Real-world clinical and cost-effectiveness of community clozapine initiation: mirror cohort study

What is the current scope of research assessing patients' and clinicians' perspectives on clozapine treatment? A comprehensive scoping review

OBJECTIVES

Clozapine is continuously underused. The existing systematic reviews addressing barriers to clozapine prescribing primarily focus on clinical staff's attitudes and perceived barriers to prescribing. However, a preliminary literature search revealed additional literature on the subject not previously included in systematic reviews, including literature on patient perspectives. A scoping review is warranted to map the scope of primary studies on patients' and/or clinicians' perspectives on clozapine treatment and to identify gaps in research.

DESIGN

A scoping review was designed and reported in accordance with established guidelines for scoping reviews.

DATA SOURCES

The electronic databases Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar and two grey literature databases were searched. Furthermore, citation tracking of selected studies was undertaken.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We included primary, empirical studies reporting clinicians' and/or patients' perspectives on clozapine treatment. No limitation was set for the year of publication or type of primary study.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two researchers independently screened for studies, extracted the data and coded the content. Findings were summarised visually and narratively.

RESULTS

146 studies were included. Most studies reported on patients' or clinicians' perspectives on active clozapine treatment or on clinicians' perspectives on barriers to clozapine initiation in general. Three gaps in research were identified: (1) clozapine-eligible, yet clozapine-naïve, patients' attitudes towards clozapine commencement, (2) clinicians' reasons for clozapine withholding and perceived facilitators of clozapine treatment in specific patient-cases and (3) patient and clinician perspectives on clozapine discontinuation, continuation and rechallenge in specific patient cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Research on clozapine perspectives tends to repeat itself. Future studies addressing the identified gaps in evidence could provide the insights needed to optimise clozapine utilisation.

Ketamine for refractory depression: Save the best for last?

Ketamine has recently been shown to be non-inferior to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), one of psychiatry's most effective treatments for depression. Given the novelty of ketamine as well as its interventional nature, ketamine is currently viewed as an alternative to ECT and as such, considered a third-line agent for treatment-refractory depression. However, available data suggest that ketamine carries a low side-effect burden and is better tolerated than many second-line augmentation strategies for depression. With this combination of higher efficacy and lower side-effect burden in conjunction with what is known about treatment outcomes in relation to the duration of untreated illness, it is in the best interest of patients for the field of psychiatry to evaluate ketamine as a second-line augmentation strategy for refractory depression.

Psychiatrists' views on clozapine prescribing in Ireland

INTRODUCTION

Despite proven effectiveness in refractory schizophrenia, clozapine remains underutilised, and it is important to understand potential reasons for this. This study's aim was to examine in a National sample of Consultant Psychiatrists their knowledge of, attitudes and perceived barriers to clozapine use.

METHODS

A novel questionnaire was designed and distributed by email to 275 Consultant Psychiatrists in Republic of Ireland.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight percent (n = 77) completed the survey, with 55% of respondents practicing for 15 or more years. Clinicians expressed confidence in managing clozapine treatment and side effects and were well aware of clozapine's clinical effectiveness and guideline-based use. A majority indicated insufficient experience managing rechallenge and half expressed insufficient experience managing adverse events. Perceived patient factors were highlighted as barriers with 69% of respondents reporting patients' concern about effectiveness and 50% regarding tolerability. Sixty-four percent (n = 40) indicated that a specialised/tertiary clozapine service would facilitate initiation, with 57% (n = 36) reporting less frequent blood monitoring would aid clozapine prescribing. A majority identified that access to dedicated staff (81%, n = 51) and dedicated day hospital services (84%, n = 53) would facilitate community initiation.

CONCLUSION

Consultants are familiar with clozapine use and related guidelines. Dedicated staff and facilities for clozapine use is one identified structural change to enhance clozapine prescribing in Ireland. Tertiary service or clinical advice service would assist in clozapine rechallenge cases or in managing significant adverse events. More structured patient education regarding clozapine effectiveness and professional development programmes focused on managing side effects and rechallenge may promote clozapine use.

Pharmacological Treatments of Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia-An Update

Schizophrenia is a chronic psychotic disorder comprising positive symptoms, negative symptoms, and cognitive deficits. Negative symptoms are associated with stigma, worse functional outcomes, and a significant deterioration in quality of life. Clinical diagnosis is challenging despite its significance, and current treatments offer little improvement in the burden of negative symptoms. This article reviews current pharmacological strategies for treating negative symptoms. Dopaminergic, glutamatergic, serotonergic, noradrenergic, cholinergic, anti-inflammatory compounds, hormones, and psychostimulants are explored. Finally, we review pharmacological global treatment guidelines for negative symptoms. In general, switching to a second-generation antipsychotic seems to be most often recommended for patients with schizophrenia on first-generation antipsychotics, and an add-on antidepressant is considered when depression is also present. However, the treatment of negative symptoms remains an unmet need. Future, larger clinical studies and meta-analyses are needed to establish effective pharmacological agents for the effective treatment of negative symptoms.

