An exploratory haloperidol-controlled dose-finding study of ziprasidone in hospitalized patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Intramuscular ziprasidone compared with intramuscular haloperidol in the treatment of acute psychosis. Ziprasidone I.M. Study Group. Olanzapine versus ziprasidone: results of a 28-week double-blind study in patients with schizophrenia. Randomized, controlled, double-blind multicenter comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone and olanzapine in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Ziprasidone 40 and 120 mg/day in the acute exacerbation of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: a 4-week placebo-controlled trial. Comparative effectiveness of second-generation antipsychotics and haloperidol in acute schizophrenia. Rapid tranquilization for agitated patients in emergency psychiatric rooms: a randomized trial of olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone. Ziprasidone 80 mg/day and 160 mg/day in the acute exacerbation of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: a 6-week placebo-controlled trial. Ziprasidone Study Group. Risperidone versus haloperidol in the treatment of chronic schizophrenic patients: a parallel group double-blind comparative trial.
Ninety patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder according to DSM-III-R criteria participated in this double-blind, exploratory, dose-ranging trial. After a single-blind washout period of 4 to 7 days, patients were randomly assigned to receive one of four fixed doses of the new antipsychotic, ziprasidone 4 (N = 19), 10 (N = 17), 40 (N = 17), or 160 (N = 20) mg/day or haloperidol 15 mg/day (N = 17) for 4 weeks. A dose-response relationship among ziprasidone groups was established for improvements in Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) score (p = 0.002) but not in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total score (p = 0.08). The intent-to-treat analysis of mean changes from baseline in the BPRS total, BPRS Psychosis core, and CGI-S scores demonstrated that ziprasidone 160 mg/day was comparable with haloperidol in reducing overall psychopathology and positive symptoms and was superior to ziprasidone 4 mg/day. Despite the small sample size and short duration of the trial, the improvement in CGI-S with both ziprasidone 160 mg/day and haloperidol 15 mg/day was statistically significantly greater than with ziprasidone 4 mg/day (p = 0.001 andp = 0.005, respectively). The percentage of patients classified as responders on both the BPRS total (> or = 30% improvement) and CGI-Improvement (score of 1 or 2) scales in the ziprasidone 160 mg/day group was similar to that in the haloperidol group and nonsignificantly greater than that in the ziprasidone 4 mg/day group. On all assessments of clinical efficacy, the improvements associated with ziprasidone 4 mg/day, 10 mg/day, and 40 mg/day were similar. Concomitant benztropine use at any time during the study was less frequent with ziprasidone 160 mg/day (15%) than with haloperidol (53%). Haloperidol was associated with a sustained hyperprolactinemia, unlike ziprasidone, where only transient elevations in prolactin that returned to normal within the dosing interval were observed. Ziprasidone was well tolerated, and the incidence of adverse events was similar in all groups. The results of this study suggest that ziprasidone 160 mg/day is as effective as haloperidol 15 mg/day in reducing overall psychopathology and positive symptoms of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder but has a lower potential to induce extrapyramidal symptoms. This 7-day, randomized, open-label, multicenter, international study compared the efficacy and tolerability of intramuscular (i.m.) ziprasidone with haloperidol i.m. and the transition from i.m. to oral treatment in hospitalized patients with acute psychotic agitation (related to DSM-III-R diagnoses).
                Patients received up to 3 days of flexible-dose ziprasidone i.m. (N = 90) or haloperidol i.m. (N = 42) followed by oral treatment to day 7. After an initial ziprasidone i.m. dose of 10 mg, subsequent i.m. doses of 5 to 20 mg could be given every 4 to 6 hours (maximum daily dose = 80 mg) if needed, followed by oral ziprasidone, 80-200 mg/day. Haloperidol i.m. doses of 2.5 to 10 mg were given on entry, followed by 2.5 to 10 mg i.m. every 4 to 6 hours (maximum daily dose = 40 mg) if needed, then by oral haloperidol, 10-80 mg/day.
                The mean reductions in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total, BPRS agitation items, and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scale scores were statistically significantly greater (p < .05, p < .01, and p < .01, respectively) after ziprasidone i.m. treatment compared with haloperidol i.m. treatment. Further reductions in these scores also occurred in both groups following transition to oral treatment. Ziprasidone was associated with a lower incidence of movement disorders and a reduced requirement for anticholinergic medication during both i.m. and oral treatment compared with haloperidol. Movement disorder scale scores improved with ziprasidone i.m. and oral treatment, but deteriorated with haloperidol. Other adverse events were rare with both treatments.
