneity, even though the mean dose of typical antipsychotics was higher. This effect size remained similar when separately analyzing sponsored and non-sponsored studies. When differentiating between high and low-dose studies, the high-dose group showed a significant difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics whereas the low-dose group did not. An analysis comparing clozapine to typical antipsychotics showed a moderate effect size (0.415), with low heterogeneity. These results are important for clinicians to help their shared decision making with patients when choosing maintenance treatment, as next to efficacy for psychosis and tolerability, safety for the patient and their environment is an important outcome.

Risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a widely accessible antipsychotic that can be used to manage psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether oral risperidone alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 2017); this register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid use of risperidone and other drugs, combinations of drugs or placebo for people exhibiting aggression or agitation (or both) thought to be due to psychosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now contains data from nine trials (total n = 582) reporting on five comparisons. Due to risk of bias, small size of trials, indirectness of outcome measures and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was graded as very-low quality. None of the included studies provided useable data on our primary outcome 'tranquillisation or asleep' by 30 minutes, repeated need for tranquillisation or any economic outcomes. Data were available for our other main outcomes of agitation or aggression, needing restraint, and incidence of adverse effects.Risperidone versus haloperidol (up to 24 hours follow-up)For the outcome, specific behaviour - agitation, no clear difference was found between risperidone and haloperidol in terms of efficacy, measured as at least 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Psychotic Agitation Sub-score (PANSS-PAS) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) and no effect was observed for need to use restraints (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.21; participants = 28; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Incidence of adverse effects was similar between treatment groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus olanzapineOne small trial (n = 29) reported useable data for the comparison risperidone versus olanzapine. No effect was observed for agitation measured as PANSS-PAS endpoint score at two hours (MD 2.50, 95% CI -2.46 to 7.46; very low-quality evidence); need to use restraints at four days (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.39 to 5.28; very-low quality evidence); specific movement disorders measured as Behavioural Activity Rating Scale (BARS) endpoint score at four days (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.83; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus quetiapineOne trial reported (n = 40) useable data for the comparison risperidone versus quetiapine. Aggression was measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) endpoint score at two weeks. A clear difference, favouring quetiapine was observed (MD 1.80, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.40; very-low quality evidence). No evidence of a difference between treatment groups could be observed for incidence of akathisia after 24 hours (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.06; very low-quality evidence). Two participants allocated to risperidone and one allocated to quetiapine experienced myocardial ischaemia during the trial.Risperidone versus risperidone + oxcarbazepineOne trial (n = 68) measured agitation using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component.(PANSS-EC) endpoint score and found a clear difference, favouring the combination treatment at one week (MD 2.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.98; very low-quality evidence), but no effect was observed for global state using Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) endpoint score at one week (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.21; very-low quality evidence). Incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms after 24 hours was similar between treatment groups (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14; very-low quality evidence).Risperidone versus risperidone + valproic acidTwo trials compared risperidone with a combination of risperidone plus valproic acid. No clear differences between the treatment groups were observed for aggression (MOAS endpoint score at three days: MD 1.07, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.34; participants = 54; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or incidence of akathisia after 24 hours: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.03; participants = 122; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, results for the main outcomes show no real effect for risperidone. The only data available for use in this review are from nine under-sampled trials and the evidence available is of very low quality. This casts uncertainty on the role of risperidone in rapid tranquillisation for people with psychosis-induced aggression. High-quality pragmatic RCTs are feasible and are needed before clear recommendations can be drawn on the use of risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

Clozapine in Reducing Aggression and Violence in Forensic Populations

Popular media often portray people with a mental illness as being aggressive, violent, and incarcerated as a result of their behavior. Despite exaggeration in the media, risks for some aggressive behaviors are in fact higher in individuals with schizophrenia. This is often the case with influence of comorbid substance use disorders. It is essential that mental health professionals are aware of treatments that may help with attenuating and treating behaviors that contribute to violence, aggression and incarceration. This paper reviews violence and incarceration in individuals with schizophrenia as well as recommendations, guidelines and benefits for the use of clozapine in this population. Clozapine remains one of the most underutilized evidence-based medications available in the psychiatric arena in the United States. It is a viable and recommended option in the forensic population and it may be helpful on the path to recovery as well as bring substantial savings to the criminal justice system.

Measurement of agitation and aggression in adult and aged neuropsychiatric patients: review of definitions and frequently used measurement scales

Agitation and aggression in adult psychiatric patients with psychoses and in persons with dementia increase the burden of disease and frequently cause hospitalization. The implementation of currently available management strategies and the development of new ones is hindered by inconsistent terminology that confuses agitation with aggression. This confusion is maintained by many rating scales that fail to distinguish between these two syndromes. We review the frequently used rating scales with a particular focus on their ability to separate agitation from aggression. Agitation and aggression are two different syndromes. For example, reactive aggression is often precipitated by rejection of care and may not be associated with agitation per se. We propose, in treatment studies of behavioral symptoms of dementia and challenging behaviors in psychoses, that outcomes should be evaluated separately for agitation and aggression. This is important for investigation of drug effectiveness since the medication may be effective against one syndrome but not the other. Separate assessments of agitation and aggression should be a general principle of trial design with particular salience for registration studies of medications proposed for approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other regulatory bodies.

