Buchanan Schizo Pharma

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    1/23

    The 2009 Schizophrenia PORT Psychopharmacological TreatmentRecommendations and Summary Statements

    Robert W. Buchanan1,2, Julie Kreyenbuhl3,4,Deanna L. Kelly2, Jason M. Noel5, Douglas L. Boggs2,Bernard A. Fischer2, Seth Himelhoch3, Beverly Fang6,Eunice Peterson6, Patrick R. Aquino6, and William Keller6

    2Maryland Psychiatric Research Center, Departmentof Psychiatry,University of Maryland School of Medicine, PO Box 21247,Baltimore, MD 21228;3Division of Services Research, Departmentof Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine,Baltimore,MD;

    4VA Capitol HealthcareNetwork (VISN5) Mental

    Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Baltimore, MD;5

    Department of Pharmacy Practice and Science, University ofMaryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD; 6Department ofPsychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore,MD

    In light of the large number of studies published since the2004 update of Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes ResearchTeam psychopharmacological treatment recommenda-tions, we conducted an extensive literature review to deter-mine whether the current psychopharmacologicaltreatment recommendations required revision and whetherthere was sufficient evidence to warrant new treatment rec-

    ommendations for prespecified outcomes of interest. Wereviewed over 400 articles, which resulted in 16 treatmentrecommendations: the revision of 11 previous treatmentrecommendations and 5 new treatment recommendations.Three previous treatment recommendations were elimi-nated. There were 13 interventions and/or outcomes forwhich there was insufficient evidence for a treatment rec-ommendation, and a statement was written to summarizethe current level of evidence and identify important gapsin our knowledge that need to be addressed. In general,there was considerable consensus among the Psychophar-macology Evidence Review Group and the expert consul-tants. Two major areas of contention concerned whetherthere was sufficient evidence to recommend specific dosageranges for the acute and maintenance treatment of first-episode and multi-episode schizophrenia and to endorsethe practice of switching antipsychotics for the treatmentof antipsychotic-related weight gain. Finally, there con-

    tinue to be major gaps in our knowledge, including limitedinformation on (1) the use of adjunctive pharmacologicalagents for the treatment of persistent positive symptomsor other symptom domains of psychopathology, includinganxiety, cognitive impairments, depressive symptoms,and persistent negative symptoms and (2) the treatmentof co-occurring substance or medical disorders that occurfrequently in individuals with schizophrenia.

    Key words: acute treatment/antipsychotic medications/clozapine/first-episode schizophrenia/maintenancetreatment/side effects

    Introduction

    The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team(PORT) psychopharmacological treatment recommen-dations provide a comprehensive summary of currentevidence-based pharmacological treatment practices.There have been 2 previous sets of pharmacological treat-ment recommendations.1,2 These recommendations haveserved to guide the development of algorithms3,4 andguidelines5 for the treatment of schizophrenia.

    Since the last update of the PORT psychopharmaco-logical treatment recommendations,2 there have beenover 600 studies published on the pharmacological treat-ment of schizophrenia. These have included a series ofpublications from 3 large pragmatic studies: the ClinicalAntipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CAT-IE),6 the Cost Utility of the Latest Antipsychotic Drugsin Schizophrenia Study (CUtLASS),7 and the EuropeanFirst-Episode Schizophrenia Trial (EUFEST).8 TheCATIE and CUtLASS studies represent the 2 largest,

    non-industry sponsored comparisons of first-generationantipsychotic (FGA) medications and second-generationantipsychotic (SGA) medications in people with multi-episode schizophrenia, whereas EUFEST compared hal-operidol to multiple SGAs in people with first-episodeschizophrenia. In addition, there have been a series ofnew studies that have examined antipsychotic monother-apy and adjunctive strategies for the treatment ofa number of symptom and behavioral outcomes, includ-ing cognitive impairments, negative symptoms, and

    1To whom correspondence should be addressed; tel: 410-402-

    7876, fax: 410-402-7198, e-mail: [email protected].

    Schizophrenia Bulletin vol. 36 no. 1 pp. 7193, 2010doi:10.1093/schbul/sbp116Advance Access publication on December 2, 2009

    The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. All rights reserved.For permissions, please email: [email protected].

    71

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    2/23

    co-occurring medical and substance misuse disorders.The number of publications in these areas warrants theevaluation of the pharmacological treatment of these out-comes. Finally, although not a pharmacological interven-tion, there have been a number of studies that haveevaluated the potential efficacy of repetitive transcranialmagnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of refrac-

    tory auditory hallucinations.In the current PORT update, we evaluated published

    studies to determine whether the current PORT psycho-pharmacological treatment recommendations requiredrevision and whether there was sufficient evidence to war-rant new treatment recommendations for prespecifiedoutcomes of interest.

    Methods

    The Schizophrenia PORT Psychopharmacology Evi-dence Review Group (ERG) was comprised of University

    of Maryland Baltimore faculty with expertise in the phar-macological treatment of schizophrenia. The Psycho-pharmacology ERG was charged with 2 tasks: (1) toreview new evidence related to the extant PORT psycho-pharmacological treatment recommendations and (2) inconsultation with the Psychopharmacology AdvisoryBoard, to identify new outcomes or interventions to re-view for the purpose of determining whether a treatmentrecommendation was warranted for the outcome or inter-vention. These outcomes and interventions included butwere not limited to antidepressants, antipsychotic poly-pharmacy, cognition, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT),negative symptoms, rTMS, smoking cessation, and qual-ity of life.

    On a quarterly basis, the Psychopharmacology ERGconducted electronic MEDLINE literature searches, us-ing as search terms schizophrenia and the names of in-dividual antidepressants, antiepileptics, antipsychotics,benzodiazepines, and lithium; schizophrenia; and clinicaltrial as search terms. Other search terms included specifictopic areas, such as treatment of cognition, extrapyrami-dal side effects, first-episode schizophrenia, negativesymptoms, prolactin-related side effects, quality of life,tardive dyskinesia (TD), and weight gain. All searcheswere limited to English language, clinical trial, and

    schizophrenia and to medications with U.S. Food andDrug Administration approval.

    The time period for the literature search was January2002 through March 2008. In addition, if appropriate forthe evaluation of an intervention or outcome, we in-cluded articles published prior to January 2002, if thearea had not previously undergone a PORT review.We did not re-review articles published prior to January2002, if they had been reviewed in one of the previousPORT treatment recommendation publications. If a rele-vant article was published after March 2008 and wouldsignificantly alter the PORT evaluation of the evidence,

    then the article was included in the reviewed evidencebase.

    Each Psychopharmacology ERG member wasassigned one or more antipsychotic medication and des-ignated topic areas to review, with 2 ERG membersassigned to each antipsychotic medication to ensurethat all relevant articles were identified and included in

    the review. At the quarterly PsychopharmacologyERG meetings, the members would present the articleabstracts from their literature search. If the study wasa randomized controlled trial (RCT), and at least 50%of the participants had a schizophrenia spectrum disorderdiagnosis, that is, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder,or schizophreniform disorder, then the article was se-lected for further review. The majority of studies weredouble-blind RCTs, with the following major exceptions:one of the CATIE phase 2 studies,9 the CUtLASS study,7

    and EUFEST.8 In the CATIE phase 2E study, the cloza-pine arm was open labeled9; in the CUtLASS study,

    participants were randomly assigned to open-label anti-psychotic treatment, with clinical raters blind to treat-ment assignment7; and in the EUFEST study,participants were randomly assigned to open-label anti-psychotic treatment and the majority of clinical ratingswere not blinded to treatment assignment.8 In addition,we would also allow case reports or case series, if the out-come was a rare event, eg, neuroleptic malignantsyndrome (NMS).

