-
Psychological Medicine Jul 2023Antipsychotics are widely used in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), but there has been no comprehensive meta-analytic assessment that examined their use... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Antipsychotics are widely used in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), but there has been no comprehensive meta-analytic assessment that examined their use as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy.
METHODS
A systematic review and a meta-analysis were conducted on randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) that reported on the efficacy and safety/tolerability of antipsychotics for the treatment of adults with MDD. Data of both monotherapy and adjunctive antipsychotic use were extracted, but analyzed separately using a random-effects model. Co-primary outcomes were study-defined-treatment response and intolerability-related discontinuation. We also illustrated the risk/benefit balance of antipsychotics for MDD, using two-dimensional graphs representing the primary efficacy and safety/tolerability outcome. Secondary outcomes included psychopathology, remission, all-cause-discontinuation, inefficacy-related discontinuation, and adverse events.
RESULTS
Forty-five RCTs with 12 724 patients were included in the analysis. In monotherapy (studies = 13, = 4375), amisulpride [1.99 (1.55-2.55)], sulpiride [1.50 (1.03-2.17)], and quetiapine [1.48 (1.23-1.78)] were significantly superior to placebo regarding treatment response. However, intolerability-related discontinuations were significantly higher compared to placebo with amisulpride and quetiapine. In adjunctive therapy (studies = 32, = 8349), ziprasidone [1.80 (1.07-3.04)], risperidone [1.59 (1.19-2.14)], aripiprazole [1.54 (1.35-1.76)], brexpiprazole [1.41 (1.21-1.66)], cariprazine [1.27 (1.07-1.52)], and quetiapine [1.23 (1.08-1.41)] were significantly superior to placebo regarding treatment response. However, of these antipsychotics that were superior to placebo, only risperidone was equivalent to placebo regarding discontinuation due to intolerability, while the other antipsychotics were inferior.
CONCLUSION
Results suggest that there are significant differences regarding the risk/benefit ratio among antipsychotics for MDD, which should inform clinical care.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Quetiapine Fumarate; Risperidone; Depressive Disorder, Major; Amisulpride; Olanzapine; Benzodiazepines; Dibenzothiazepines
PubMed: 35510505
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291722000745 -
Psychopharmacology May 2020What is the difference between aripiprazole and brexpiprazole? (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
RATIONALE
What is the difference between aripiprazole and brexpiprazole?
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review, network meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluated the efficacy and safety/tolerability of aripiprazole and brexpiprazole for treating acute schizophrenia.
METHODS
We searched Scopus, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library from inception until May 22, 2019. The response rate was set as the primary outcome. Other outcomes were discontinuation rate and incidence of individual adverse events. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% credible interval (95%CrI) were calculated.
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were identified (n = 3925). Response rates of both aripiprazole and brexpiprazole were superior to that of the placebo (RR [95%CrI]: aripiprazole = 0.84 [0.78, 0.92], brexpiprazole = 0.84 [0.77, 0.92]). Aripiprazole and brexpiprazole were associated with a lower incidence of all-cause discontinuation (0.80 [0.71, 0.89], 0.83 [0.72, 0.95]), adverse events (0.67 [0.47, 0.97], 0.64 [0.46, 0.94]), and inefficacy (0.56 [0.40, 0.77], 0.68 [0.48, 0.99]) compared with the placebo. Although brexpiprazole was associated with a lower incidence of schizophrenia as an adverse event compared with the placebo (0.57 [0.37, 0.85]), aripiprazole and brexpiprazole were associated with a higher incidence of weight gain compared with the placebo (2.12 [1.28, 3.68], 2.14 [1.35, 3.42]). No significant differences were found in other individual adverse events, such as somnolence, akathisia, extrapyramidal symptoms, and dizziness between aripiprazole or brexpiprazole and placebo. Any outcome between aripiprazole and brexpiprazole were not different.
CONCLUSIONS
Differences in short-term efficacy and safety for acute schizophrenia were not apparent between aripiprazole and brexpiprazole. Future studies are warranted to evaluate whether there are differences in the long-term outcome between treatments.
Topics: Acute Disease; Akathisia, Drug-Induced; Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Quinolones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Schizophrenia; Thiophenes; Weight Gain
PubMed: 32002559
DOI: 10.1007/s00213-020-05472-5 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Mar 2024The evidence of treatment options' efficacy on acute bipolar manic episodes is relatively less in youths than adults. We aimed to compare and rank the drug's efficacy,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The evidence of treatment options' efficacy on acute bipolar manic episodes is relatively less in youths than adults. We aimed to compare and rank the drug's efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety for acute mania in children and adolescents.