Haloperidol for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol used alone is recommended to help calm situations of aggression or agitation for people with psychosis. It is widely accessible and may be the only antipsychotic medication available in limited-resource areas.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether haloperidol alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation, wherein clinicians are required to intervene to prevent harm to self and others.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (26th May 2016). This register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving people exhibiting aggression and/or agitation thought to be due to psychosis, allocated rapid use of haloperidol alone (by any route), compared with any other treatment. Outcomes of interest included tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes, repeated need for rapid tranquillisation within 24 hours, specific behaviours (threat or injury to others/self), adverse effects. We included trials meeting our selection criteria and providing useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR), for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), and for cognitive outcomes we derived standardised mean difference (SMD) effect sizes, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and using a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce 'Summary of findings' tables which included our pre-specified main outcomes of interest.

MAIN RESULTS

We found nine new RCTs from the 2016 update search, giving a total of 41 included studies and 24 comparisons. Few studies were undertaken in circumstances that reflect real-world practice, and, with notable exceptions, most were small and carried considerable risk of bias. Due to the large number of comparisons, we can only present a summary of main results.Compared with placebo, more people in the haloperidol group were asleep at two hours (2 RCTs, n=220, RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.82 to 0.95, very low-quality evidence) and experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=207, RR 7.49, 95%CI 0.93 to 60.21, very low-quality evidence).Compared with aripiprazole, people in the haloperidol group required fewer injections than those in the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n=473, RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.62 to 0.99, low-quality evidence). More people in the haloperidol group experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n=477, RR 6.63, 95%CI 1.52 to 28.86, very low-quality evidence).Four trials (n=207) compared haloperidol with lorazepam with no significant differences with regard to number of participants asleep at one hour (1 RCT, n=60, RR 1.05, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.44, very low-quality of evidence) or those requiring additional injections (1 RCT, n=66, RR 1.14, 95%CI 0.91 to 1.43, very low-quality of evidence).Haloperidol's adverse effects were not offset by addition of lorazepam (e.g. dystonia 1 RCT, n=67, RR 8.25, 95%CI 0.46 to 147.45, very low-quality of evidence).Addition of promethazine was investigated in two trials (n=376). More people in the haloperidol group were not tranquil or asleep by 20 minutes (1 RCT, n=316, RR 1.60, 95%CI 1.18 to 2.16, moderate-quality evidence). Acute dystonia was too common in the haloperidol alone group for the trial to continue beyond the interim analysis (1 RCT, n=316, RR 19.48, 95%CI 1.14 to 331.92, low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Additional data from new studies does not alter previous conclusions of this review. If no other alternative exists, sole use of intramuscular haloperidol could be life-saving. Where additional drugs are available, sole use of haloperidol for extreme emergency could be considered unethical. Addition of the sedating promethazine has support from better-grade evidence from within randomised trials. Use of an alternative antipsychotic drug is only partially supported by fragmented and poor-grade evidence. Adding a benzodiazepine to haloperidol does not have strong evidence of benefit and carries risk of additional harm.After six decades of use for emergency rapid tranquillisation, this is still an area in need of good independent trials relevant to real-world practice.

Leading indicators of community-based violent events among adults with mental illness

BACKGROUND

The public health, public safety and clinical implications of violent events among adults with mental illness are significant; however, the causes and consequences of violence and victimization among adults with mental illness are complex and not well understood, which limits the effectiveness of clinical interventions and risk management strategies. This study examined interrelationships between violence, victimization, psychiatric symptoms, substance use, homelessness and in-patient treatment over time.

METHOD

Available data were integrated from four longitudinal studies of adults with mental illness. Assessments took place at baseline, and at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 24, 30 and 36 months, depending on the parent studies' protocol. Data were analysed with the autoregressive cross-lag model.

RESULTS

Violence and victimization were leading indicators of each other and affective symptoms were a leading indicator of both. Drug and alcohol use were leading indicators of violence and victimization, respectively. All psychiatric symptom clusters - affective, positive, negative, disorganized cognitive processing - increased the likelihood of experiencing at least one subsequent symptom cluster. Sensitivity analyses identified few group-based differences in the magnitude of effects in this heterogeneous sample.

CONCLUSIONS

Violent events demonstrated unique and shared indicators and consequences over time. Findings indicate mechanisms for reducing violent events, including trauma-informed therapy, targeting internalizing and externalizing affective symptoms with cognitive-behavioral and psychopharmacological interventions, and integrating substance use and psychiatric care. Finally, mental illness and violence and victimization research should move beyond demonstrating concomitant relationships and instead focus on lagged effects with improved spatio-temporal contiguity.