    In the case of the extant PORT pharmacological treat-ment recommendations, the selected articles werereviewed for their potential to importantly modify theserecommendations. In the case of new interventions oroutcomes, there were 2 possible review results. First,the reviewed evidence could meet criteria for sufficientevidence to merit a treatment recommendation (seeKreyenbuhl et al,10 this issue, for a description of thesecriteria). Alternatively, the evidence could be judged tobe insufficient to merit a treatment recommendation,in which case a summary statement was written that de-scribed the intervention, the indication for the interven-tion, and provided a summary of the evidence and theimportant gaps in knowledge that precluded treatmentrecommendation status. The draft treatment recommen-dations and summary statements were then reviewed by

    the external advisory board (see Kreyenbuhl et al,10 thisissue, for a description of this process) and their com-ments were incorporated into revisions, which were re-reviewed by the external advisory board, and then finalversions were produced.

    Treatment Recommendations

    There are 16 treatment recommendations. The treatmentrecommendations are grouped either by intervention oroutcome. The presentation of each treatment recommen-dation follows the same format: the title of the treatment

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

    72

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    3/23

    recommendation, the full recommendation, the expertrating of the treatment recommendation, and the evi-dence summary for the recommendation.

    Treatment of Acute Positive Symptoms in Treatment-Responsive People With Schizophrenia

    Acute Antipsychotic Treatment

    Recommendation. In people with treatment-responsive,multi-episode schizophrenia who are experiencing anacute exacerbation of their illness, antipsychotic medica-tions, other than clozapine, should be used as the first lineof treatment to reduce positive psychotic symptoms. Theinitial choice of antipsychotic medication or the decisionto switch to a new antipsychotic medication should bemade on the basis of individual preference, prior treat-ment response, and side effect experience; adherence his-tory; relevant medical history and risk factors; individual

    medication side effect profile; and long-term treatmentplanning.

    Evidence Summary. Since the last PORT update, therehave been several new studies comparing SGAs to pla-cebo for the treatment of acute positive symptoms.The majority are registration studies sponsored by thepharmaceutical industry.1115 These studies continue tosupport the efficacy of antipsychotic medications forpositive symptoms in treatment-responsive people withmulti-episode schizophrenia.

    The primary question of interest remains whether SGAscompared with FGAs should be preferentially used for thisindication. Two new pragmatic clinical trials have beencompleted, which partially address this issue: the CATIEstudy6 and the CUtLASS study.7 In both these studies,the sample included participants who were experiencingan acute exacerbation of their illness, as well as individualswho were changing their medications because of inade-quate response to or intolerable side effects from prior an-tipsychotic treatment. However, neither study separatelyanalyzed these subsamples of participants. In the CATIEstudy, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidonewere compared with the FGA: perphenazine. In the CUt-LASS study, antipsychotic medications were classified intoFGA and SGA groups and were compared by group. In the

    CATIE study, participants randomized to olanzapine hada significantly longer time to discontinuation than thosewho received risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and per-phenazine, though the differences between olanzapine andziprasidone and olanzapine and perphenazine were no lon-ger significant after correction for multiple comparisons.There was no significant difference among olanzapine, ris-peridone, and perphenazine on Positive and Negative Syn-drome Scale (PANSS) total score. In the CUtLASS study,there were no significant FGA vs SGA group differencesfor PANSS total score or the positive or negative syndromesubscale scores. These studies suggest that there are limited

    positive symptom efficacy differences, except for possiblyolanzapine, between FGAs and SGAs. There continuestobe nodata tosupporta change toa SGA for those peoplewho experience adequate symptom control and minimalside effects with an FGA.

    The other major considerations in the choice of anti-psychotic medication are individual and treatment-

    related factors that may influence treatment outcomes.In the context of whether SGAs should be preferentiallyused to treat schizophrenia, the question revolves aroundthe relative side effect risks of FGAs and specific SGAs.There are 4 major side effects to consider when choosingamong the first- and second-generation agents: (1) extra-pyramidal symptoms (EPS), including TD, (2) weightgain and associated metabolic effects, (3) prolactin eleva-tion and associated sexual side effects, and (4) QTc pro-longation. The relative risk for EPS among FGAs andSGAs is high-potency FGAs >mid-potency FGAs = ris-peridone > low-potency FGAs > olanzapine = ziprasi-

    done > quetiapine > clozapine. There is currentlyinsufficient comparative data among the differentFGAs and SGAs to rank aripiprazole (see ProphylacticAntiparkinson Medications Treatment Recommenda-tion in the Other Psychopharmacological Recommenda-tions section for further details). The relative risk forcausing TD is FGAs> SGAs > clozapine (see Antipsy-chotic Choice and Treatments for Tardive DyskinesiaSummary Statement in the Supplementary Material forfurther details).

    Select SGAs are more likely to cause weight gain andmetabolic abnormalities than most FGAs or other SGAs.In particular, olanzapine and clozapine are more likely tocause weight gain, glucose elevation, and lipid abnormal-ities than other SGAs and medium- and high-potencyFGAs.16,17 The relative metabolic risk of these SGAsvs low-potency FGAs, such as chlorpromazine and thi-oridazine, has not been directly assessed, but these agentsare known to have a higher relative metabolic risk thanmedium- or high-potency FGAs. Risperidone and que-tiapine have an intermediate risk for weight gain and glu-cose elevation.6,16,17 There is less information availablefor paliperidone on all these measures, although weightgain appears similar to risperidone. Quetiapine has an in-termediate risk for lipid elevation, whereas risperidone

    has a low risk for lipid elevations.6,16,17 In contrast, ari-piprazole and ziprasidone have low risk for weight gainand other metabolic side effects.6,16,17 In summary, therelative risk for weight gain among antipsychotic medi-cations is clozapine = olanzapine > low-potency FGAmedications > risperidone = paliperidone = quetiapine >medium-potency FGA medications> high-potency anti-psychotic medications = molindone = aripiprazole =ziprasidone (see Pharmacological Prevention and Treat-ment of Antipsychotic-Associated Weight Gain in Schizo-phrenia Summary Statement section in theSupplementary Material for further details). The relative

    73

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

    http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_9/Supplementary%20Materialhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_9/Supplementary%20Material
  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    4/23

    risk for prolactin elevation and sexual side effects is risper-idone = paliperidone> FGA medications> olanzapine>ziprasidone > quetiapine = clozapine > aripiprazole (seeAntipsychotic-Induced Prolactin Elevations, HormonalSide Effects and Sexual Dysfunction Summary Statementin the Supplementary Material for further details). Finally,the relative risk for QTc prolongation is thioridizine >ziprasidone> quetiapine= risperidone= olanzapine= hal-operidol clozapine.1821 Aripiprazole,2224 fluphen-azine,25 and chlorpromazine25,26 do not appreciablyprolong the QTc interval. Clozapine may increase theQTc interval, but the effect is dose dependent27 and isequivalent to olanzapine and haloperidol.28 However,one study found that clozapine did not increase the QTcinterval.29

    In light of the comparable efficacy and variable risk of

    side effects among the different FGAs and SGAs,a straightforward recommendation for preferential useof SGAs over FGAs for first-line treatment of acute pos-itive symptoms is not currently warranted. Rather, theinitial choice of antipsychotic medication or the decisionto switch to a new antipsychotic medication should bemade through shared decision making between the phy-sician and the person with schizophrenia based on indi-vidual preference, prior treatment response, and sideeffect experience; adherence history; relevant medical his-tory, and risk factors; individual medication side effectprofile; and long-term treatment planning.

