Comparative efficacy and safety of atypical and conventional antipsychotic drugs in first-episode psychosis: a randomized, double-blind trial of olanzapine versus haloperidol. Double-blind olanzapine vs. haloperidol D2 dopamine receptor blockade in schizophrenic patients: a baseline-endpoint. A double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol for the treatment of delirium. A randomized, placebo-controlled dose-comparison trial of haloperidol for psychosis and disruptive behaviors in Alzheimer's disease. A Canadian multicenter placebo-controlled study of fixed doses of risperidone and haloperidol in the treatment of chronic schizophrenic patients. Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders: results of an international collaborative trial. A multicentre, double-blind, randomized comparison of quetiapine (ICI 204,636, 'Seroquel') and haloperidol in schizophrenia. A comparison of risperidone and haloperidol for the prevention of relapse in patients with schizophrenia. Risperidone versus haloperidol in psychotic patients with disturbing neuroleptic-induced extrapyramidal symptoms: a double-blind, multi-center trial.
Few long-term studies have compared the efficacy and safety of typical and atypical antipsychotic medications directly in patients with a first episode of psychosis who met the criteria for schizophrenia or a related psychotic disorder. This study compared the acute and long-term effectiveness of haloperidol with that of olanzapine in patients with first-episode psychosis in a large, controlled clinical trial.
                Patients with first-episode psychosis (N=263) were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive haloperidol or olanzapine and were followed for up to 104 weeks. Domains measured included psychopathology, psychosocial variables, neurocognitive functioning, and brain morphology and metabolism. This report presents data from clinical measures of treatment response and safety data from the 12-week acute treatment phase.
                Haloperidol and olanzapine were associated with substantial and comparable baseline-to-endpoint reductions in symptom severity, which did not differ significantly in last-observation-carried-forward analyses. However, in a mixed-model analysis, olanzapine-treated subjects had significantly greater decreases in symptom severity as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score and negative and general scales and by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale but not as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale positive scale and by the Clinical Global Impression severity rating. Olanzapine-treated patients experienced a lower rate of treatment-emergent parkinsonism and akathisia but had significantly more weight gain, compared with the haloperidol-treated patients. Overall, significantly more olanzapine-treated subjects than haloperidol-treated subjects completed the 12-week acute phase of the study (67% versus 54%).
                As expected on the basis of previous studies, both olanzapine and haloperidol were effective in the acute reduction of psychopathological symptoms in this group of patients with first-episode psychosis. However, olanzapine had several relative advantages in therapeutic response. Although the nature of adverse events differed between the two agents, retention in the study was greater with olanzapine. Retention in treatment is important in this patient population, given their risk of relapse. Longer-term results are needed to determine whether treatment with atypical antipsychotics results in superior outcomes for a first episode of schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to compare in vivo striatal D2 dopamine receptor occupancy induced by olanzapine and haloperidol in schizophrenic patients using a baseline-endpoint [(123)I]IBZM single photon computed emission tomography (SPECT) design. The relationships of striatal D2 receptor occupancy with clinical efficacy and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) were also assessed. Twenty-seven inpatients with schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder were included in a 4-week prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel and comparative clinical trial. Thirteen patients were treated with haloperidol (10 mg/day) and 14 with olanzapine (10 mg/day). Ratings of clinical status and EPS were obtained weekly. The percentage of D2 receptor occupancy was estimated by using basal ganglia (striatum)/frontal cortex IBZM uptake ratios obtained from each patient before and after 4 weeks of maintained antipsychotic treatment. Olanzapine led to a mean striatal D2 receptor occupancy of 49% (range 28-69%), which was significantly lower than that induced by haloperidol (mean 64%, range 46-90%). The baseline-endpoint SPECT design used in this study revealed lower antipsychotic D2 occupancy percentage values than those reported in the literature, using other approaches. The degree of striatal D2 receptor occupancy correlated to the EPS, which predominantly appeared in patients on haloperidol. No relationship was found between the striatal D2 receptor occupancy and clinical improvement. Olanzapine induced a lower striatal D2 occupancy than haloperidol. This low striatal D2 occupancy, together with the lower incidence of EPS in olanzapine-treated patients, contributed to confirm the atypical behavior of this new antipsychotic drug. Nevertheless, conclusions based on SPECT-estimated percentages of antipsychotic D2 occupancy should be cautious, since the SPECT design could influence the results. In this regard, SPECT studies including baseline and endpoint examinations should be encouraged. To compare the clinical efficacy of haloperidol and risperidone for the treatment of delirium, the authors performed a double-blind comparative study. Twenty-eight patients with delirium were recruited and randomly assigned to receive a flexible-dose regimen of haloperidol or risperidone over 7 days. The severity of delirium was assessed by using Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale scores. Scores for each group decreased significantly over the study period. However, no significant differences in mean Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale scores between groups were found. The group-by-time effect was not significant. In addition, there was no significant difference in the frequency of response to the drugs between the two groups. One patient in the haloperidol group experienced mild akathisia, but no other patients reported clinically significant side effects. These data show no significant difference in the efficacy or response rate between haloperidol and risperidone in the treatment of delirium. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy and side effects of two doses of haloperidol and placebo in the treatment of psychosis and disruptive behaviors in patients with Alzheimer's disease.