Potential Mechanisms of Hematological Adverse Drug Reactions in Patients Receiving Clozapine in Combination With Proton Pump Inhibitors

Clozapine is a second-generation antipsychotic which has proven efficacy in treating the symptoms of schizophrenia. Although clozapine therapy is associated with a number of adverse drug reactions, it is frequently used. One of the most common adverse drug reactions is gastroesophageal reflux disease which is an indication for treatment with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). Coadministration of clozapine and PPIs increases the risk of hematological adverse drug reactions, including neutropenia and agranulocytosis. The mechanism in idiosyncratic agranulocytosis is not dose related and involves either a direct toxic or an immune-allergic effect. It is suspected that the clozapine metabolites nitrenium ion and N-desmethylclozapine may cause apoptosis or impair growth of granulocytes. Formation of N-desmethylclozapine is correlated with activity of the cytochrome P450 enzymes 1A2 and 3A4 (CYP1A2 and CYP3A4). Nitrenium ion is produced by the flavin-containing monooxygenase system of leukocytes. A drug interaction between clozapine and a PPI is a consequence of the induction of common metabolic pathways either by the PPI or clozapine. Findings to date suggest that indirect induction of flavin-containing monooxygenase by omeprazole through the aryl hydrocarbon receptor increases the expression of the enzyme mRNA and in the long term may cause the increase in activity. Moreover, induction of CYP1A2, especially by omeprazole and lansoprazole, may increase the serum concentration of N-desmethylclozapine, which can accumulate in lymphocytes and may achieve toxic levels. Another hypothesis that may explain hematological adverse drug reactions is competitive inhibition of CYP2C19, which may contribute to increased serum concentrations of toxic metabolites.

Effects of paliperidone extended release on hostility among Thai patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

This open-label prospective study investigated the effects of paliperidone extended release (ER) on hostility in Thai patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND

Patients diagnosed with schizophrenia may be hostile or exhibit aggressive behavior, which can occasion their admission to psychiatric hospital. Antipsychotic medications are often used to treat hostility and aggression in such patients. Paliperidone ER is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, there are no data available for paliperidone ER with regard to its efficacy on hostility and aggression among Thai patients. This study was a part of the PERFEcT study, a 6-month, open-label, multicenter, multicountry, prospective trial to explore the safety, efficacy, and functionality of paliperidone ER tablets. The current study included only the data obtained from Thai participants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Flexible dosing of paliperidone ER in a range of 3-12 mg/day was used, allowing investigators to adjust the dosage of each subject individually. The 199 Thai patients had a stable Clinical Global Impression - severity score before enrollment. Demographic data were collected at enrollment, and assessments took place at 1, 2, 3, and 6 months postbaseline. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scale were used to evaluate efficacy. In this analysis, we report the findings for the specific PANSS factor P7 (hostility) and the PSP subscale disturbing and aggressive behavior. Data were analyzed using paired t-test method to investigate changes in mean PANSS and PSP total and subscale scores. The significance level was set at P<0.05.

RESULTS

From a total of 199 Thai patients, 148 patients (74.4%) participated in all visits. There was a significant reduction in mean scores for all total PANSS measures from 1 month onward compared with baseline, as well as ongoing significant reductions in scores from visit to visit. There was a significant reduction in mean hostility score at 2 months (P<0.05), 3 months (P<0.05), and 6 months (P<0.01) (n=148). For the PSP scale, there was a significant across-the-board reduction of mean scores from 3 months onward, including in the disturbing and aggressive behavior subscale (P<0.001) (n=148).

CONCLUSION

Switching from previously unsuccessful antipsychotic treatments to paliperidone ER may be a useful option to reduce hostility and disturbing behavior in patients with schizophrenia. This study in Thai patients is in line with findings in other countries and cultures concerning the management of hostility in patients with schizophrenia.

Haloperidol for long-term aggression in psychosis

BACKGROUND

Psychotic disorders can lead some people to become agitated. Characterised by restlessness, excitability and irritability, this can result in verbal and physically aggressive behaviour - and both can be prolonged. Aggression within the psychiatric setting imposes a significant challenge to clinicians and risk to service users; it is a frequent cause for admission to inpatient facilities. If people continue to be aggressive it can lengthen hospitalisation. Haloperidol is used to treat people with long-term aggression.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether haloperidol alone, administered orally, intramuscularly or intravenously, is an effective treatment for long-term/persistent aggression in psychosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (July 2011 and April 2015).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) or double blind trials (implying randomisation) with useable data comparing haloperidol with another drug or placebo for people with psychosis and long-term/persistent aggression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author (AK) extracted data. For dichotomous data, one review author (AK) calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a fixed-effect model. One review author (AK) assessed risk of bias for included studies and created a 'Summary of findings' table using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We have no good-quality evidence of the absolute effectiveness of haloperidol for people with long-term aggression. One study randomising 110 chronically aggressive people to three different antipsychotic drugs met the inclusion criteria. When haloperidol was compared with olanzapine or clozapine, skewed data (n=83) at high risk of bias suggested some advantage in terms of scale scores of unclear clinical meaning for olanzapine/clozapine for 'total aggression'. Data were available for only one other outcome, leaving the study early. When compared with other antipsychotic drugs, people allocated to haloperidol were no more likely to leave the study (1 RCT, n=110, RR 1.37, CI 0.84 to 2.24, low-quality evidence). Although there were some data for the outcomes listed above, there were no data on most of the binary outcomes and none on service outcomes (use of hospital/police), satisfaction with treatment, acceptance of treatment, quality of life or economics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Only one study could be included and most data were heavily skewed, almost impossible to interpret and oflow quality. There were also some limitations in the study design with unclear description of allocation concealment and high risk of bias for selective reporting, so no firm conclusions can be made. This review shows how trials in this group of people are possible - albeit difficult. Further relevant trials are needed to evaluate use of haloperidol in treatment of long-term/persistent aggression in people living with psychosis.