    Acute Antipsychotic Medication Dose

    Recommendation. In people with treatment-responsive,multi-episode schizophrenia who are experiencing anacute exacerbation of their illness, the daily dosage ofFGA medications should be in the range of 3001000chlorpromazine equivalents (CPZ) (see table 1). The daily

    dosage of SGA medications for an acute symptom epi-sode should be aripiprazole: 1030 mg*, olanzapine:1020 mg*, paliperidone: 315 mg, quetiapine: 300750mg*, risperidone: 28 mg, and ziprasidone: 80160mg*. Treatment trials should be at least 2 weeks, withan upper limit of 6 weeks to observe optimal response(*, There is insufficient evidence to determine the up-per effective dose limit. The quoted upper dose is theFDA-approved upper dose.).

    Evidence Summary. Since the 2004 PORT recommen-dations, no new information has emerged to warranta change in the recommended FGA dosage range for

    treatment of acute positive symptom episodes.

    2

    The recommended dosage ranges for aripiprazole,olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone re-flect those demonstrated to be safe and efficacious in piv-otal clinical trials.2 There are currently no new data tosupport the safety and efficacy of aripiprazole, olanza-pine, quetiapine, or ziprasidone dosages above the afore-mentioned upper limits.

    Paliperidone received FDA approval in 2006. Therecommended dosage range is based on registrationstudies.1214

    In general, because the incidence of side effectsincreases with the use of doses at the upper end of the

    recommended range, the lowest effective dose shouldbe used to treat the acute episode. There is no absoluteproscription against the use of doses outside the recom-mended range, but reasons for such use should bedocumented.

    Treatment of Acute Positive Symptoms in People WithFirst-Episode Schizophrenia

    Antipsychotic Choice for First-Episode Schizophrenia

    Recommendation. Antipsychotic medications, otherthan clozapine and olanzapine, are recommended as

    first-line treatment for persons with schizophrenia expe-riencing their first acute positive symptom episode.

    Evidence Summary. In first-episode psychosis, earlytreatment with antipsychotic drugs is associated with sig-nificant symptom reduction, and the results of severalstudies suggest that there are no significant short-termefficacy differences between FGAs and SGAs. RCTscomparing haloperidol and SGAs have demonstratedequivalent improvements in psychopathology scoresand 12-week response rates.3032 In an 8-week study ofpeople with early-onset schizophrenia and related spec-trum disorders (aged 819 years), there were no significant

    Table 1. Recommended Oral Antipsychotic Dosage Ranges forthe Treatment of Schizophrenia

    Medication (First-Generation

    Antipsychotic Medications) CPZa

    PORT RecommendedDosage Range

    AcuteTherapy

    (mg/day)

    MaintenanceTherapy

    (mg/day)

    PhenothiazinesFluphenazine HCl 2 620 612Trifluoperazine 5 1550 1530Perphenazine 10 1264 1240Chlorpromazine 100 3001000 300600Thioridazine 100 300800 300600

    ButyrophenoneHaloperidol 2 620 612

    OthersThiothixene 5 1550 1530Molindone 10 30150 30100Loxapine 10 30100 3060

    Note: CPZ, chlorpromazine equivalent; PORT, SchizophreniaPatient Outcomes Research Team.aApproximate dose equivalent to 100 mg of chlorpromazine(relative potency); may not be the same at lower vs higher doses.CPZ doses are not relevant to the second-generationantipsychotics and, therefore, are not provided for these agents.

    74

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

    http://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_9/Supplementary%20Materialhttp://localhost/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_9/Supplementary%20Material
  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    5/23

    differences among molindone, risperidone, and olanzapinein response rates or symptom reduction.33 Finally, ina study comparing chlorpromazine and clozapine in anti-psychotic-naive people with first-episode schizophrenia, inthe 12-week intention to treat analyses, there were no sig-nificant group differences in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale(BPRS) total or Clinical Global Impression-Severity

    (CGI-S) scores.34 In the 12-week observed cases analyses,clozapine was superior to chlorpromazine on BPRS totaland CGI-S scores. In neither analysis was there a signifi-cant group difference for positive symptoms. Clozapinetreatment was associated with significantly greaterimprovements in negative symptom scores.

    There is some evidence to suggest that SGAs comparedwith FGAs may show greater long-term benefits. In a2-year study of haloperidol and olanzapine, Green andcolleagues35 observed superior remission rates and treat-ment retention with olanzapine. After 2 years, 23.4% ofparticipants in the olanzapine group remained on treat-

    ment compared with 12.1% of haloperidol-treated partic-ipants. In a long-term study comparing risperidone andhaloperidol, there was a significantly longer median timeto relapse in the risperidone group (466 vs 205 days).32

    However, overall treatment retention and rates of clinicalimprovement were similar between the 2 groups. In con-trast, the 1-year interim analysis of another long-termstudy of individuals with first-episode schizophrenia ran-domized to risperidone or low-dose haloperidol failed toreplicate the findings from Schooler and colleagues.36 Inthis latter study, there were no significant group differen-ces in relapse, rehospitalization, or other measures ofclinical worsening.

    The EUFEST, a large, open-labeled, 1-year random-ized trial, showed that treatment discontinuation wasgreatest for haloperidol compared with participants re-ceiving any of 4 SGAs.8 Clinical Global Impressionscores and Global Assessment of Functioning scoreswere also superior for the SGA group compared with hal-operidol, but there were no group differences in PANSStotal scores or the Calgary Depression Scale (CDS) andquality of life scores.

    Finally, in the chlorpromazine vs clozapine first-episode schizophrenia study,34 the 52-week data analysesshowed no differences in any of the symptom outcome

    measures. There were no significant differences in theproportion of participants who met a priori remission cri-teria, though participants randomized to clozapine metremission criteria significantly faster than those random-ized to chlorpromazine. In light of the negligible groupdifferences in efficacy and the adverse side effect profileof clozapine, these results do not warrant elevatingclozapine to a first-line treatment of people with first-episode schizophrenia.

