The effects of an educational intervention on antipsychotic-induced weight gain. Issues that may determine the outcome of antipsychotic trials: industry sponsorship and extrapyramidal side effect. A cognitive/behavioral group intervention for weight loss in patients treated with atypical antipsychotics. Switching patients to aripiprazole from other antipsychotic agents: a multicenter randomized study. Ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid in first-episode psychosis: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the discontinuation of long-term antipsychotics in dementia. Pharmacotherapy of impaired affect in recovering schizophrenic patients. Why olanzapine beats risperidone, risperidone beats quetiapine, and quetiapine beats olanzapine: an exploratory analysis of head-to-head comparison studies of second-generation antipsychotics. Serum leptin and triglyceride levels in patients on treatment with atypical antipsychotics.
To assess the effect of an educational intervention on antipsychotic-induced weight gain among patients with schizophrenia.
                Quasi-experimental. Seventy patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder entered this 6-month study condicted in the United States. All participants began receiving olanzapine treatment when they entered the study. The patients were then randomly assigned to an intervention group or a standard care group. Over the next 4-months, the intervention group participated in weekly psychoeducation classes focused on nutrition, exercise, and living a healthy lifestyle. Patients were followed for an additional 2 months to assess weight change.
                A statistically significant difference in weight change between the two groups was observed post-treatment and at endpoint. At endpoint, the mean weight change of the intervention group was -.06 pounds, while the mean weight change in the standard care group was 9.57 pounds. In both groups, men gained significantly more weight than did women.
                The results indicate that a structured educational intervention might have a positive effect on antipsychotic-induced weight gain among patients with schizophrenia. This study presents a meta-analysis of the influence of several potentially biasing factors (eg industry support, extrapyramidal side effects) on efficacy of studies comparing second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) with first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) medications. We used the dataset from our previously published meta-analysis of 124 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SGAs with FGAs, to evaluate whether certain possible biases could influence the actual outcome on the total score of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scores. Industry sponsorship was determined by contact with authors or publication statement. We calculated whether (1) industry sponsorship, (2) study quality, (3) extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) properties, or (4) prophylactic antiparkinsonian medications influenced SGA vs FGA efficacy for each drug and averaged overall by two Hedges and Olkin-based meta-analyses. The analysis found that none of the factors was significantly associated with a particular outcome. While industry-sponsored articles may conclude their medication to be more favorable than that of a competitor in an RCT, we found that the observed efficacy was not influenced by sponsorship. Many attribute the finding that SGAs appears to be more efficacious than FGAs to be a result of EPS-decreasing efficacy (or its measurement). We were unable to confirm that the drug's EPS properties or antiparkinsonian management altered actual efficacy. Obesity and diabetes have caused problems for individuals with schizophrenia long before atypical antipsychotic agents. The prevalence of obesity, insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance, type 2 diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, and the Metabolic Syndrome has increased in people with schizophrenia as compared to the general population. Risk reduction studies for persons with obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease indicate that cognitive/behavioral interventions that promote motivation and provide strategies to overcome the barriers in adherence to diet and activity modification are effective interventions for weight management and risk reduction. In the landmark multi-center randomized-controlled trial study, the Diabetes Prevention Project (DPP), a cognitive/behavioral intervention, was more successful in producing weight loss and preventing diabetes than the drugs metformin, troglitazone or placebo. This pilot study examined the effectiveness of a cognitive/behavioral group intervention, modified after the DPP program, in individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder taking atypical antipsychotics in a large urban public mental health system. Outcome measures included body weight, body mass index, waist-hip ratios, and fasting glucose levels. Both groups demonstrated elevated fasting glucose levels and were obese with a mean BMI of 33. The group that received the cognitive/behavioral group intervention lost more weight than the treatment as usual group. The CB group participants lost an average of 5.4 lb or 2.9% of body weight, and those in the control group lost 1.3 lb or 0.6% body weight. The range of weight loss for the treatment group was from 1 to 20 lb. This pilot study has demonstrated that weight loss is possible with cognitive/behavioral interventions in a population with a psychotic disorder. Switching patients from one antipsychotic to another can lead to tolerability problems or transient symptom exacerbations. It is important to compare switching strategies to determine which methods produce the best possible patient outcomes.
                To investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of three dosing strategies for switching chronic, stable patients with schizophrenia from current oral antipsychotic monotherapy to once-daily oral aripiprazole monotherapy.
                Patients in this 8-week, open-label, outpatient study were randomized to: 1). immediate initiation of 30 mg/day aripiprazole with simultaneous immediate discontinuation of current antipsychotic; 2). immediate initiation of 30 mg/day aripiprazole while tapering off current antipsychotic over 2 weeks; or 3). up-titrating aripiprazole to 30 mg/day over 2 weeks, while simultaneously tapering off current antipsychotic. Efficacy assessments included PANSS, CGI-S, and CGI-I scores. Safety assessments included: adverse events (AEs) recording, evaluation of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), vital signs, ECG, and clinical laboratory tests.