A Guide to the Management of Clozapine-Related Tolerability and Safety Concerns

Clozapine is a highly effective antipsychotic medication, which provides a range of significant benefits for patients with schizophrenia, and is the standard of care for treatment-resistant schizophrenia as well as for reducing the risk of suicidal behaviors in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. However, clozapine is widely underutilized, largely because prescribing clinicians lack experience in prescribing it and managing its adverse events (AEs). Clozapine is associated with 3 uncommon but immediately dangerous AEs, agranulocytosis, myocarditis/cardiomyopathy, and seizures, as well as AEs that may become dangerous if neglected, including weight gain, metabolic syndrome and constipation, and others that are annoying or distressing such as sedation, nighttime enuresis and hypersalivation. Because of the risk of agranulocytosis, clozapine formulations are available only through restricted distribution via a patient registry, with mandatory, systematized monitoring for absolute neutrophil count using a specific algorithm. We identified articles on managing clozapine-associated AEs by searching PubMed using appropriate keywords and search techniques for each topic. A review of the prevalence and clinical characteristics of clozapine-associated AEs shows that these risks can be managed efficiently and effectively. The absolute risks for both agranulocytosis and myocarditis/cardiomyopathy are low, diminish after the first 6 months, and are further reduced with appropriate monitoring. Weight gain/metabolic disorders and constipation, which develop more gradually, can be mitigated with regular monitoring and timely interventions. Sedation, hypersalivation, and enuresis are common but manageable with ameliorative measures and/or medications.

Proximal Risk Factors for Short-Term Community Violence Among Adults With Mental Illnesses

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the role of static indicators and proximal, clinically relevant indicators in the prediction of short-term community violence in a large, heterogeneous sample of adults with mental illnesses.

METHODS

Data were pooled from five studies of adults with mental illnesses (N=4,484). Follow-up data were available for 2,579 participants. A hierarchical linear regression assessed the incremental validity of a series of variable clusters in the prediction of violence risk at six months: static characteristics (age, sex, race-ethnicity, and primary diagnosis), substance use (alcohol use and drug use at baseline), clinical functioning (psychiatric symptoms at baseline and recent hospitalization), recent violence, and recent victimization.

RESULTS

Results demonstrated improved prediction with each step of the model, indicating that proximal indicators contributed to the prediction of short-term community violence above and beyond static characteristics. When all variables were entered, current alcohol use, recent violence, and recent victimization were positive predictors of subsequent violence, even after the analysis controlled for participant characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides empirical evidence for three proximal, clinically relevant indicators in the assessment and management of short-term violence risk among adults with mental illnesses: current alcohol use, recent violence, and recent victimization. Consideration of these indicators in clinical practice may assist in the identification of adults with mental illnesses who are at heightened risk of short-term community violence.

Medication and aggressiveness in real-world schizophrenia. Results from the FACE-SZ dataset

INTRODUCTION

The primary objective of this study was to determine if second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) administration was associated with lower aggressiveness scores compared to first-generation (FGA) in schizophrenia (SZ). The secondary objective was to determine if antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines administration were respectively associated with lower aggressiveness scores compared to patients who were not administered these medications.

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-one patients with schizophrenia (N = 255) or schizoaffective disorder (N = 76) (mean age = 32.5 years, 75.5 % male gender) were systematically included in the network of FondaMental Expert Center for Schizophrenia and assessed with the structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I disorders and validated scales for psychotic symptomatology, insight, and compliance. Aggressiveness was measured by the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BPAQ) score. Ongoing psychotropic treatment was recorded.

RESULTS

Patients who received SGA had lower BPAQ scores than patients who did not (p = 0.01). More specifically, these patients had lower physical and verbal aggression scores. On the contrary, patients who received benzodiazepines had higher BPAQ scores than patients who did not (p = 0.04). No significant difference was found between BPAQ scores of patients respectively being administered mood stabilizers (including valproate), antidepressant, and the patients who were not. These results were found independently of socio-demographical variables, psychotic symptomatology, insight, compliance into treatment, daily-administered antipsychotic dose, the way of antipsychotic administration (oral vs long acting), current alcohol disorder, and daily cannabis consumption.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study are in favor of the choice of SGA in SZ patients with aggressiveness, but these results need further investigation in longitudinal studies. Given the potent side effects of benzodiazepines (especially dependency and cognitive impairment) and the results of the present study, their long-term prescription is not recommended in patients with schizophrenia and aggressive behavior.