    No clinically meaningful differences in efficacyhave been observed among SGAs in the treatment offirst-episode patients. In studies comparing multiple

    SGAs, there have been no differences in overall symp-tom scores and response rates among treatmentgroups.8,37,38

    Significant differences in adverse effects, includingdrug-induced movement disorders and metabolic sideeffects, have been observed between and among FGAsand SGAs and should be considered in shared decision

    making around selection of initial antipsychotic treat-ment (see Acute Antipsychotic Treatment TreatmentRecommendation in the Treatment of Acute PositiveSymptoms in Treatment-Responsive People with Schizo-phrenia section for further details). Olanzapine treatmenthas consistently been shown to have the highest liabilityfor weight gain when compared with most other FGAsand SGAs. In a 4-month, single-blind comparison,37

    olanzapine was associated with significantly greaterincreases in body weight and body mass index than ris-peridone. In a head-to-head comparison with quetiapineand risperidone, olanzapine was associated with up to 2

    times the increase in weight at 12 and 52 weeks.38

    In theSikich and colleagues33 study, olanzapine was associatedwith significant increases in weight, fasting insulin, cho-lesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol com-pared with risperidone and molindone, whereasrisperidone was associated with significantly greaterweight gain than molindone. In the absence of any evi-dence of significantly enhanced therapeutic benefits,the association of olanzapine with significant metabolicrisks suggests that olanzapine should not be considered asa first-line treatment for individuals experiencing theirfirst episode of schizophrenia.

    Although not systematically evaluated in first-episodeschizophrenia, there are other significant risks associatedwith many of the FGAs, especially when used in moderate-to-high doses. Low-potency FGAs, such as thioridazineand chlorpromazine, are associated with adverse effectssuch as cardiac arrythmias, hepatotoxicity, metabolic ab-normalities, orthostasis, sedation, skin and retinal pigmen-tation, and weight gain. High-potency FGAs, includinghaloperidol and fluphenazine, carry significant risks ofmotor symptoms, including acute dystonia and akathisia,and TD, which can be irreversible. All these risks should betaken into consideration when deciding whether to useFGAs in people with first-episode schizophrenia.

    The available data have several limitations. Haloperi-dol is still the most frequently used FGA comparator. Be-cause people with first-episode schizophrenia show ahigh degree of sensitivity to the motor side effects ofhigh-potency FGAs, the use of nonhigh-potency com-parators may produce different results. The long-termadvantages of risperidone and olanzapine comparedwith haloperidol observed in some, but not all studies,may be partially due to this differential sensitivity tomotor side effects. Ziprasidone and aripiprazole haveno available published randomized, double-blind dataon their use in first-episode schizophrenia. Finally, it

    75

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    6/23

    also remains to be seen whether the use of long-acting in-jectable (LAI) preparations of FGAs or risperidone offeradditional benefits or disadvantages in the first-episodepopulation.

    Antipsychotic Medication Dose for First-Episode

    SchizophreniaRecommendation. People with first-episode schizophre-nia exhibit increased treatment responsiveness and an in-creased sensitivity to adverse effects compared withpeople with multi-episode schizophrenia. Therefore, an-tipsychotic treatment should be started with doses lowerthan those recommended for people with multi-episode schizophrenia (FGA medications: 300500 mgCPZ equivalents per day; risperidone and olanzapine:lower half of recommended dosage range for multi-episode patients). An important exception is with quetia-pine, which often requires titration to 500600 mg/day.

    The therapeutic efficacy of low-dose aripiprazole orziprasidone has not been evaluated in people withfirst-episode schizophrenia.

    Evidence Summary. The use of lowest effective doses isespecially important in people with first-episode schizo-phrenia in order to establish treatment acceptance andreduce the severity of adverse effects. Most recently pub-lished studies assessing antipsychotic efficacy in peoplewith first-episode schizophrenia have been specificallydesigned to evaluate the efficacy of lower doses. In thesestudies, the mean modal risperidone dosages ranged from2.4 to 4 mg/day;30,32,37,38 and the mean modal daily olan-zapine dosages ranged from 9.1 to 12.6 mg/day.8,31,35,38

    These risperidone and olanzapine dose ranges were foundto be effective and represent the lower end of the doserange for multi-episode people with schizophrenia (seeMaintenance Antipsychotic Medication Dose Treat-ment Recommendationin theMaintenancePharmacother-apy in Treatment-Responsive People with Schizophreniasection for further details).

    In contrast, the extant evidence suggests that quetia-pine cannot be effectively used in doses lower thanwhat are used in people with multi-episode schizophre-nia. In the McEvoy and colleagues study, the meanmodal dose of quetiapine was 506 mg, with similar effi-

    cacy to the comparator treatments.38 A similar result wasobserved in the open-label EUFEST study,8 in which themean dose of quetiapine was 498.6 mg/day; a dose thatwas associated with comparable treatment retention andoverall psychopathology scores to the other treatmentgroups. These mean doses are almost exactly the sameas the mean quetiapine dose in the CATIE study.6

    There have been several new studies that have docu-mented the efficacy of low-dose haloperidol in this pop-ulation. In a 6-week, randomized controlled studycomparing haloperidol 2 mg/day to haloperidol 8 mg/day in first-episode psychosis, Oosthuizen and col-

    leagues reported no between-group differences in over-all psychopathology score and clinician globalimpression improvement scores, whereas the 2-mg/day group showed significantly lower parkinsonismadverse effect scores than the 8-mg/day group.39 Indouble-blind studies, in which haloperidol was com-pared with SGAs, mean haloperidol dosages ranged

    from 2.9 to 4.8 mg/day.31,32,35 These lower doses of hal-operidol produced comparable symptom ameliorationand tolerability to SGAs, but haloperidol was associ-ated with inferior treatment retention in some31,35 butnot all32 studies.

    The lack of adequately controlled data with ziprasi-done and aripiprazole precludes the determination ofwhether the recommendation to use doses in the lowerhalf of the recommend dose range for multi-episode peo-ple with schizophrenia applies to these agents.

    Maintenance Pharmacotherapy in Treatment-ResponsivePeople With Schizophrenia

    Maintenance Antipsychotic Medication Treatment

    Recommendation. People with treatment-responsive,multi-episode schizophrenia who experience acute andsustained symptom relief with an antipsychotic medica-tion should be offered continued antipsychotic treatmentin order to maintain symptom relief and to reduce the riskof relapse or worsening of positive symptoms.

    Evidence Summary. Since the last PORT review, 5 stud-ies have examined the comparative efficacy of an SGAand placebo for the prevention of relapse in schizophre-nia.4044 These studies have documented the superior ef-ficacy of aripiprazole, olanzapine, paliperidone,quetiapine, and ziprasidone compared with placebo forpreventing relapse.

    Since the last PORT review, several studies haveaddressed the comparative efficacy of FGAs andSGAs for maintenance treatment.6,7,36,4549 Two of thesestudies compared the long-term efficacy of risperidoneand haloperidol for preventing psychotic relapse. In con-trast to an earlier study by Csernansky and colleagues,50

    these studies did not find a significant benefit of risper-

    idone for preventing relapse.36,45 Two studies comparedthe long-term efficacy of olanzapine to haloperidol. Ina 12-month study of people who were currently hospital-ized or had been hospitalized within the last 2 years,Rosenheck and colleagues46 failed to find any symptomor retention differences between the 2 drugs. In contrast,Kongsakon et al47 found an advantage for olanzapine onoverall symptom improvement but not for positive symp-toms. The difference between the 2 studies may be relatedto the use of prophylactic anticholinergic agents in thestudy by Rosenheck et al but not in the industry-sponsored study of Kongsakon and colleagues. The

    76

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    7/23

    lack of prophylactic anticholinergics may also have con-tributed to the observed group differences in the risper-idone studies by Csernansky et al and Schooler et al.