METHOD
We systematically reviewed the double-blinded, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing drugs or placebo for acute manic episodes of bipolar disorder in children and adolescents using PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and https://clinicaltrials.gov from inception until November 20, 2022. Response to treatment was the primary outcome, and random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted (PROSPERO 2022: CRD42022367455).
RESULTS
Of 10,134 citations, we included 15 RCTs, including 2372 patients (47 % female), 15 psychotropic drugs, and the placebo. Risperidone 0.5-2.5 mg/day, aripiprazole 30 mg/day olanzapine, quetiapine 400 mg/day, quetiapine 600 mg/day, asenapine 5 mg/day, asenapine 10 mg, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole 10 mg were found to be effective (in comparison with placebo) in children and adolescents, respectively (τ = 0.0072, I = 10.2 %). The tolerability of aripiprazole 30 mg/day was lower than risperidone 0.5-2.5 mg/day and olanzapine. Oxcarbazepine had the highest discontinuation due to the adverse effects risk ratio.
LIMITATIONS
Efficacy ranking of the treatments could be performed by evaluating relatively few RCT results, and only monotherapies were considered.
CONCLUSIONS
Efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety are changing with the doses of antipsychotics for children and adolescents with acute bipolar manic episodes. Drug selection and optimum dosage should be carefully adjusted in children and adolescents.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Adult; Child; Risperidone; Olanzapine; Aripiprazole; Bipolar Disorder; Quetiapine Fumarate; Mania; Network Meta-Analysis; Antipsychotic Agents; Dibenzocycloheptenes
PubMed: 38211745
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.01.067 -
Advances in Therapy May 2022Dementia-related psychosis (DRP) is characterized by hallucinations and delusions, which may increase the debilitating effects of underlying dementia. This network... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Dementia-related psychosis (DRP) is characterized by hallucinations and delusions, which may increase the debilitating effects of underlying dementia. This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated the comparative efficacy, safety, and acceptability of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) commonly used off label to treat DRP.
METHODS
We included 22 eligible studies from a systematic literature review of AAPs (quetiapine, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, and brexpiprazole) used off label to treat DRP. Study outcomes were: (1) efficacy-neuropsychiatric inventory-nursing home (NPI-NH psychosis subscale), (2) safety-mortality, cerebrovascular events (CVAEs), and others (somnolence, falls, fractures, injuries, etc.), and (3) acceptability-discontinuations due to all causes, lack of efficacy, and adverse events (AEs). We used random-effects modeling to estimate pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) for NPI-NH psychosis subscale scores and odds ratios (OR) for other dichotomous outcomes, with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
RESULTS
Compared with placebo, aripiprazole (SMD - 0.12; 95% CI - 0.31, 0.06), and olanzapine (SMD - 0.17; 95% CI - 0.04; 0.02) demonstrated small, non-significant numerical improvements in NPI-NH psychosis scores (5 studies; n = 1891), while quetiapine (SMD 0.04; 95% CI - 0.23, 0.32) did not improve symptoms. The odds of mortality (15 studies, n = 4989) were higher for aripiprazole (OR 1.58; 95% CI 0.62, 4.04), brexpiprazole (OR 2.22; 95% CI 0.30, 16.56), olanzapine (OR 2.21; 95% CI 0.84, 5.85), quetiapine (OR 1.68; 95% CI 0.70, 4.03), and risperidone (OR 1.63; 95% CI 0.93, 2.85) than for placebo. Risperidone (OR 3.68; 95% CI 1.68, 8.95) and olanzapine (OR 4.47; 95% CI 1.36, 14.69) demonstrated significantly greater odds of CVAEs compared to placebo. Compared with placebo, odds of all-cause discontinuation were significantly lower for aripiprazole (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.51, 0.98; 20 studies; 5744 patients) and higher for other AAPs. Aripiprazole (OR 0.5; 95% CI 0.31, 0.82) and olanzapine (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.31, 0.74) had significantly lower odds of discontinuation due to lack of efficacy (OR 12 studies; n = 4382) compared to placebo, while results for quetiapine and risperidone were not significant. Compared with placebo, the odds of discontinuation due to AEs (19 studies, n = 5445) were higher for olanzapine (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.75, 3.92), brexpiprazole (OR 1.80; 95% CI 0.80, 4.07), quetiapine (OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.82, 1.91), aripiprazole (OR 1.38; 95% CI 0.90, 2.13), and risperidone (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.02, 1.94).