Preliminary evidence for association of genome-wide significant DRD2 schizophrenia risk variant with clozapine response

AIM

The recent Psychiatric Genomics Consortium genome-wide association study identified an SNP, rs2514218, located 47kb upstream of the DRD2 gene to be associated with risk for schizophrenia (p = 2.75e-11). Since all antipsychotics bind to dopamine D2 receptors, we examined rs2514218 in relation to response to antipsychotic treatment.

PATIENTS & METHODS

We investigated the SNP in relation to treatment response in a prospective study consisting of 208 patients (151 Caucasians, 42 African-Americans and 15 others) treated with clozapine for 6 months.

RESULTS

rs2514218 was associated with total score change in the brief psychiatric rating scale under an additive model (pcorr= 0.033).

CONCLUSION

Our finding provides evidence for rs2514218 association with antipsychotic response, but further replication is required before firm conclusions can be drawn.

The promise of atypical antipsychotics

Five new antipsychotic drugs introduced in the United States in the last decade offer physicians the ability to treat patients with schizophrenia and bipolar mania without the adverse effects of the first-generation antipsychotics. In this article, the authors discuss the advantages and side effects of these agents and present a guide to help physicians choose the optimal drug in the most favorable formulation for each patient.

Clozapine use reduced psychiatric hospitalization and emergency room visits in patients with bipolar disorder independent of improved treatment regularity in a three-year follow-up period

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of clozapine in bipolar disorder remains to be systemically examined. In the current study, we sought to disentangle the effect of clozapine from that of improved treatment regularity and to compare the effect of clozapine with the effect of regular treatment for bipolar disorder by exploring the complete 10-year clozapine prescription data from a Taiwanese total population health claims database.

METHODS

In the period between 2000 and 2009, 3,874 (3.3%) out of the 117,785 patients identified as having bipolar disorder in a Taiwanese total population health claims database were ever prescribed clozapine. Among them, 920 patients with bipolar disorder who had good pre-clozapine medication compliance and received at least two clozapine prescriptions were further categorized according to their clozapine medication possession ratio (MPR) as regular users (MPR ≥ 0.8; n = 476) and irregular users (MPR < 0.8; n = 444). Using a mirror-image design, we compared the numbers of emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalizations and hospital days, and the average durations of a single hospitalization during the pre- and post-clozapine mirror periods with a follow-up time of up to three years, controlling for time-variant course confounders.

RESULTS

The patterns of change in outcome indices from the pre-clozapine period to the post-clozapine period differed significantly between the two clozapine-user groups. Clinical outcome indices improved only in regular users, while they deteriorated in irregular users. Over the three-year follow-up period, the irregular users consistently had a higher adjusted risk for increased numbers of ER visits [odds ratio (OR): 2.06-2.43], hospitalizations (OR: 2.52-3.22), and total hospital days (OR: 2.42-2.91) when compared to the regular users. Thus, effects of clozapine were consistently demonstrated in one- to three-year mirror comparison periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Clozapine, when used with high treatment regularity (MPR > 0.8), was effective in reducing the numbers of ER visits, hospitalizations, and total hospital days in patients with bipolar disorder with previous frequent hospitalizations and ER visits despite regular pre-clozapine treatment for bipolar disorder. However, high early attrition and suboptimal treatment compliance need to be rectified in order to optimize the outcome of clozapine treatment in bipolar disorders.

Augmentation of clozapine with amisulpride: an effective therapeutic strategy for violent treatment-resistant schizophrenia patients in a UK high-security hospital

OBJECTIVE

Clozapine is used in the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia and is effective in reducing aggression; however a subgroup of patients is poorly responsive. For violent patients in this group, there is limited literature on the use of strategies to augment clozapine with other agents. Here we present a case series of 6 schizophrenia patients, within a high-security hospital, who have a history of serious violence and who were treated with clozapine augmented with amisulpride.

METHODS

We reviewed case notes and health records for evidence of violence/aggression and positive factors such as engagement in activities, and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scores were formulated. We also examined metabolic parameters before and after augmentation.

RESULTS

All 6 of the patients showed clinical improvement in symptoms and a reduction in their risk of violence to others. Five patients had a reduction in number of violent/aggressive incidents, and all patients showed improvement in engagement in occupational, vocational, and/or psychological work. Metabolic parameters were largely unchanged except for 1 patient whose Body Mass Index (BMI) increased. Five patients reported side effects as unchanged or improved.

CONCLUSION

These schizophrenia patients with a history of violence showed clinical improvement and reduced aggression and violence with amisulpride augmentation of clozapine. To our knowledge, this is the first report of an antiaggressive benefit of this combination in forensic psychiatric patients. Further studies are warranted to establish the efficacy and anti-aggressive effects of amisulpride augmentation of clozapine.

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.

Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs against hostility in patients with schizophrenia in the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study

INTRODUCTION

Aggressive behavior can be a dangerous complication of schizophrenia. Hostility is related to aggression. This study aimed to compare the effects of olanzapine, perphenazine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone on hostility in schizophrenia.

METHODS

We used the data that were acquired in the 18-month Phase 1 of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study. We analyzed the scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility item in a subset of 614 patients who showed at least minimal hostility (a score ≥ 2) at baseline.

