A twelve month comparison of penfluridol and trifluoperazine in chronic schizophrenic outpatients. A double-blind comparison of loxitane--loxapine succinate and trifluoperazine hydrochloride in chronic schizophrenic patients. Comparative short-term evaluation of penfluridol and trifluoperazine in chronic schizophrenia. [Zotepine versus perazine in patients with paranoid schizophrenia: a double-blind controlled trial of its effectiveness]. A double-blind comparative trial of loxapine and trifluoperazine in acute and chronic schizophrenic patients. One-year, low-dose neuroleptic study of in-patients with chronic schizophrenia characterised by persistent negative symptoms. Amisulpride v. haloperidol. A double-blind comparison of loxapine succinate and trifluoperazine in newly admitted schizophrenic patients. Antipsychotic efficacy of the antidepressant trimipramine: a randomized, double-blind comparison with the phenothiazine perazine. A standard- (trifluoperazine) controlled clinical study with pimozide in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenic patients, I.
This investigation is a 52-week double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of penfluridol and trifluoperazine in 25 chronic schizophrenic outpatients. Penfluridol was administered once weekly and trifluoperazine daily. Measurements were made at baseline, various fixed intervals during the study period and termination. The data reveals that both agents were similarly effective in maintaining control of the symptoms of chronic schizophrenic patients at a level commensurate with or better than that provided by their previous medication. Besides being effective, medications were also well tolerated. The side effects were characteristic of marketed neuroleptics. Akathisia was more common with penfluridol but readily controlled with anti-parkinsonian medication. Other side effects were similar in severity and occurrence between study-drug groups. Both agents had low autonomic liability, and neither agent was depressogenic. Therapeutic efficacy and safety of loxapine succinate (LOX) and trifluoperazine hydrochloride were compared by means of a controlled, double-blind study involving 49 chronic schizophrenic inpatients. The data indicated that LOX in dosages ranging from 40 - 65 mg/day, (usually administered on a b.i.d. schedule) had demonstrable anti-psychotic activity in 14 of 25 chronic schizophrenic patients (56%), while TFP treatment in appropriate dosage showed a similar activity in 9 of 23 patients (39%). Both LOX and TFP displayed essentially the same profile and incidence of side effects. Clinical laboratory abnormalities were minor. On the basis of this study, and in comparison with trifluoperazine, it appears that loxapine is an efficacious and essentially safe medication, suitable for the treatment of chronic schizophrenia. A double blind comparative study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of penfluridol and trifluoperazine in patients of chronic schizophrenia. Penfluridol was administered once weekly while trifluoperazine was administered twice daily by preparing identical capsules. The data revealed that both the compounds were similarly effective in maintaining control of symptoms of chronic schizophrenia. However, penfluridol has a definite advantage over trifluoperazine since it is administered once a week instead of twice a day. The dibenzothiepine zotepine is a new potential "atypical" neuroleptic exhibiting powerful antiserotonergic and antidopaminergic properties. The efficacy of zotepine was evaluated in a double-blind controlled trial versus the tricyclic neuroleptic perazine in 41 patients suffering mainly from the paranoid-hallucinatory type of schizophrenia. The key outcome variable was the extent of mental disturbance as defined by the total score of the BPRS. Additional outcome variables were GAS and CGI. In addition, adverse reactions and extrapyramidal side effects were assessed according to the FSUCL scale and the Gerlach and AIMS rating scale, respectively. Additional variables recorded were blood pressure, heart rate and routine laboratory parameters as well as electrocardiogram and electroencephalogram. In the first two days, standard equivalent doses of both drugs were administered. Thereafter, doses were administered as required. The efficacy of both substances was compared after 7, 14 and 28 days of treatment. Both drugs showed a similar antipsychotic efficacy. Under zotepine treatment a 55% improvement of the BPRS total score was observed while perazine led to a 41% BPRS score reduction. After 7 days the zotepine group was significantly more improved than the perazine group, possibly due to a dosing effect in the perazine group. In the zotepine group, fewer adverse reactions and a better benefit/risk index were observed although the differences between the two treatment groups did not reach levels of statistical significance. There were no drug-specific abnormal laboratory findings. Thus, in the present study there was no significant difference between zotepine and perazine with respect to antipsychotic efficacy and side-effect rates. However, zotepine showed a trend to a better benefit/risk index at the end of treatment. A double-blind comparative trial of loxapine and trifluoperazine was carried out in 57 acute and chronic schizophrenic patients. In both groups of patients loxapine proved to be equivalent in its effects to trifluoperazine and there were suggestions it might be rather more effective in chronic patients. Side-effects were similar with the two drugs but anticholinergic effects, excitement, dizziness and faintness occurred rather more commonly with loxapine. Laboratory tests, urine analysis, cardiovascular and ophthalmological investigations showed no significant abnormalities. Amisulpride is a potent substituted benzamide antipsychotic drug claimed to improve the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, particularly at low dosage.