                Ziprasidone i.m. was significantly more effective in reducing the symptoms of acute psychosis and was better tolerated than haloperidol i.m., particularly in movement disorders. The transition from ziprasidone i.m. to oral ziprasidone was effective and well tolerated. The efficacy and safety of olanzapine were compared with those of ziprasidone.
                This was a multicenter randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, 28-week study of patients with schizophrenia. Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with 10-20 mg/day of olanzapine or 80-160 mg/day of ziprasidone. The primary efficacy measure was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score. Secondary efficacy and safety measures included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale subscales as well as mood, quality of life, and extrapyramidal symptom scales. Safety was evaluated by recording treatment-emergent adverse events and measuring vital signs and weight.
                The study was completed by significantly more olanzapine-treated patients (165 of 277, 59.6%) than ziprasidone-treated patients (115 of 271, 42.4%). At 28 weeks, the olanzapine-treated patients showed significantly more improvement than the ziprasidone-treated patients on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale overall scale and all subscales and on the Clinical Global Impression ratings of severity of illness and improvement. The responder rate was higher for olanzapine than for ziprasidone. Extrapyramidal symptoms were not significantly different between groups in change-to-endpoint analyses, but results favored olanzapine on baseline-to-maximum changes. Weight change was significantly greater with olanzapine (mean=3.06 kg, SD=6.87) than with ziprasidone (mean=-1.12 kg, SD=4.70). Fasting lipid profiles were significantly superior in the ziprasidone group; there was no significant difference in fasting glucose level.
                Olanzapine treatment resulted in significantly greater psychopathology improvement and higher response and completion rates than ziprasidone treatment, while ziprasidone was superior for weight change and lipid profile. Limited randomized, controlled trial data exist on possible differences between atypical antipsychotics in efficacy, overall tolerability, and important indices of health status. The authors compared the efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone and olanzapine in the treatment of acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
                In this 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-design, flexible-dose trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive ziprasidone (N=136) or olanzapine (N=133). Primary efficacy measures were improvement in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) severity scale scores; secondary measures were scores on the CGI improvement scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia. Tolerability assessments included fasting lipid profiles, fasting glucose and insulin measurements, electrocardiography, and monitoring of vital signs and body weight.
                The overall mean daily doses were 129.9 mg (SD=27.3) for ziprasidone and 11.3 mg (SD=2.8) for olanzapine. Both antipsychotics were efficacious in improving symptoms and global illness severity. The two treatment groups did not differ significantly in primary or secondary efficacy measures at endpoint or in by-visit analysis. Both agents were well tolerated. Body weight, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol significantly increased with olanzapine but not with ziprasidone; all between-group comparisons of these variables were significant and favored ziprasidone. Olanzapine, but not ziprasidone, was associated with significant increases in fasting insulin level. No patient in either group exhibited a corrected QT interval >/=500 msec.
                During 6 weeks' treatment, ziprasidone and olanzapine demonstrated comparable antipsychotic efficacy. Differences favoring ziprasidone were observed in metabolic parameters. A double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter study, was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ziprasidone in 139 patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Patients were randomized to receive ziprasidone 40 mg/day, 120 mg/day or placebo for 28 days. Ziprasidone 120 mg/day was significantly more effective than placebo in improving the BPRS total, CGI-S. BPRS depression cluster and BPRS anergia cluster scores (all P < 0.05). Similarly, the percentages of patients classified as responders on the BPRS (> or = 30% reduction) and the CGI improvement (score < or = 2) were significantly greater with ziprasidone 120 mg/day compared with placebo (P < 0.05). The number of patients who experienced an adverse event was similar in all three treatment groups, and discontinuation due to adverse events was rare (five of 91 ziprasidone-treated patients). The most frequently reported adverse events, that were more common in either ziprasidone group than in the placebo group, were dyspepsia, constipation, nausea and abdominal pain. There was a notably low incidence extrapyramidal side-effects (including akathisia) and postural hypotension and no pattern of laboratory abnormalities or apparent weight gain. Ziprasidone-treated patients were not clinically different from placebo-treated patients on the Simpson-Angus Rating scale, Barnes Akathisia scale and AIMS assessments. These results indicate that ziprasidone 120 mg/day is effective in the treatment of the positive, negative and affective symptoms of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder with a very low side-effect burden. There is little information on the comparative effectiveness of second-generation antipsychotic agents.