                In a 6-week random-assignment, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (phase A), haloperidol, 2-3 mg/day (standard dose), and haloperidol, 0.50-0.75 mg/day (low dose), were compared in 71 outpatients with Alzheimer's disease. For the subsequent 6-week double-blind crossover phase (phase B), patients taking standard- or low-dose haloperidol were switched to placebo, and patients taking placebo were randomly assigned to standard- or low-dose haloperidol.
                For the 60 patients who completed phase A, standard-dose haloperidol was efficacious and superior to both low-dose haloperidol and placebo for scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale psychosis factor and on psychomotor agitation. Response rates according to three sets of criteria were greater with the standard dose (55%-60%) than the low dose (25%-35%) and placebo (25%-30%). The advantage of standard dose over low dose was replicated in phase B. In phase A, extrapyramidal signs tended to be greater with the standard dose than in the other two conditions, primarily because of a subgroup (20%) who developed moderate to severe signs. Low-dose haloperidol did not differ from placebo on any measure of efficacy or side effects.
                The results indicated a favorable therapeutic profile for haloperidol in doses of 2-3 mg/day, although a subgroup developed moderate to severe extrapyramidal signs. A starting dose of 1 mg/day with gradual, upward dose titration is recommended. The narrow therapeutic window observed with haloperidol may also apply to other neuroleptics used in Alzheimer's disease patients with psychosis and disruptive behaviors. In a double-blind study, 135 inpatients with a diagnosis of chronic schizophrenia were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of treatment with one of six parallel treatments: risperidone (a new central 5-hydroxytryptamine2 and dopamine D2 antagonist), 2, 6, 10, 16 mg/day; haloperidol, 20 mg/day; or placebo, after a single-blind placebo washout period. Doses were increased in fixed increments up to a fixed maintenance dose reached after 1 week. On the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness and Improvement, all active medications were superior to placebo except for risperidone (2 mg) on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement. On the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score and positive subscale, superiority to placebo was observed for all treatment groups except for haloperidol and risperidone (2 mg), which tended to be superior to placebo on total PANSS and the positive subscale, respectively. On the PANSS negative subscale, only risperidone (6 mg/day) was significantly better than placebo. Risperidone (6 mg) was superior to haloperidol on the total PANSS, General Psychopathology, and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale subscales. Although there was a linear increase in parkinsonism with increasing risperidone dosage, there were no statistically significant differences between risperidone (2, 6, and 16 mg/day) and placebo. At doses of 6 to 16 mg, risperidone displayed a marked antidyskinetic effect compared with placebo. This effect was more pronounced in patients with severe dyskinesia. By contrast, haloperidol produced significantly more parkinsonism than placebo and risperidone (2, 6 and 16 mg), with no effect on tardive dyskinesia. These data suggest that risperidone, at the optimal therapeutic dose of 6 mg/day, produced significant improvement in both positive and negative symptoms without an increase in drug-induced parkinsonian symptoms and with a significant beneficial effect on tardive dyskinesia. This international, multicenter double-blind trial was designed to compare the therapeutic profile of an atypical antipsychotic, olanzapine, with that of a conventional dopamine D2 antagonist, haloperidol.
                A total of 1,996 patients at 174 sites in Europe and North America were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine (N = 1,336) or haloperidol (N = 660) over 6 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis involved the mean change from baseline to endpoint in total scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Secondary analyses included comparisons of the mean change in positive and negative symptoms, comorbid depression, extrapyramidal symptoms, and overall drug safety.
                Olanzapine demonstrated clinical results superior to those of haloperidol on overall improvement according to the BPRS and on every secondary measure, including depression. Olanzapine was also associated with significantly fewer discontinuations of treatment due to lack of drug efficacy or adverse events. Substantially more olanzapine-treated patients (66.5%) than haloperidol-treated patients (46.8%) completed 6 weeks of therapy. Statistically significant advantages of olanzapine treatment were related to 1) change in negative symptoms, 2) extrapyramidal symptom profile, 3) effect on prolactin levels, and 4) response rate.
                Olanzapine shows a superior and broader spectrum of efficacy in the treatment of schizophrenic psychopathology, with a substantially more favorable safety profile, than haloperidol. It meets several of the criteria for a novel atypical antipsychotic agent. Quetiapine (ICI 204,636, 'Seroquel') is a new atypical antipsychotic agent with a similar binding profile to the original atypical antipsychotic, clozapine. Its clinical efficacy has already been demonstrated at multiple fixed doses (150-750 mg/day) and has been suggested to be comparable with haloperidol (12 mg/day).