CONCLUSIONS
Overall results demonstrate that, compared with placebo, quetiapine is not associated with improvement in psychosis in patients with dementia, while olanzapine and aripiprazole have non-significant small numerical improvements. These off-label AAPs (quetiapine, risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, and brexpiprazole) are associated with greater odds of mortality, CVAEs, and discontinuations due to AEs than placebo. These results underscore the ongoing unmet need for newer pharmacological options with a more favorable benefit-risk profile for the treatment of DRP.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Dementia; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Off-Label Use; Olanzapine; Psychotic Disorders; Quetiapine Fumarate; Risperidone; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35247186
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-022-02075-8 -
Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) Nov 2023This systematic review compared the efficacy and tolerance of oral antipsychotics (APDs) used in the treatment of schizophrenia following the PRISMA-P© statement ( =... (Review)
Review
This systematic review compared the efficacy and tolerance of oral antipsychotics (APDs) used in the treatment of schizophrenia following the PRISMA-P© statement ( = 21). The primary outcomes of interest were clinical response measured with symptoms' improvement, tolerance to side effects and discontinuation reasons. There was better individual patients' response to aripiprazole vs. ziprasidone and quetiapine ((CDSS = 0.04), BPRS = 0.02, YMRS = 0.001) and ziprasidone vs. quetiapine (CGI = 0.02, CDSS = 0.02). Aripiprazole was more tolerated than risperidone, ziprasidone and quetiapine ( < 0.05). Quetiapine was more tolerated than aripiprazole, ziprasidone and risperidone ( < 0.05). Ziprasidone was more tolerated than quetiapine haloperidol and olanzapine ( < 0.05). Risperidone was more tolerated than olanzapine ( = 0.03) and haloperidol was more tolerated than olanzapine and quetiapine ( < 0.05). Olanzapine caused less discontinuation than quetiapine; quetiapine caused less discontinuation than ziprasidone, aripiprazole and haloperidol; ziprasidone caused less discontinuation than quetiapine, aripiprazole and haloperidol; aripiprazole caused less discontinuation than quetiapine, ziprasidone and olanzapine and olanzapine caused less discontinuation than ziprasidone and haloperidol ( < 0.05). It was concluded that individual patient clinical response, tolerance to side effects and life-threatening side effects remain the most reliable basis for selecting and continuing the use of APD.
PubMed: 37987385
DOI: 10.3390/pharmacy11060175 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Feb 2024Intravenous racemic ketamine is a promising treatment for treatment-resistant depression. However, its clinical utility compared with intranasal esketamine and the other... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparative efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of intravenous racemic ketamine with intranasal esketamine, aripiprazole and lithium as augmentative treatments for treatment-resistant unipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Intravenous racemic ketamine is a promising treatment for treatment-resistant depression. However, its clinical utility compared with intranasal esketamine and the other well-studied conventional pharmacological interventions (i.e., aripiprazole and lithium) as augmentative treatments for treatment-resistant unipolar depression in adults remains unclear. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of intravenous racemic ketamine with intranasal esketamine, aripiprazole and lithium under such conditions.
METHODS
The Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINHAL and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were systematically searched from their inception to 10 May 2023. Randomised controlled trials evaluating these drugs were included. A random-effects network meta-analysis was also performed.
RESULTS
In the primary analysis, all four drugs were significantly more effective than placebo. In addition, intravenous racemic ketamine was significantly more effective and acceptable than intranasal esketamine and aripiprazole. Intravenous racemic ketamine was not significantly different from placebo in tolerability, whereas intranasal esketamine and aripiprazole were significantly less tolerable than placebo. Lithium did not differ significantly from intravenous racemic ketamine in efficacy, tolerability and acceptability.
LIMITATIONS
The sample size of patients treated with intravenous racemic ketamine was small.