    The CATIE study was comprised of multiple phases,which compared the effectiveness of an FGA, perphena-zine, to olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasi-done and the comparative effectiveness among the

    different SGAs.6,48,49 In the CATIE phase 1 study,6 olan-zapine had a significantly longer time to discontinuationthan risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and perphena-zine, though the differences between olanzapine andziprasidone and olanzapine and perphenazine were nolonger significant after correction for multiple compari-sons. There was no significant difference among olanza-pine, risperidone, and perphenazine on PANSS totalscore. In the CATIE phase 1B study,49 the time to discon-tinuation for participants randomized to olanzapine orquetiapine was significantly longer than that for partic-ipants randomized to risperidone. However, there were

    no significant symptom differences among the 3 groups.In the phase 2T study,48 participants who had discontin-ued their phase 1 study drug because of lack of efficacy orintolerability were randomized to olanzapine, quetiapine,risperidone, or ziprasidone. The time to discontinuationfor participants randomized to olanzapine or risperidonewas significantly longer than that for people randomizedto quetiapine or ziprasidone. The 3 studies taken togethersuggest that there may be some benefit of olanzapinecompared with the other SGAs for time to discontinua-tion and to quetiapine and ziprasidone for symptom ame-lioration. The potential therapeutic advantage ofolanzapine has to be balanced by side effect considera-tions (see Acute Antipsychotic Treatment TreatmentRecommendation in the Treatment of Acute PositiveSymptoms in Treatment-Responsive People with Schizo-phrenia section for further details).

    In the CUtLASS study, there were no significant FGAvs SGA group differences for PANSS total score or thepositive or negative syndrome subscale scores.7 In con-trast to the CATIE study, response differences for spe-cific agents were not examined.

    In summary, studies published since the last PORT re-view continue to confirm that maintenance therapy withan FGA or SGA reduces the risk of symptom relapse dur-

    ing the first to second year following an acute symptomepisode. Although, several studies suggest that SGAsmay be more effective than FGAs for preventing relapse,there is not sufficient information to recommend SGAsfor this indication.

    Maintenance Antipsychotic Medication Dose

    Recommendation. In people with treatment-responsive,multi-episode schizophrenia who experience acute andsustained symptom relief with an antipsychotic medica-tion, the maintenance dosage for FGA medications

    should be in the range of 300600 CPZ equivalents perday. The maintenance dosage for aripiprazole, olanza-pine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, and ziprasi-done should be the dose found to be effective forreducing positive psychotic symptoms in the acute phaseof treatment.

    Evidence Summary. Since the last PORT review

    2

    , nonew evidence has emerged to warrant a change in the rec-ommended dosage range or dosage reduction strategiesduring maintenance treatment with FGAs. In contrastto previously reviewed maintenance studies withFGAs,1,2 maintenance studies with SGAs have not ade-quately examined whether the dose used to treat acutepositive symptom exacerbations is required for mainte-nance treatment.

    In general, because the incidence of side effectsincreases with the use of doses at the higher end of therecommended range, the lowest effective dose shouldbe used for maintenance treatment. However, there is

    no absolute proscription against the use of doses outsidethe recommended range, but reasons for such use shouldbe documented.

    Long-Acting Antipsychotic Medication MaintenanceTreatment

    Recommendation. LAI antipsychotic medicationshould be offered as an alternative to oral antipsychoticmedication for the maintenance treatment of schizophre-nia when the LAI formulation is preferred to oral prep-arations. The recommended dosage range forfluphenazine decanoate is 6.2525 mg administered every

    2 weeks and for haloperidol decanoate is 50200 mg ad-ministered every 4 weeks, although alternative dosagesand administration intervals equivalent to the recommen-ded dosage ranges may also be used. The recommendeddosage range for risperidone long-acting injection is 2575 mg administered every 2 weeks.

    Evidence Summary. LAI formulations of antipsychoticmedications provide a convenient alternative to takingmultiple daily oral doses of antipsychotic medications.LAI formulations are available for 2 FGA agents (flu-phenazine and haloperidol) and 1 SGA agent (risperi-done). Previous reviews and a recent study comparing

    rates of symptom exacerbation and side effects across4 fixed doses of haloperidol decanoate support our rec-ommendation of administering 50200 mg of this medi-cation once monthly.1,51,52 In the study by Kane andcolleagues,52 rates of symptom exacerbation were signif-icantly higher for participants randomized to monthlyadministration of 25 mg (60%) of haloperidol decanoatecompared with those who received 50 (25%), 100 (23%),or 200 (15%). There were no differences in adverse effects,including EPS, among participants receiving the 3 higherdoses of haloperidol decanoate. The previous PORTreviews1,51 and the commentary by Kane and colleague52

    77

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    8/23

    on the fluphenazine decanoate literature also support therecommendation of administering 6.2525 mg of thisagent every 2 weeks. The administration of equivalentdoses at different time intervals than those recommendedis acceptable when clinically appropriate.

    In 2003, the LAI formulation of risperidone, risperi-done microspheres, became available in the United

    States. Three double-blind, randomized, controlled tri-als of risperidone microspheres, all of which were indus-try sponsored, have examined the efficacy and safety ofthis formulation. In a 12-week study, fixed risperidonemicrospheres doses of 25, 50, and 75 mg were comparedwith placebo in individuals with schizophrenia.53 Alldoses were more effective than placebo, though the find-ings must be interpreted in the context of very high ratesof attrition across all study groups (51%68%). In a sec-ond 12-week study, Chue and colleagues54 demon-strated that risperidone microspheres, in dosesranging from 25 to 75 mg every 2 weeks, did not exhibit

    inferior efficacy compared with daily doses of oral ris-peridone ranging from 2 to 6 mg. In a 52-week trial,Simpson and colleagues found that risperidone micro-spheres doses of 25 and 50 mg administered every 2weeks exhibited comparable efficacy with respect totime to relapse.55 The risperidone microspheres dosesdid not differ on secondary efficacy outcomes andwere similar on all neurological and metabolic safetymeasures except prolactin elevation, which was morepronounced in the 50-mg group.

    There remain significant gaps in the evidence base forall these agents. In particular, there are no new long-term,randomized, controlled trials investigating whether FGAor SGA LAI antipsychotic medications reduce the risk ofrelapse in comparison to oral antipsychotic agents, al-though 2 such studies of LAI risperidone are currentlyunderway. There are also no data to support the useof LAI antipsychotic agents compared with oral antipsy-chotic medications as first-line treatments for schizophre-nia or studies demonstrating that use of LAI agentsimproves long-term adherence to treatment. Finally,comparative studies of the efficacy and safety of LAI for-mulations of FGAs vs LAI risperidone have not beenconducted. Therefore, the current evidence is insufficientto recommend a specific LAI antipsychotic agent over

    another.

    Targeted, Intermittent Antipsychotic MedicationMaintenance Strategies

    Recommendation. Targeted, intermittent antipsychoticmaintenance strategies should not be used routinelyin lieu of continuous maintenance treatment regimensdue to the increased risk of symptom worsening andrelapse.

    Evidence Summary. In efforts to limit the risks of med-ication adverse effects and to offset the risks of unsuper-

    vised treatment discontinuation, a strategy of targetedintermittent treatment has been suggested for select peo-ple with first-episode and multi-episode schizophreniawho can be monitored closely during drug withdrawaland who do not experience symptom worsening duringmedication tapering.