                To determine if any of five second-generation antipsychotics or haloperidol is more effective in treating acutely ill patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or schizophreniform disorder.
                A sample of 327 newly admitted patients were randomised to open-label treatment with aripiprazole, haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone or ziprasidone for a minimum of 3 weeks. Measures of effectiveness were improvement in mental status so that the patient no longer required acute in-patient care, and changes in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores.
                By the first measure, haloperidol (89%), olanzapine (92%) and risperidone (88%) were significantly more effective than aripiprazole (64%), quetiapine (64%) and ziprasidone (64%). Changes in BPRS ratings were not significant among treatments.
                Haloperidol, olanzapine and risperidone are superior to aripiprazole, quetiapine and ziprasidone for the acute treatment of psychosis in hospitalised patients with schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or schizophreniform disorder. To compare the effectiveness of intramuscular olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol alone as the first medication(s) used to treat patients with agitation and aggressive behavior.
                One hundred fifty patients with agitation caused by psychotic or bipolar disorder were randomly assigned under double-blind conditions to receive olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus midazolam, haloperidol plus promethazine or haloperidol alone. The Overt Agitation Severity Scale, Overt Aggression Scale and Ramsay Sedation Scale were applied within 12 hours after the first dosage.
                All medications produced a calming effect within one hour of administration, but only olanzapine and haloperidol reduced agitation by less than 10 points, and only olanzapine reduced aggression by less than four points in the first hour. After twelve hours, only patients treated with haloperidol plus midazolam had high levels of agitation and aggression and also more side effects. Ziprasidone, olanzapine and haloperidol alone had more stable results for agitation control, while ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine and olanzapine had stable results for aggression control.
                Olanzapine, ziprasidone, haloperidol plus promethazine, haloperidol plus midazolam and haloperidol were effective in controlling agitation and aggression caused by mental illness over 12 hours. Although all the drugs had advantages and disadvantages, haloperidol plus midazolam was associated with the worst results in all the observed parameters. In this double-blind study, patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomized to receive either ziprasidone 80 mg/day (n = 106) or 160 mg/day (n = 104) or placebo (n = 92), for 6 weeks. Both doses of ziprasidone were statistically significantly more effective than placebo in improving the PANSS total, BPRS total, BPRS core items, CGI-S, and PANSS negative subscale scores (p < .05). Ziprasidone 160 mg/day significantly improved depressive symptoms in patients with clinically significant depression at baseline (MADRS > or = 14, over-all mean 23.5) (p < .05) as compared with placebo. The percentage of patients experiencing adverse events was similar in each treatment group, and resultant discontinuation was rare. The most frequent adverse events associated with ziprasidone were generally mild dyspepsia, nausea, dizziness, and transient somnolence. Ziprasidone was shown to have a very low liability for inducing movement disorders and weight gain. The results indicate that ziprasidone is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of the positive, negative, and depressive symptoms of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. A parallel group double-blind comparative trial was conducted to study the efficacy and safety of risperidone compared with haloperidol. After a one-week wash-out, 35 chronic schizophrenic patients (17 males, 18 females) were randomly assigned to one of two groups for eight weeks of double-blind treatment. The patients' psychopathology was assessed by means of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for Schizophrenia (PANSS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI). Safety assessments included the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale (ESRS), the UKU Side Effect Rating Scale, vital signs, body weight, ECG and laboratory screening. Thirty-two patients completed the trial: there were 3 dropouts in the risperidone group. The results on the PANSS and CGI indicate that the mean changes from baseline on the total PANSS score and on the total BPRS score were comparable in both treatment groups. The number of patients where a clinical improvement at least 20% reduction in baseline score was also similar in both treatment groups. Risperidone caused less extrapyramidal symptoms and less side effects in UKU scale than haloperidol. No significant ECG changes were induced, no relevant changes in blood pressure or clinical laboratory parameters were observed. This study has demonstrated that the combined serotonin 5-HT2 and dopamine-D2 antagonist risperidone is an antipsychotic as potent as haloperidol. Risperidone causes less extrapyramidal symptoms, and is better tolerated than haloperidol.
Currently data are limited. Ziprasidone may be an effective antipsychotic with less extrapyramidal effects than haloperidol. It also, however, causes more nausea and vomiting than the typical drugs, and, at present, there is no data suggesting that it is different to other atypical compounds. Well planned, conducted and reported long term randomised trials are needed if ziprasidone is to be accepted into everyday use.