                Sixty long-term in-patients with schizophrenia and selected for predominant negative symptoms were randomised to receive either haloperidol or amisulpride. Over a year there was systematic dose reduction, as symptoms allowed.
                There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in the proportion receiving low-dose treatment, the control of positive symptoms, or ratings of social behaviour, side-effects or tardive dyskinesia. For negative symptoms, there were consistent but non-significant trends in favour of amisulpride. The amisulpride patients required significantly less anticholinergic medication.
                In chronically-hospitalised in-patients with schizophrenia characterised by persistent negative symptoms, amisulpride was a well-tolerated maintenance antipsychotic medication. The drug had only a limited effect in reducing negative symptoms, which were relatively stable, enduring phenomena in this sample, despite dosage reduction. A study was conducted evaluating the efficacy of loxapine succinate in newly admitted schizophrenic patients through a four-week double-blind comparison with trifluoperazine. Twenty-four patients received between 40 and 80 mg loxapine succinate daily and 19 patients received between 20 and 50 mg trifluoperazine daily. The two groups showed comparable significant improvement on the BPRS and CGI. The discharge and termination rates of the two groups were not significantly different and the incidence and severity of side effects, most frequently extrapyramidal signs, were similar in both groups. Loxapine succinate was judged to be an effective treatment for newly admitted schizophrenic patients. The tricyclic antidepressant trimipramine exhibits several features (e. g., dopaminergic effect, molecular structure similar to a neuroleptic, receptor-binding profile similar to clozapine) that suggest its potential as an antipsychotic medication. The aim of the study was to investigate the antipsychotic potential of trimipramine in a controlled clinical trial comparing its antipsychotic efficacy with that of a neuroleptic.
                In a German multi-center, randomized, double-blind trial, the antipsychotic efficacy of trimipramine was compared with that of the phenothiazine neuroleptic perazine, using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and Clinical Global Impressions (CGI). Antidepressant efficacy of both agents was measured by use of the Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale (BRMES). Ninety-five patients with acute schizophrenia (DSM-III-R) and a BPRS total score > 40 at baseline were treated with either 300-400 mg trimipramine or 450-600 mg perazine for 5 weeks.
                Therapeutic equivalence of both treatments (in the dosages used) could not be demonstrated (change in BPRS total score, per-protocol [PP] analysis, one-sided equivalence testing). However, intention-to-treat (ITT) as well as PP analysis showed a statistically significant decrease in the BPRS total scores in both treatment groups (PP: trimipramine, 56.5 +/- 9.8 to 44.1 +/- 17.9; perazine, 56.4 +/- 10.8 to 37.9 +/- 12.9). Significant decreases in all BPRS and PANSS subscores as well as CGI results and response rate support the antipsychotic efficacy of trimipramine. The BRMES total scores significantly decreased in both treatment groups without showing a significant difference between the two agents. Trimipramine was better tolerated than perazine and did not elicit extrapyramidal symptoms.
                Trimipramine failed to exhibit therapeutic equivalence to perazine in the dosages used. However, there was evidence of a substantial antipsychotic effect of trimipramine. It may be a useful medication if depressive symptoms in psychotic patients require antidepressant treatment or if other antipsychotics cannot be administered. nan
Although there are shortcomings and gaps in the data, there appears to be enough consistency over different outcomes and periods to confirm that trifluoperazine is an antipsychotic of similar efficacy to other commonly used neuroleptics for people with schizophrenia. Its adverse events profile is similar to that of other drugs. It has been claimed that trifluoperazine is effective at low doses for patients with schizophrenia but this does not appear to be based on good quality trial based evidence.