                Efficacy with aripiprazole was maintained during the study with numerical improvements compared with baseline in all three groups. The overall incidence of AEs was broadly comparable across all groups, and AEs were generally mild to moderate in severity and time-limited. Discontinuations due to AEs were comparable across the groups. No deterioration in EPS occurred in any group. The reduction in body weight and plasma prolactin levels following switch to aripiprazole were comparable across the three groups.
                Any of the three strategies evaluated can be used safely for switching patients to aripiprazole from antipsychotic monotherapy. Furthermore, patients' symptoms may continue to improve after switching to aripiprazole. To investigate if ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid (E-EPA) augmentation improves antipsychotic efficacy and tolerability in first-episode psychosis (FEP).
                We performed a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 2-g E-EPA augmentation in 80 FEP patients. Sixty-nine patients were eligible for analysis; a post hoc analysis was computed for a subgroup of nonaffective FEP patients (N = 53). The first participant was included in November 2000 and the last participant completed the trial in August 2003. Primary outcome measures were symptom change scores and time to first response, while tolerability measures and cumulative antipsychotic dose were secondary outcome measures.
                Analysis of covariance controlling for baseline symptoms found no significant mean difference between E-EPA and placebo at week 12 for symptom change scores. Cox regression analysis revealed a significant treatment by diagnosis interaction (p = .024) for time to first response favoring E-EPA in nonaffective psychosis. Post hoc analysis for cumulative response rates further confirmed a higher response rate at week 6 (42.9% [15/35] vs. 17.6% [6/34] for all participants, p = .036; 54.2% [13/24] vs. 17.2% [5/29] for the nonaffective psychosis subset, p = .008); however, the difference at week 12 was no longer significant. Analysis of secondary outcome measures revealed that E-EPA-augmented participants needed 20% less antipsychotic medication between weeks 4 through 6 (p = .03), had less extrapyramidal side effects in the initial 9 weeks (p < .05 for all participants and for all timepoints), and reported less constipation (p = .011) and fewer sexual side effects (p = .016) than those treated with antipsychotic medication alone.
                The findings suggest that E-EPA may accelerate treatment response and improve the tolerability of antipsychotic medications. However, it was not possible to demonstrate a sustained symptomatic benefit of E-EPA in early psychosis, possibly due to a ceiling effect, since a high proportion of first-episode patients already achieve symptomatic remission with antipsychotic medication alone. Further controlled trials in nonaffective early psychosis seem warranted.
                Australian Clinical Trials Registry identifier 12605000267651 (http://actr.org.au). The objectives of this randomized clinical trial were to investigate the impact of the discontinuation of long-term antipsychotics in residents with dementia in chronic care institutions and to identify clinical predictors of safe discontinuation. Subjects included 34 residents with dementia who were on antipsychotics for more than 6 months and whose behavior was currently stable. Subjects were randomized to either continue receiving their regular dosage of antipsychotics or to receive placebo for 6 months. Early withdrawal from the study was not statistically different between the groups (relative risk [RR] = 1.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-3.26), and though not significantly different, subjects in the placebo group were more likely to be withdrawn from the study because of worsening behavior (RR = 1.25, 95% Cl 0.33-4.76). Three subjects in the placebo group were withdrawn from the study due to worsening of extrapyramidal symptoms. The active treatment group had more behavioral problems (e.g., physical aggression towards others, p < .05) compared to the placebo group. The placebo group developed more apathy, but balancing this outcome was a relative improvement in cognitive functioning. Baseline antipsychotic dose was predictive of behavioral worsening upon discontinuation of long-term antipsychotic drugs. The primary limitation of the study was the small sample size. In conclusion, a trial of discontinuation of antipsychotics should be considered in this population. Prominent and persistent anxiety, depression, and/or negative features characterize a substantial minority of recovered or residually psychotic schizophrenic outpatients and contribute to poor outcome. Because extrapyramidal side effects of typical neuroleptic medications often resemble such features, we first systematically studied the contribution of extrapyramidal side effects to these problems and their treatment. For patients who remained distressed, controlled trials of supplemental thymoleptics were undertaken.
                In trial 1, 92 distressed (depressed and/or anxious) patients and 36 patients in a defect state (patients with negative symptoms) participated in a double-blind, intramuscular challenge that compared centrally acting benztropine mesylate with peripherally acting glycopyrrolate. In trial 2, 57 distressed patients and 22 patients in a defect state were randomly assigned to a double-blind, neuroleptic medication dose-reduction group. In trial 3, 57 chronically distressed patients who were maintained on a low dose of fluphenazine decanoate were randomly assigned to a supplemental desipramine hydrochloride, lithium carbonate, or placebo group under double-blind conditions for 12 weeks.