                This international, 6-week, multicentre, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial compared quetiapine with haloperidol (455 mg and 8 mg mean total daily doses, respectively) in 448 hospitalized patients with acute exacerbation of chronic or subchronic schizophrenia (DSM-III-R), in order to establish their equivalence in terms of efficacy, and the nature of their tolerability profiles, especially in terms of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) and serum prolactin levels.
                Both quetiapine and haloperidol produced a clear reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Severity of Illness and Global Improvement scores. At day 42, the PANSS total score was reduced by -18.7+/-1.63 in the quetiapine group, and -22.1+/-1.63 in the haloperidol group (P = 0.13, between-treatment). Quetiapine was better tolerated than haloperidol in terms of EPS as demonstrated by the significant differences in the Simpson Scale and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale scores (P < 0.05). Although patients in both groups had elevated serum prolactin concentrations at baseline, mean serum prolactin concentration decreased (by 16.5 microg/l) in quetiapine-treated patients, yet increased (by 5.9 microg/l) in patients treated with haloperidol.
                Quetiapine is an effective and well tolerated antipsychotic of comparable efficacy to haloperidol and lacks the latter compound's effect on prolactin and EPS. Prevention of relapse is a major goal of maintenance treatment in patients with psychotic disorders. We performed a long-term comparison of a newer, atypical antipsychotic drug, risperidone, and an older, conventional neuroleptic drug, haloperidol, in terms of the rate of relapse in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.
                In a double-blind, prospective study at 40 sites, we randomly assigned adult outpatients in stable condition with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder to receive treatment with flexible doses of either risperidone or haloperidol for a minimum of one year.
                Of the 397 patients who underwent randomization, data from 2 were excluded because they did not receive study medication; data from all 30 patients from one site were excluded by the sponsor, the Janssen Research Foundation, because of concern about the integrity of the data. The median duration of treatment was 364 days in the risperidone group and 238 days in the haloperidol group (P=0.02). Of the 177 patients assigned to risperidone and the 188 assigned to haloperidol who remained in the analysis, 44.1 percent and 52.7 percent, respectively, discontinued treatment for reasons other than relapse. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the risk of relapse at the end of the study was 34 percent for the risperidone group and 60 percent for the haloperidol group (P<0.001); the risk ratio for relapse with haloperidol, from the Cox model, was 1.93 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.33 to 2.80; P<0.001). Early discontinuation of treatment for any reason was more frequent among haloperidol-treated patients (risk ratio, 1.52; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.18 to 1.96). Patients in the risperidone group had greater reductions in the mean severity of both psychotic symptoms and extrapyramidal side effects than those in the haloperidol group.
                Adult outpatients with clinically stable schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder have a lower risk of relapse if they are treated with risperidone than if they are treated with haloperidol. A randomized, double-blind, multi-center trial was started to compare the severity of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) during risperidone and haloperidol treatment in schizophrenic patients who had disturbing EPS during their previous neuroleptic treatment. Additional objectives of this trial were comparing the antipsychotic effectiveness of the two treatments and the use of antiparkinsonian medication.
                Effects of flexible doses of risperidone and haloperidol were compared in 77 psychotic patients (83% with chronic schizophrenia) with disturbing neuroleptic-induced EPS (risperidone 40 patients, haloperidol 37). The trial was completed by 47 patients: 25 in the risperidone group (12 women, 13 men), and 22 in the haloperidol group (10 women, 12 men).
                An adequate antipsychotic effect was obtained in most patients by both treatments. The primary aim of this trial was comparing parkinsonism measured with the extrapyramidal syndrome rating scale (ESRS) during treatment with risperidone and haloperidol. Two primary parameters were selected: the change from baseline to the worst score during treatment of ESRS II (parkinsonism) and ESRS VI (clinical global impression of severity of parkinsonism). The CGI of severity of parkinsonism was better with risperidone (P=0.025), while the parkinsonism total score tended to be better with risperidone (P<0. 10). Before the double-blind treatment, 34 (of the 77) had used antiparkinson medication (risperidone 18, haloperidol 16). During the double-blind treatment phase, 21 patients had used antiparkinson medication (risperidone 11, haloperidol 10). The larger reduction of parkinsonism in the risperidone group was not due to a difference in the use of anti-parkinsonian medication.
                In this group of schizophrenic patients with disturbing EPS during previous neuroleptic treatment, a stronger reduction of parkinsonism was observed with risperidone than with haloperidol.
There is no evidence that haloperidol in low dosage has different efficacy in comparison with the atypical antipsychotics olanzapine and risperidone in the management of delirium or has a greater frequency of adverse drug effects than these drugs. High dose haloperidol was associated with a greater incidence of side effects, mainly parkinsonism, than the atypical antipsychotics. Low dose haloperidol may be effective in decreasing the degree and duration of delirium in post-operative patients, compared with placebo. These conclusions must be tempered by the observation that they are based on small studies of limited scope, and therefore will require further corroborating evidence before they can be translated into specific recommendation for the treatment of delirium.