    Since the last PORT review, in a study involving both

    first-episode and multi-episode individuals with schizo-phrenia, Gaebel and colleagues conducted a post hocreanalysis to compare the use of maintenance antipsy-chotic treatment to 2 intermittent treatment protocols.56

    Participants were randomized to receive maintenance an-tipsychotic treatment (MT), intermittent treatment to bereinitiated upon emergence of prodromal symptoms (PI),or intermittent treatment to be reinitiated upon experi-encing a full relapse (CI). In a completer analysis ofparticipants with first-episode schizophrenia, the differ-ences in relapse rates did not achieve statistical signifi-cance (MT: 38%; PI: 42%; CI: 67%). The comparable

    relapse rate between the PI and MT groups suggeststhat if people can be monitored closely and the first signsof clinical exacerbation detected, then an intermittenttreatment strategy can be used in select people withrecent-onset schizophrenia.

    In multi-episode schizophrenia, the MT group (20%)had a statistically significant relapse rate advantage com-pared with both the PI (71%) and CI (78%) conditions.56

    In addition, significant differences in rehospitalizationrates were noted for participants randomized to theMT group (24%) compared with the PI (45%) and theCI (52%) groups. These findings are consistent withprevious investigations in multi-episode people withschizophrenia.2

    There have been 2 studies that have examined drug dis-continuation in first- or early-episode people with schizo-phrenia. Gitlin and colleagues57 enrolled people withrecent-onset schizophrenia in a placebo-controlled cross-over trial of fluphenazine decanoate. Study participantshad their medication withdrawn under clinical supervi-sion. Within the 18-month follow-up period, 96% ofparticipants experienced an exacerbation of psychoticsymptoms or a relapse. Among individuals experiencingan exacerbation or relapse, the median time to exacerba-tion or relapse was 245 days. Wunderink and colleagues58

    carried out a study in which after 6 months of successfultreatment, remitted first-episode participants were ran-domized to either a medication maintenance strategyor a medication discontinuation strategy. Participantsrandomized to the medication discontinuation groupwere significantly more likely to relapse (43% vs 21%).Only 20% of participants who were randomized to thediscontinuation strategy were relapse free for a medianperiod of 15 months.

    Although Gaebel and colleagues56 failed to find a sta-tistical difference between maintenance and targetedtreatment strategies in first-episode people with

    78

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    9/23

    schizophrenia, the high rate of symptom exacerbation orrelapse in the 2 drug discontinuation studies57,58 suggeststhat these strategies should be considered only for peoplewith schizophrenia who refuse continuous maintenancetreatment or for whom some other contraindication tocontinuous maintenance treatment exists, such asextreme side effect sensitivity.

    Clozapine for the Treatment of Residual Symptoms

    Clozapine for Positive Symptoms in Treatment-ResistantPeople With Schizophrenia

    Recommendation. Clozapine should be offered to peo-ple with schizophrenia who continue to experience persis-tent and clinically significant positive symptoms after 2adequate trials of other antipsychotic agents. A trial ofclozapine should last at least 8 weeks at a dosage from300 to 800 mg/day.

    Evidence Summary. Since the last PORT review, 12 newstudies have compared clozapine with other antipsy-chotic medications for the treatment of positive symp-toms. The available empirical evidence continues tosupport the use of clozapine in people who have notresponded to adequate treatment with FGAs.1,2

    There is new evidence to suggest that clozapine is moreeffective than other SGAs in people who have failed toadequately respond to either an FGA or SGA.9,59 TheCATIE phase 2E study compared clozapine (open label),olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine.9 Clozapine hada longer time to all-cause discontinuation than olanza-pine, quetiapine, and risperidone, with the comparison

    between clozapine and quetiapine and clozapine and ris-peridone statistically significant. Clozapine had a signifi-cantly longer time to discontinuation due to lack ofefficacy than all 3 drugs. Clozapine produced greaterimprovements in PANSS total and positive syndromesubscale scores, with the difference in PANSS total scoressignificant for clozapine vs quetiapine and risperidonebut not olanzapine. In the CUtLASS 2 trial, open-labelclozapine was compared with a group of other SGAs, in-cluding olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone, and pro-duced significantly greater reductions in the PANSS totalscore than these other agents.59

    OtherSecondGenerationAntipsychoticMedications. Sincethe last PORT review, several studies have addressed thequestion of whether other SGAs may also exhibit superiorefficacy in people who have failed to adequately respond toprevious trials of FGAs or SGAs. In addition to the CAT-IE and CUtLASS studies described above, which failed todemonstrate the superior efficacy of olanzapine, quetia-pine, and risperidone, there have been 6 studies thathave compared the use of olanzapine with clozapine,6065

    with 3 studies comparing high-dose olanzapine with cloza-pine59,63,64 and 2 studies conducted in children and adoles-cents.61,64 In the 4 studies conducted in adult populations, 3

    of the 4 studies reported a numerical advantage for cloza-pine on total and positive symptom scores, but the groupdifference did not reach statistical significance.6062,65 Thelack of statistical group differences has led to the claim thatolanzapine was non-inferior to clozapine for positive symp-toms in treatment-resistant schizophrenia.61,62,65 However,these studies have several methodological problems, includ-

    ing the use of low clozapine doses,61,62 small samplesizes,60,65 the inclusion of participants who were treatmentintolerant to prior medications rather than treatment resis-tant, which would tend to minimize potential group differ-ences;61,62 and the failure to include an FGA comparatorarm.6062,65

    Two studies evaluated olanzapine and clozapine in chil-dren or adolescents with treatment-resistant schizophre-nia.63,64 In the study by Shaw and colleague,63 clozapineproduced a marked reduction in total and positive symp-toms, whereasparticipants treated with olanzapine had es-sentially no change in total symptoms and a worsening of

    positive symptoms. The group differences were not statis-tically significant, probably, because of the relatively smallsample sizes. In the study by Kumra and colleague, partic-ipants treated with clozapine were significantly more likelyto meet response criteria, but there were no significantgroup differences in total or positive symptoms.64

    In summary, clozapine continues to be the treatment ofchoice for people who have failed to adequately respondto previous antipsychotic treatment. Several studies havecompared clozapine with olanzapine, but various meth-odological problems with these studies undermine inter-pretations of non-inferiority of olanzapine toclozapine, and prior direct tests of olanzapine vs haloper-idol in people with treatment-resistant schizophreniafound little benefit of either agent.60,66 There are no stud-ies examining the use of aripiprazole, paliperidone, orziprasidone for use in treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

    Monitoring Clozapine Plasma Levels

    Recommendation. If a person treated with clozapine hasfailed to demonstrate an adequate response, then a cloza-pine level should be obtained to ascertain whether the clo-zapine level is above 350 ng/ml. If the blood level is less than350 ng/ml, then the dosage should be increased, to the ex-

    tent that side effects are tolerated, to achieve a blood levelabove 350 ng/ml.