                For patients who were already maintained on antiparkinsonian medication, impaired affect was not resolved by additional benztropine. Only distressed patients with a family history of severe mental disorder (often affective) showed improvement with neuroleptic medication dose reduction. Patients in the defect-state group reported less dysphoria on a reduced neuroleptic medication dose, but negative symptoms persisted. Desipramine improved diverse aspects of mood and residual psychoticism, possibly as a prophylaxis against minor affective exacerbations. Depression improved in women only. Lithium positively affected multiple indexes of anxiety and anxious depression.
                Most often, persistent affective impairments are neither resistant extrapyramidal side effects nor characterological traits. Thymoleptics improve the nonphasic, chronic types of anxiety and depression in contrast to the acute, episodic forms, for which little support can be found in the literature. In many parts of the world, second-generation antipsychotics have largely replaced typical antipsychotics as the treatment of choice for schizophrenia. Consequently, trials comparing two drugs of this class--so-called head-to-head studies--are gaining in relevance. The authors reviewed results of head-to-head studies of second-generation antipsychotics funded by pharmaceutical companies to determine if a relationship existed between the sponsor of the trial and the drug favored in the study's overall outcome.
                The authors identified head-to-head comparison studies of second-generation antipsychotics through a MEDLINE search for the period from 1966 to September 2003 and identified additional head-to-head studies from selected conference proceedings for the period from 1999 to February 2004. The abstracts of all studies fully or partly funded by pharmaceutical companies were modified to mask the names and doses of the drugs used in the trial, and two physicians blinded to the study sponsor reviewed the abstracts and independently rated which drug was favored by the overall outcome measures. Two authors who were not blinded to the study sponsor reviewed the entire report of each study for sources of bias that could have affected the results in favor of the sponsor's drug.
                Of the 42 reports identified by the authors, 33 were sponsored by a pharmaceutical company. In 90.0% of the studies, the reported overall outcome was in favor of the sponsor's drug. This pattern resulted in contradictory conclusions across studies when the findings of studies of the same drugs but with different sponsors were compared. Potential sources of bias occurred in the areas of doses and dose escalation, study entry criteria and study populations, statistics and methods, and reporting of results and wording of findings.
                Some sources of bias may limit the validity of head-to-head comparison studies of second-generation antipsychotics. Because most of the sources of bias identified in this review were subtle rather than compelling, the clinical usefulness of future trials may benefit from minor modifications to help avoid bias. The authors make a number of concrete suggestions for ways in which potential sources of bias can be addressed by study initiators, peer reviewers of studies under consideration for publication, and readers of published studies. Weight gain is a common adverse effect associated with the use of most antipsychotic drugs. Leptin has been reported to be associated with antipsychotic-induced weight gain. Previous studies have demonstrated a relationship between the atypical antipsychotics clozapine and olanzapine and serum leptin levels. We planned to comparatively investigate the effects of the atypical antipsychotics quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone, and clozapine on leptin and triglyceride levels and weight gain.
                The study population comprised 56 patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia, who were divided into 4 treatment groups: quetiapine (N = 14), olanzapine (N = 14), risperidone (N = 14), or clozapine (N = 14) monotherapy, and a control group of 11 patients receiving no psychopharmacologic treatment. The patients were evaluated at baseline and at the sixth week according to the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), body mass index (BMI), weight, and fasting serum leptin and triglyceride levels. Data were gathered in 2001 and 2002.
                Olanzapine and clozapine caused a marked increase in weight and serum triglyceride and leptin levels, though increases in these variables were modest in the patients receiving quetiapine and minimal in those receiving risperidone. There were positive correlations between serum leptin levels and BMI and triglyceride levels. Clinical efficacy, as indicated by decrease in total PANSS scores, was associated with leptin levels in all atypical antipsychotic groups.
                Our results suggest that leptin may be associated with olanzapine- and clozapine-induced weight gain and that quetiapine appears to have modest influence and risperidone appears to have minimal influence on leptin and triglyceride levels and weight gain compared with olanzapine and clozapine.
Evidence from this review suggests that switching antipsychotic medication to one with lesser potential for causing weight gain or metabolic problems could be an effective way to manage these side effects, but the data were weak due to the limited number of trials in this area and small sample sizes. Poor reporting of data also hindered using some trials and outcomes. There was no difference in mental state, global state and other treatment related adverse events between switching to another medication and continuing on the previous one. When the three switching strategies were compared none of them had an advantage over the others in their effects on the primary outcomes considered in this review. Better designed trials with adequate power would provide more convincing evidence for using medication switching as an intervention strategy.
Note: the 167 citations in the awaiting classification section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.