CONCLUSIONS
Intravenous racemic ketamine may be a better augmentative treatment for treatment-resistant unipolar depression than intranasal esketamine and aripiprazole. Whether intravenous racemic ketamine or lithium is superior is unclear currently. A larger head-to-head trial of intravenous racemic ketamine versus conventional augmentative treatments for treatment-resistant unipolar depression is needed.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Ketamine; Aripiprazole; Antidepressive Agents; Lithium; Network Meta-Analysis; Depressive Disorder; Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant; Depression
PubMed: 37949235
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.11.023 -
L'Encephale Dec 2022Drug-induced hypersalivation is a frequent drug adverse event of psychotropic drugs. This excess salivary pooling in the mouth can cause an impairment of a patient's...
OBJECTIVES
Drug-induced hypersalivation is a frequent drug adverse event of psychotropic drugs. This excess salivary pooling in the mouth can cause an impairment of a patient's quality of life leading to low rates of medication adherence. The optimal management of hypersalivation is thus crucial to improve patient care. To date, no recommendations for limiting drug-induced hypersalivation have been published. In this study, we conducted a systematic review to investigate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing drug-induced hypersalivation.
METHODS
Treatment of drug-induced sialorrhea based on case reports and clinical studies were sought in May 2021 from PubMed, Google Scholar and Science Direct (keywords : « treatment », « hypersalivation », « induced », « drug », « clozapine »). Articles published between 1966 to May 2021 on the treatment of drug-induced hypersalivation were included in this study.
RESULTS
Sixty-seven articles were selected in this narrative review. First, patient education associated with non-drug related management are essential to improve the compliance to drugs inducing hypersalivation. The non-drug related management should be initiated with an increase in the frequency of swallowing with chewing gum. In the case of ineffectiveness, the dosage of drug responsive of sialorrhea can be adjusted according to the patient's response and his/her medical history (i.e. reducing the dose or splitting the daily dose). Finally, if the problem persists, a symptomatic treatment can be added according to the type of sialorrhea (diurnal or nocturnal), preferred galenic by patient, tolerance and availability of drugs. Several drugs have been tested to reduce hypersalivation induced by clozapine (61/67), risperidone (3/67), quetiapine (2/67) and aripiprazole (2/67). Among the 63 articles targeting a specific corrective treatment, anticholinergic agents were most described in the literature (41 cases out of 63) with atropine, glycopyrrolate and scopolamine (6/41 each). Other agents were described as clinically effective on hypersalivation: dopamine antagonists (9/63) with amisulpride (5/9), alpha-2-adrenergic agonists (5/63) with clonidine (3/5), botulinic toxin (4/63), and terazosine, moclobemide, bupropion and N-acetylcysteine (for each 1/63).
CONCLUSIONS
In the case of drug-induced hypersalivation, after failure of non-drug therapies and dosage optimization of the causative treatment, an anticholinergic drug can be initiated. In case of insufficient response, the different treatments presented can be used depending on the galenic form, tolerance and access to those medications. The assessment of the risk-benefit balance should be systematic. The heterogeneity of the studies, the little knowledge about the pharmacological mechanism of saliva flow modulation and the unavailability of corrective drugs are different factors contributing to the complexity of therapeutic optimization.
Topics: Female; Humans; Male; Sialorrhea; Clozapine; Quality of Life; Amisulpride; Scopolamine; Cholinergic Antagonists; Antipsychotic Agents
PubMed: 35989107
DOI: 10.1016/j.encep.2022.03.013 -
Schizophrenia Research Aug 2020Different therapeutic strategies are used for lowering prolactin concentrations in patients with psychotic disorders with antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinaemia. We... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Different therapeutic strategies are used for lowering prolactin concentrations in patients with psychotic disorders with antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinaemia. We aimed to examine the evidence from open-label studies and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that studied four prolactin-lowering therapeutic strategies in people with psychotic disorders and hyperprolactinaemia: 1) switching to prolactin-sparing antipsychotics; 2) adding aripiprazole; 3) adding dopamine agonists; and 4) adding metformin. RCTs were included in a meta-analysis. Effect sizes (Hedges' g) of prolactin reductions with each strategy were calculated. Withdrawal rates were also considered. We identified 26 studies. Nine studies explored switching antipsychotic treatment to aripiprazole (n = 4), olanzapine (n = 1), quetiapine (n = 2), paliperidone palmitate (n = 1) or blonanserin (n = 1). Twelve studies tested the addition of aripiprazole. Six studies explored the addition of cabergoline (n = 3), bromocriptine (n = 2) or terguride (n = 1). We also found one meta-analysis testing the addition of metformin to antipsychotic treatment but no other individual studies. A meta-analysis could only be performed for the addition of aripiprazole, the strategy with the best level of evidence. Five RCTs testing the addition of aripiprazole yielded a significant reduction in prolactin concentration compared to placebo (N = 3) or maintaining antipsychotic treatment (N = 2): Hedges' g was -1.35 (CI 95%: -1.93 to -0.76, p < 0.001). The three placebo-controlled RCTs for aripiprazole addition showed similar withdrawal rates for aripiprazole (10.1%) and placebo (11.5%), without significant differences in the meta-analysis. Our study suggests that, in terms of levels of evidence, adding aripiprazole is the first option to be considered for lowering prolactin concentrations in patients with schizophrenia and hyperprolactinaemia.