RESULTS

The primary analysis of hostility indicated an effect of difference between treatments (F(4,1487) = 7.78, P < 0.0001). Olanzapine was significantly superior to perphenazine and quetiapine at months 1, 3, 6, and 9. It was also significantly superior to ziprasidone at months 1, 3, and 6, and to risperidone at months 3 and 6.

DISCUSSION

Our results are consistent with those of a similar post-hoc analysis of hostility in first-episode subjects with schizophrenia enrolled in the European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial (EUFEST) trial, where olanzapine demonstrated advantages compared with haloperidol, quetiapine, and amisulpride.

CONCLUSION

Olanzapine demonstrated advantages in terms of a specific antihostility effect over the other antipsychotics tested in Phase 1 of the CATIE trial.

The psychopharmacology of violence: making sensible decisions

Violent behavior associated with mental disorders is a common reason for admission to a psychiatric inpatient unit. Once hospitalized, patients may continue to be intermittently agitated and have persistent aggressive behaviors, preventing their discharge back into the community. Managing agitation quickly with effective pharmacological agents can avoid further escalation to aggression and violence. In the acute setting, this usually involves the parenteral use of antipsychotics, with or without benzodiazepines. Within the past decade, short-acting intramuscular formulations of second-generation antipsychotics have become available and provide a means to induce calm with a substantially lower risk of acute dystonia or akathisia compared with haloperidol. New alternative formulations that avoid injections include inhalation and sublingual administration. Longer-term management of persistent aggressive behavior by reducing the frequency and intensity of future episodes of agitation is more complex. In contrast to agitation associated with schizophrenia or bipolar mania, no agents have yet been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of persistent aggressive behavior. The strongest evidence supports the use of clozapine as an antihostility agent, followed by olanzapine. Adjunctive strategies with anticonvulsants and beta-adrenergic agents may also be worthwhile to consider.

Aggression in Psychoses

Most individuals diagnosed with a mental illness are not violent, but some mentally ill patients commit violent acts. PubMed database was searched for articles published between 1980 and November 2013 using the combination of key words “schizophrenia” or “bipolar disorder” with “aggression” or “violence.” In comparison with the general population, there is approximately a twofold increase of risk of violence in schizophrenia without substance abuse comorbidity and ninefold with such comorbidity. The risk in bipolar disorder is at least as high as in schizophrenia. Most of the violence in bipolar disorder occurs during the manic phase. Violence among adults with schizophrenia may follow two distinct pathways: one associated with antisocial conduct and another associated with the acute psychopathology, particularly anger and delusions. Clozapine is the most effective treatment of aggressive behavior in schizophrenia. Emerging evidence suggests that olanzapine may be the second most effective treatment. Treatment nonadherence greatly increases the risk of violent behavior, and poor insight as well as hostility is associated with nonadherence. Nonpharmacological methods of treatment of aggression in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are increasingly important. Cognitive behavioral approaches appear to be effective in cases where pharmacotherapy alone is not sufficient.

Clozapine: key discussion points for prescribers

Clozapine is the most effective antipsychotic medication for treatment-refractory schizophrenia and is also approved for suicidality in schizophrenia patients. However, it can cause significant medical morbidity and requires intensive medical monitoring once prescribed. Perhaps due to lack of familiarity with its use, it is underused in clinical practice and its initiation often delayed. This article reviews the literature on clozapine in order to measure its potential effectiveness against its adverse effects and ultimately aims to serve as a useful summary for clinicians in their everyday prescribing.

Psychopharmacologic management of aggression

This article is designed to provide an overview of the existing literature on pharmacologically managing aggression, with a specific focus on psychiatric diagnoses commonly associated with increased aggression. Self-injurious behaviors and suicide are sometimes classified as forms of aggression, but information presented here focuses primarily on aggression toward others (physical and/or verbal).

Pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia: a critical review of the pharmacology and clinical effects of current and future therapeutic agents

Since the introduction of chlorpromazine and throughout the development of the new-generation antipsychotic drugs (APDs) beginning with clozapine, the D(2) receptor has been the target for the development of APDs. Pharmacologic actions to reduce neurotransmission through the D(2) receptor have been the only proven therapeutic mechanism for psychoses. A number of novel non-D(2) mechanisms of action of APDs have been explored over the past 40 years but none has definitively been proven effective. At the same time, the effectiveness of treatments and range of outcomes for patients are far from satisfactory. The relative success of antipsychotics in treating positive symptoms is limited by the fact that a substantial number of patients are refractory to current medications and by their lack of efficacy for negative and cognitive symptoms, which often determine the level of functional impairment. In addition, while the newer antipsychotics produce fewer motor side effects, safety and tolerability concerns about weight gain and endocrinopathies have emerged. Consequently, there is an urgent need for more effective and better-tolerated antipsychotic agents, and to identify new molecular targets and develop mechanistically novel compounds that can address the various symptom dimensions of schizophrenia. In recent years, a variety of new experimental pharmacological approaches have emerged, including compounds acting on targets other than the dopamine D(2) receptor. However, there is still an ongoing debate as to whether drugs selective for singe molecular targets (that is, 'magic bullets') or drugs selectively non-selective for several molecular targets (that is, 'magic shotguns', 'multifunctional drugs' or 'intramolecular polypharmacy') will lead to more effective new medications for schizophrenia. In this context, current and future drug development strategies can be seen to fall into three categories: (1) refinement of precedented mechanisms of action to provide drugs of comparable or superior efficacy and side-effect profiles to existing APDs; (2) development of novel (and presumably non-D(2)) mechanism APDs; (3) development of compounds to be used as adjuncts to APDs to augment efficacy by targeting specific symptom dimensions of schizophrenia and particularly those not responsive to traditional APD treatment. In addition, efforts are being made to determine if the products of susceptibility genes in schizophrenia, identified by genetic linkage and association studies, may be viable targets for drug development. Finally, a focus on early detection and early intervention aimed at halting or reversing progressive pathophysiological processes in schizophrenia has gained great influence. This has encouraged future drug development and therapeutic strategies that are neuroprotective. This article provides an update and critical review of the pharmacology and clinical profiles of current APDs and drugs acting on novel targets with potential to be therapeutic agents in the future.