    Evidence Summary. Five studies have evaluated the re-lationship between clozapine blood levels and therapeuticresponse. All 5 studies showed increased positive symptomresponse to be associated with higher clozapine blood lev-els. Two studies showed that treatment response was re-lated to clozapine levels above 350 ng/ml67,68 and onestudy69 showed that treatment response was related to clo-zapine levels above 370 ng/ml. In the study by Potkin andcolleagues,70 treatment response was related to clozapinelevels above 420 ng/ml. These 4 studies all adjusted

    79

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    10/23

    clozapine dose to therapeutic response or had a fixed clo-zapine dose and then measured clozapine blood levels.VanderZwaag and colleagues71 found that a clozapineblood level of 250 ng/ml distinguished responders fromnon-responders. No response rate difference was foundbetween clozapine blood levels above 250 ng/ml or cloza-pine blood levels above 350 ng/ml, but each of these clo-

    zapine blood levels was superior to clozapine blood levelsbelow 250 ng/ml. In this study, the clozapine blood levelswere monitored and then the clozapine dose was adjustedto achieve the desired clozapine blood level.

    The 5 studies were of varying duration, yet each studyhad a similar percentage of responders to clozapine whenclozapine blood levels were above the threshold value.The comparable response rates suggest that study dura-tion did not confound the observed dose-response results.

    In summary, the evidence suggests that clozapine levelsabove 350 ng/ml are associated with improved clozapinetreatment response. The VanderZwaag and colleagues71

    study is the only study that found clozapine levels lowerthan 350 ng/ml to be associated with treatment response,but this study had a 2 or 3 times per day dosing regimenfor clozapine, which may have led to lower clozapineblood levels. VanderZwaag and colleagues suggest thatif clozapine is dosed once daily, then the clozapine bloodlevel should be above 350 ng/ml.

    Clozapine for Hostility

    Recommendation. A trial of clozapine should be offeredto people with schizophrenia who present with persistentsymptoms of hostility and/or display persistent violent

    behaviors.

    Evidence Summary. There is substantial evidence tosupport the use of clozapine in people with schizophreniawho display persistent violent behaviors.2 A recent 12-week double-blind study compared clozapine, olanza-pine, and haloperidol for reducing physical assaultsand other aggressive behaviors in physically assaultivepeople with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.They found that clozapine was superior to both olanza-pine and haloperidol in reducing the number and severityof physical assaults and reducing overall aggression.72 Ina secondary analysis of chronically ill people with schizo-

    phrenia, Volavka and colleagues73 reported that cloza-pine compared with olanzapine, risperidone, orhaloperidol was more effective for reducing aggressivebehavior and for improving measures of hostility.74 How-ever, clozapine only separated from oral haloperidol afterexcluding the first 24 weeks of data.75 In a treatment-resistant sample, clozapine compared with olanzapinewas found to produce significant improvement inBPRS activation items, and there was a trend forimprovement in hostility and aggression.60

    The evidence that SGAs other than clozapine can re-duce violent behaviors is suggestive, but inconclusive,

    and most studies did not evaluate aggression or hostilityas the primary end point. The only randomized con-trolled study designed to include participants with ag-gression and to examine aggression or hostility with anSGA other than clozapine found olanzapine to be supe-rior to haloperidol but not as effective as clozapine.72 TheCATIE trial failed to find any differences in recorded acts

    of violence in people receiving SGA vs FGA agents, withthe exception of significantly less violence in the perphe-nazine group compared with those on quetiapine.75

    Finally, 2 RCTs failed to find any differences betweenrisperidone and haloperidol on BPRS hostility ratingsat 136 and 2 years.45

    There are limited data demonstrating improvements inBPRS or PANSS hostility ratings from RCTs for non-clozapine SGAs relative to placebo. The populationsstudied were not selected for hostile or aggressive behav-iors, were observed over shorter periods of time, andmeasurements other than hostility symptom rating scales

    were not employed. Nonetheless, quetiapine,43,76

    paliper-idone,13 and aripiprazole77 all have demonstratedimprovements in hostility relative to placebo.

    Recent studies continue to support the efficacy of clo-zapine for persistent aggressive and hostile behaviors inpeople with schizophrenia, including those who do notmeet formal criteria for treatment-resistant schizophre-nia. There continues to be limited data on the effective-ness of FGAs or SGAs, other than clozapine, for thetreatment of hostility.

    Clozapine for Suicidality

    Recommendation. A trial of clozapine should be consid-ered for people with schizophrenia who exhibit markedand persistent suicidal thoughts or behaviors.

    Evidence Summary. There is evidence to suggest that clo-zapine is associated with reduced suicide rates in peoplewith schizophrenia. Most of the observational and retro-spective studies have included only people with treatment-resistant schizophrenia.7884 In an international, random-ized, single-blind study of people with schizophrenia con-sidered at high risk for suicide, of whom only 27% wereconsidered treatment resistant, participants randomizedto clozapine showed significantly less suicidal behavior

    over 2 years than those randomized to olanzapine.85

    Amore recent meta-analysis of 6 studies86 confirmed thesefindings and reported that clozapine treatment was asso-ciated with a 3-fold overall reduction in the risk of suicidalbehaviors comparedwithotherantipsychotic medications.

    Other Psychopharmacological Recommendations

    Prophylactic Antiparkinson Medications

    Recommendation. In people treated with FGA medica-tions, prophylactic use of antiparkinson agents to reduce

    80

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    11/23

    the incidence of extrapyramidal side effects should be de-termined on a case by case basis, taking into account in-dividual preferences, prior history of extrapyramidal sideeffects, characteristics of the antipsychotic medicationprescribed, and other risk factors for both extrapyrami-dal side effects and anticholinergic side effects. The use ofprophylactic antiparkinson agents in people treated withSGA medications is not warranted.

    Evidence Summary. Since the last PORT review,2 mul-tiple studies have continued to document very low-to-lowrates of extrapyramidal side effects with SGAs in multi-episode schizophrenia. In the CATIE study, among theparticipants treated with an SGA, the percentage of par-ticipants with Simpson-Angus Scale (SAS) total scores1 ranged from 4% to 8%, with no significant group dif-ferences in treatment-emergent EPS among the variousSGAs.6

    Epidemiological studies have shown lower rates of an-ticholinergic prescriptions for people with schizophreniataking SGAs compared with those taking FGAs,87,88

    though the use of anticholinergic agents may vary amongthe SGAs. People with schizophrenia receiving risperi-done were 1.43 times more likely to receive anticholiner-gics compared with people on olanzapine.87 In addition,Park and colleagues found a 20% decrease in the co-pre-scription of anticholinergics in people with schizophreniaswitched from an FGA to olanzapine, whereas there wasno change in anticholinergic prescriptions for thoseswitched from an FGA to risperidone.88 In the CATIEstudy, there was a statistically significant difference inthe use of anticholinergics, with those randomized to ris-

    peridone most likely and those randomized to quetiapineleast likely to receive them.89

    The delineation of the relative risk of EPS amongFGAs and between FGAs and SGAs is complicatedby factors such as dosing. In a meta-analysis, Leuchtand colleagues90 found the relative risk of EPS ofSGAs vs haloperidol differed depending on whetherthe haloperidol dose was greater or less than 12 mg.However, regardless of dose, haloperidol had a higherrelative risk of EPS compared with SGAs than didlow-potency FGAs.90 In addition, the CATIE studyfound that the mid-potency agent perphenazine was no

    different from olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, orziprasidone in treatment-emergent EPS.6,89 Randomized,double-blind, head-to-head comparisons of EPS risk inFGAs are rare.