Topics: Antipsychotic Agents; Aripiprazole; Benzodiazepines; Humans; Hyperprolactinemia; Prolactin; Psychotic Disorders
PubMed: 32507371
DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2020.04.031 -
European Neuropsychopharmacology : the... Jun 2024Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are primarily used for relapse prevention, but in some settings and situations, they may also be useful for acute treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are primarily used for relapse prevention, but in some settings and situations, they may also be useful for acute treatment of schizophrenia. We conducted a systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), focusing on adult patients in the acute phase of schizophrenia. Interventions were risperidone, paliperidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, and placebo, administered either orally or as LAI. We synthesized data on overall symptoms, complemented by 17 other efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed with the Confidence-in-Network-Meta-Analysis-framework (CINeMA). We included 115 RCTs with 25,550 participants. All drugs were significantly more efficacious than placebo with the following standardized mean differences and their 95 % confidence intervals: olanzapine LAI -0.66 [-1.00; -0.33], risperidone LAI -0.59[-0.73;-0.46], olanzapine oral -0.55[-0.62;-0.48], aripiprazole LAI -0.54[-0.71; -0.37], risperidone oral -0.48[-0.55;-0.41], paliperidone oral -0.47[-0.58;-0.37], paliperidone LAI -0.45[-0.57;-0.33], aripiprazole oral -0.40[-0.50; -0.31]. There were no significant efficacy differences between LAIs and oral formulations. Sensitivity analyses of the primary outcome overall symptoms largely confirmed these findings. Moreover, some side effects were less frequent under LAIs than under their oral counterparts. Confidence in the evidence was moderate for most comparisons. LAIs are efficacious for acute schizophrenia and may have some benefits compared to oral formulations in terms of side effects. These findings assist clinicians with insights to weigh the risks and benefits between oral and injectable agents when treating patients in the acute phase.
Topics: Humans; Antipsychotic Agents; Administration, Oral; Schizophrenia; Delayed-Action Preparations; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Injections; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38490016
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2024.03.003 -
NPJ Schizophrenia May 2021Early intervention is essential for favorable long-term outcomes in schizophrenia. However, there is limited guidance in the scientific literature on how best to choose... (Review)
Review
Early intervention is essential for favorable long-term outcomes in schizophrenia. However, there is limited guidance in the scientific literature on how best to choose between dopamine D receptor (DR) partial agonists and DR antagonists in early stages of schizophrenia. The aim of this meta-analysis was to directly compare DR partial agonists with DR antagonists for efficacy and tolerability, using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved participants diagnosed with first-episode psychosis, schizophrenia, or related psychotic disorders with a duration of illness ≤5 years. Fourteen RCTs, involving 2494 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Aripiprazole was the only identified DR partial agonist, and was not significantly different from pooled DR antagonists for overall symptom reduction or all-cause discontinuation. However, aripiprazole was more favorable than pooled DR antagonists for depressive symptoms, prolactin levels, and triglyceride levels. Specifically, aripiprazole was more favorable than paliperidone for triglyceride levels and more favorable than risperidone and olanzapine, but less favorable than ziprasidone, for weight gain. In addition, aripiprazole was less favorable for akathisia compared with second-generation DR antagonists, in particular olanzapine and quetiapine, and less favorable for discontinuation due to inefficacy than risperidone. Lastly, aripiprazole was more favorable than haloperidol for various efficacy and tolerability outcomes. In conclusion, aripiprazole's efficacy did not differ substantially from DR antagonists in the early course of schizophrenia, whereas differential tolerability profiles were noted. More double-blind RCTs are required comparing the efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole as well as other DR partial agonists with DR antagonists in early stages of schizophrenia.
PubMed: 34035313
DOI: 10.1038/s41537-021-00158-z