Haloperidol for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Haloperidol, used alone is recommended to help calm situations of aggression with people with psychosis. This drug is widely accessible and may be the only antipsychotic medication available in areas where resources are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether haloperidol alone, administered orally, intramuscularly or intravenously, is effective treatment for psychosis-induced agitation or aggression.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (1st June 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled  trials (RCTs) involving people exhibiting agitation or aggression (or both) thought to be due to psychosis, allocated rapid use of haloperidol alone (by any route), compared with any other treatment. Outcomes included tranquillisation or asleep by 30 minutes, repeated need for rapid tranquillisation within 24 hours, specific behaviours (threat or injury to others/self), adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected and assessed studies for methodological quality and extracted data. 'Summary of findings' tables were produced for each comparison grading the evidence and calculating, where possible and appropriate, a range of absolute effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies comparing haloperidol with 18 other treatments. Few studies were undertaken in circumstances that reflect real world practice, and, with notable exceptions, most were small and carried considerable risk of bias.Compared with placebo, more people in the haloperidol group were asleep at two hours (2 RCTs, n = 220, risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 0.95). Dystonia was common (2 RCTs, n = 207, RR 7.49, CI 0.93 to 60.21). Compared with aripiprazole, people in the haloperidol group required fewer injections than those in the aripiprazole group (2 RCTs, n = 473, RR 0.78, CI 0.62 to 0.99). More people in the haloperidol group experienced dystonia (2 RCTs, n = 477, RR 6.63, CI 1.52 to 28.86).Despite three larger trials with ziprasidone (total n = 739), data remain patchy, largely because of poor design and reporting. Compared with zuclopenthixol acetate, more people who received haloperidol required more than three injections (1 RCT, n = 70, RR 2.54, CI 1.19 to 5.46).Three trials (n = 205) compared haloperidol with lorazepam. There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to the number of participants asleep at one hour (1 RCT, n = 60, RR 1.05, CI 0.76 to 1.44). However, by three hours, significantly more people were asleep in the lorazepam group compared with the haloperidol group (1 RCT, n = 66, RR 1.93, CI 1.14 to 3.27). There were no differences in numbers requiring more than one injection (1 RCT, n = 66, RR 1.14, CI 0.91 to 1.43).Haloperidol's adverse effects were not offset by addition of lorazepam (e.g. dystonia 1 RCT, n = 67, RR 8.25, CI 0.46 to 147.45; required antiparkinson medication RR 2.74, CI 0.81 to 9.25). Addition of promethazine was investigated in one larger and better graded trial (n = 316). More people in the haloperidol group were not tranquil or asleep by 20 minutes (RR 1.60, CI 1.18 to 2.16). Significantly more people in the haloperidol alone group experienced one or more adverse effects (RR 11.28, CI 1.47 to 86.35). Acute dystonia for those allocated haloperidol alone was too common for the trial to continue beyond the interim analysis (RR 19.48, CI 1.14 to 331.92).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

If no other alternative exists, sole use of intramuscular haloperidol could be life-saving. Where additional drugs to offset the adverse effects are available, sole use of haloperidol for the extreme emergency, in situations of coercion, could be considered unethical. Addition of the sedating promethazine has support from better-grade evidence from within randomised trials. Use of an alternative antipsychotic drug is only partially supported by fragmented and poor-grade evidence. Evidence for use of newer generation antipsychotic alternatives is no stronger than that for older drugs. Adding a benzodiazepine to haloperidol does not have strong evidence of benefit and carries a risk of additional harm.After six decades of use for emergency rapid tranquillisation, this is still an area in need of good independent trials relevant to real world practice.