Overcoming the barriers to identifying and managing treatment-resistant schizophrenia and to improving access to clozapine: A narrative review and recommendation for clinical practice

Clozapine is the only approved antipsychotic for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Although a large body of evidence supports its efficacy and favorable risk-benefit ratio in individuals who have failed two or more antipsychotics, clozapine remains underused. However, variations in clozapine utilization across geographic and clinical settings suggest that it could be possible to improve its use. In this narrative review and expert opinion, we summarized information available in the literature on the mechanisms of action, effectiveness, and potential adverse events of clozapine. We identified barriers leading to discouragement in clozapine prescription internationally, and we proposed practical solutions to overcome each barrier. One of the main obstacles identified to the use of clozapine is the lack of appropriate training for physicians: we highlighted the need to develop specific professional programs to train clinicians, both practicing and in residency, on the relevance and efficacy of clozapine in TRS treatment, initiation, maintenance, and management of potential adverse events. This approach would facilitate physicians to identify eligible patients and offer clozapine as a treatment option in the early stage of the disease. We also noted that increasing awareness of the benefits of clozapine among healthcare professionals, people with TRS, and their caregivers can help promote the use of clozapine. Educational material, such as leaflets or videos, could be developed and distributed to achieve this goal. The information provided in this article may be useful to improve disease burden and support healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers navigating the complex pathways to TRS management.

Response rates to sequential trials of antipsychotic medications according to algorithms or treatment guidelines in psychotic disorders. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a relative lack of research evaluating the outcomes when treatment guidelines or algorithms for psychotic disorders are followed. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the response rates to antipsychotic medications at different stages of these algorithms and whether these response rates differ in first episode cohorts.

METHODS

Data sources: A systematic search strategy was conducted across four databases PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL. Studies that had sequential trials of different antipsychotic medications were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using random effects models and sub-group analysis in first episode psychosis studies.

RESULTS

Of the 4078 unique articles screened, fourteen articles, from nine unique studies, were eligible and included 2522 participants. The proportion who experienced a response to any antipsychotic in the first stage of an algorithm was 0.53 (95 % C.I.:0.38,0.68) and this decreased to 0.26 (95 % C.I.:0.15,0.39) in the second stage. When clozapine was used in the third stage, the proportion that achieved a response was 0.43 (95 % C.I. 0.19, 0.69) compared to 0.26 (95 % C.I.:0.05,0.54) if a different antipsychotic was used. Four studies included 907 participants with a first episode of psychosis and the proportions that achieved a response were: 1st stage: 0.63 (95 % C.I.: 0.45, 0.79); 2nd stage: 0.34 (95 % C.I.:0.16,0.55); clozapine 3rd stage: 0.45 (95 % C.I.:0.0,0.97), different antipsychotic 3rd stage: 0.15 (95 % C.I.,0.01,0.37).

DISCUSSION

These findings support the recommendation to have a trial of clozapine after two other antipsychotic medications have been found to be ineffective.

Clozapine-Related Functional Bowel Obstruction: A Rare Adverse Effect Unmasking Quetiapine and Benztropine Interaction Raising Need for Bowel Surveillance

Randomized controlled trials demonstrate a significant decline in hospital admissions and length of stay following the initiation of clozapine in individuals with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, along with an increase in quality-adjusted life years. The morbidity and mortality associated with clozapine-induced gastrointestinal hypomotility (CIGH) is greater than agranulocytosis. Despite this, we only have clozapine risk evaluation and mitigation strategies by the US Food and Drug Administration for white cell count monitoring, but none exists for CIGH. Our case highlights CIGH due to multiple factors and recommendations to prevent it and enhance clozapine compliance by conducting a thorough literature review.

Seven decades of antipsychotic drugs: Why is the life of Australians with schizophrenia still so suboptimal?

The advent of dopamine (D2) receptor-blocking medications over 70 years ago, ushered in a new era of biological treatment for schizophrenia. However, we argue that little subsequent progress has been made in translating this into fulfilled and fulfilling lives for people with schizophrenia. This Viewpoint asks why this is the case, and suggests ways forward for capitalising on extant and emerging new treatments for psychotic disorders, to the betterment of the lives of people living with schizophrenia.

Predicting clozapine dose required to achieve a therapeutic plasma concentration - A comparison of a population algorithm and three algorithms based on gene variant models

BACKGROUND

Clozapine is the most effective antipsychotic but requires careful titration to therapeutic blood levels. Methods to predict therapeutic doses are based on population data.

AIMS

We aimed to construct a model based on genetic variants which accurately predicted plasma levels for clozapine.

METHOD

We measured clozapine plasma levels in patients on a stable dose of clozapine who were known to be fully compliant. Measured plasma levels were adjusted for sampling time and dose. Hepatic enzyme variants were analysed and models were constructed to predict the required dose. These predictions were compared with a standard population-based algorithm.

RESULTS

We measured plasma clozapine concentrations in 18 adherent patients on stable doses of clozapine and recorded the exact timing of sampling. For the algorithm-predicted dose, the mean difference was -49.9 mg/day ((SD 155.9), r = 0.36) from the actual dose required to give a plasma concentration of 0.35 ng/ml. The gene variant activity score predicted a dose for which the mean difference was -43.5 mg/day ((SD 140.1), r = 0.55). For the gene variant activity score with omeprazole correction predicted dose, the mean difference was -31.0 mg/day ((SD 140.8), r = 0.54), and with the gene variant CYP1A2 inducibility predicted dose the mean difference was 44.9 mg/day ((SD 160.8), r = 0.32).

CONCLUSION

Our gene variant activity score with omeprazole correction gave the best estimate of the clozapine dose required to achieve a minimum therapeutic plasma concentration. The use of this model will allow safer titration of clozapine and may reduce the need for plasma-level monitoring during titration.