A systematic review of the evidence of clozapine's anti-aggressive effects

Reducing the risk of violent and aggressive behaviour in patients with schizophrenia remains a clinical priority. There is emerging evidence to suggest that the second-generation antipsychotic, clozapine, is effective at reducing this risk in patients with schizophrenia and some evidence to suggest that it may be best in selected patients. We conducted a systematic literature search in March 2011 of all prospective and retrospective studies, which investigated clozapine's anti-aggressive effects in a variety of mental disorders. The review identified six animal studies, four randomized controlled trials, 12 prospective non-controlled studies and 22 retrospective studies, with four case studies. We found considerable evidence in support of clozapine's ability to reduce violent and aggressive behaviour. Clozapine's anti-aggressive effect was most commonly explored in patients with schizophrenia, with less evidence available for other psychiatric disorders, including borderline personality disorder, autistic spectrum disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder and learning disability. There was mixed evidence to address the question of whether or not clozapine was any more effective than other antipsychotics. In the case of schizophrenia, there was evidence to suggest that clozapine's anti-aggressive effect was more marked particularly in those with treatment-resistant illness. Its anti-aggressive effects appeared to be 'specific', being to some extent greater than both its more general antipsychotic and sedative effects. There were significant methodological inconsistencies in the studies we identified, particularly surrounding patient recruitment criteria, the definition and measurement of violence and the lack of randomized, controlled trials. Data on therapeutic monitoring were also limited. Clozapine can reduce violence and persistent aggression in patients with schizophrenia and other psychiatric disorders. It may offer an advantage over other antipsychotics, although perhaps exclusively in the case of traditionally defined 'treatment resistance' or more broadly defined 'complex cases' with co-morbidity. Larger, randomized, blinded, controlled studies with robust characterization of participants, and standardized measures of violence and aggression are, however, needed to fully understand this link and explore the possible mechanisms.

Clozapine for the treatment of schizophrenia

INTRODUCTION

Despite considerable progress in the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia, about 30% of patients are minimally responsive to antipsychotics and there is still an excessively high rate of mortality in schizophrenia patients. Clozapine , a D(2)-5HT(2) antagonist, was the first antipsychotic to demonstrate efficacy in treatment-resistant patients, and to be associated with the lowest risk of death.

AREAS COVERED

The pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of clozapine are covered in this article, based on a literature review (PubMed) from 1975 to 2012. Pivotal, as well as supporting, randomized controlled trials are reviewed, along with observational and/or naturalistic safety studies. This review of clozapine will allow the reader to determine the place for clozapine in the schizophrenia treatment landscape.

EXPERT OPINION

Studies conducted so far suggest that clozapine is the treatment of choice for schizophrenic patients who are refractory to treatment, display violent behaviors, or who are at high risk of suicide. However, it is also the antipsychotic with the worst side effect profile, the highest risk of complications, and the most difficult to prescribe. Experience with clozapine should therefore be included in the education of future physicians.

Hematological clozapine monitoring with a point-of-care device: a randomized cross-over trial

Clozapine remains the drug of choice for patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, who show a response rate of about 50% despite their unresponsiveness to other antipsychotics. Although treatment with clozapine can lead to considerable savings on bed days, the drug is underutilized for several reasons, perhaps most importantly because of the mandatory hematological monitoring. The Chempaq Express Blood Counter (Chempaq XBC) is a point-of-care device providing counts of white blood cells (WBC) and granulocytes based on a capillary blood sampling. A randomized cross-over trial design was used comparing capillary blood sampling using a point-of-care device with traditional venous blood sampling. Patients were randomized to two sequences starting with either capillary or venous blood sampling followed by a repeated sequence. Primary outcome was measured on a 10-cm visual analog scale. Eighty-five patients were included in the test. Eight (9.4%) dropped out before completion. Patients indicated that they found capillary blood monitoring less painful than venous sampling (VAS ratings: 0.55 cm 25-75 percentiles: 0.1-1.4 cm vs. 1.75 cm 25-75 percentiles: 0.7-2.6, p<0.001). They also felt less inconvenienced by the point-of-care method than the traditional blood sampling, which involved traveling to the laboratory clinical (0.3 cm 25-75 percentiles: 0.05-0.7 vs. 2.3 cm 25-75 percentiles: 0.75-4.5, p<0.001). For hematological monitoring of clozapine patients a point-of-care device based on capillary blood sampling is better tolerated than traditional venous blood sampling.

The psychopharmacology of aggressive behavior: a translational approach: part 2: clinical studies using atypical antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and lithium

Patients experiencing mental disorders are at an elevated risk for developing aggressive behavior. In the past 10 years, the psychopharmacological treatment of aggression has changed dramatically owing to the introduction of atypical antipsychotics on the market and the increased use of anticonvulsants and lithium in the treatment of aggressive patients.This review (second of 2 parts) uses a translational medicine approach to examine the neurobiology of aggression, discussing the major neurotransmitter systems implicated in its pathogenesis (serotonin, glutamate, norepinephrine, dopamine, and γ-aminobutyric acid) and the neuropharmacological rationale for using atypical antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and lithium in the therapeutics of aggressive behavior. A critical review of all clinical trials using atypical antipsychotics (aripiprazole, clozapine, loxapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, and amisulpride), anticonvulsants (topiramate, valproate, lamotrigine, and gabapentin), and lithium are presented. Given the complex, multifaceted nature of aggression, a multifunctional combined therapy, targeting different receptors, seems to be the best strategy for treating aggressive behavior. This therapeutic strategy is supported by translational studies and a few human studies, even if additional randomized, double-blind, clinical trials are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy of this framework.