    There is some evidence to suggest that people experi-encing their first episode of schizophrenia may be moresensitive to EPS than people with multi-episode schizo-phrenia. Several studies have used low-dose haloperidolin first-episode populations (mean/mean modal doserange 2.94.4 mg/day) and found that antiparkinsonmedications were required in about 50% of partici-pants.8,31,32 People with first-episode schizophrenia

    may also be more sensitive to risperidone. Schooleret al32 found that 42% of participants randomized to ris-peridone required anticholinergics. However, the CAFEstudy reported that only 16% of participants had a rating>1 on one or more SAS items, and the percentage of par-ticipants requiring anticholinergics ranged from 4 to11%.38 There were no significant EPS differences among

    the olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone arms.38 In theEUFEST study, rates of parkinsonism ranged from 6%to 16% in participants randomized to olanzapine, quetia-pine, and ziprasidone.8

    In summary, there is evidence for differences amongantipsychotic agents in the risk for developing EPS.From greatest to least risk for EPS, a general rankingis high-potency FGAs > mid-potency FGAs = ris-peridone > low-potency FGAs > olanzapine, ziprasi-done > quetiapine > clozapine. There is currentlyinsufficient evidence to rank aripiprazole nor to furtherrefine the ranking of FGAs.

    Medication for the Treatment of Acute Agitation inSchizophrenia

    Recommendation. An oral or intramuscular (IM) anti-psychotic medication, alone or in combination witha rapid-acting benzodiazepine, should be used in thepharmacological treatment of acute agitation in peoplewith schizophrenia. If possible, the route of antipsychoticadministration should correspond to the preference ofthe individual.

    Evidence Summary. Agitation is defined in the Diagnos-tic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, FourthEdition, Text Revised91 as excessive motor activationwith concurrent inner tension and is commonly observedin acutely psychotic people with schizophrenia.92 If un-treated, either behaviorally or with medications, agita-tion can escalate to behavioral dyscontrol andaggression toward others, self, or the environment.93 Al-though positive symptoms can contribute to agitation,they are discrete dimensions of the illness and shouldnot be confused with each other.

    Several fundamental questions need to be addressedwhen developing a recommendation for the treatmentof agitation: (1) does a specific medication (either anti-

    psychotic or benzodiazepine) show superior efficacy inthe treatment of agitation?; (2) does the combinationof an antipsychotic medication and a benzodiazepinehave increased efficacy over either agent alone?;and 3) are IM formulations more effective then oralformulations?

    Benzodiazepines are commonly used to treat agita-tion,9496 with lorazepam being the most commonlyused benzodiazepine due to its predictable and rapid ab-sorption, no active metabolites, and no hepatic metabo-lism.97 Salzman and colleagues98 found that lorazepamwas as effective as haloperidol in the treatment of

    81

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    12/23

    agitation but caused fewer EPS. Battaglia and col-leagues99 found that either lorazepam or haloperidolwere beneficial in the treatment of agitation, althoughthe combination was the most effective. However, inthese studies of agitation, none of the study sampleshave included at least 50% participants with schizophre-nia, which precludes a specific recommendation about

    the use of benzodiazepines for agitation in schizophrenia.More recent studies have specifically evaluated the treat-ment of agitation in people with schizophrenia, but thefocus of these studies has been treatment with SGAs.In these studies, benzodiazepines were used frequentlyas a rescue or safety medication.100106 This use of ben-zodiazepines provides indirect support for their use inacute agitation, but until studies are conducted that di-rectly compare IM or oral benzodiazepine therapywith SGA therapy for acute agitation in schizophrenia,there is not sufficient evidence to support a treatment rec-ommendation for the use of benzodiazepines as the pri-

    mary treatment of acute agitation, even though this maybe a common clinical practice.

    Aripiprazole, olanzapine, and ziprasidone have beenevaluated for the treatment of acute agitation in schizo-phrenia. The IM formulations of these drugs have beenconsistently demonstrated to exhibit superior efficacycompared with placebo or the low-dose active compara-tor medication.100106 There are no studies that havecompared 2 or more of these agents with each other.Therefore, we cannot recommend a specific IM SGAto be preferentially used for acute agitation. A compar-ison across 4 studies showed IM haloperidol to be equallyeffective as IM aripiprazole and olanzapine but witha higher incidence of EPS.105,107 Ziprasidone has notbeen compared with an active comparator. BecauseEPS occurs at a greater rate with IM haloperidol, pre-treatment or concurrent treatment with an anticholiner-gic or benzodiazepine may be warranted, although thishas not been systematically evaluated.

    Superiority of a specific oral antipsychotic medicationhas also not been established for the treatment of acuteagitation. Studies with oral aripiprazole108 and oral olan-zapine109 found that both are equally effective as oral hal-operidol for the acute treatment or prevention of agitation.Higher doses of olanzapine (40 mg/day) may be more ef-

    fective than olanzapine 20 mg/day for the acute treatmentof agitation.110 Studies comparing the oral vs the IM for-mulation of an antipsychotic agent for the treatment ofagitation have not been conducted. Either preparationmay be beneficial for acute agitation and individual pref-erence should be considered when possible.111

    Intervention for Smoking Cessation in Schizophrenia

    Recommendation. People with schizophrenia who wantto quit or reduce cigarette smoking should be offeredtreatment with bupropion SR 150 mg twice daily for

    1012 weeks, with or without nicotine replacement ther-apy (NRT), to achieve short-term abstinence. This phar-macological treatment should be accompanied bya smoking cessation education or support group, al-though the current evidence base is insufficient to recom-mend a particular psychosocial approach.

    Evidence Summary. There have been 6 blinded RCTs ofbupropion SR 150 mg twice daily to enhance smokingcessation in schizophrenia with one study reportinga 2-year follow-up in a separate publication. Three stud-ies added bupropion SR or placebo to a 9- to 12-weekcognitive-behavioral or supportive smoking cessationgroup.112114 Those randomized to bupropion SR hadlower expired carbon monoxide (CO) and serum cotinine(when measured) as well as higher abstinence rates vs theplacebo groups during and at the end of these studies (endof study abstinence rates of 11% vs 0%, 16% vs 0%, and50% vs 12.5% for Evins and colleagues112,114 and Georgeand colleagues,113 respectively). One study used a cross-over design with 9 people on bupropion SR (dose notreported) or placebo for 3 weeks with a 1-week washoutperiod.115 While on bupropion SR, individuals exhibiteda trend toward decreased expired CO and urine cotinine,which was reversed when on placebo. However, therewere no significant group differences on these measures.

    Two studies have examined the effect of adding bupro-pion vs placebo to NRT. In the first study, all participantsreceived the nicotine patch with a standardized downwardtitration over the course of the study.116 Nicotine gum wasavailable, as needed, for cravings. Individuals who re-ceived bupropion SR NRT had significantly lower ex-

    pired CO levels compared with those receiving placebo NRT. Of interest, abstinence rates significantly favoredbupropion SR NRT at week 8, but after the nicotinepatch was titrated down, previously abstinent individualsrestarted smoking and the abstinence rates between thearms were identical by the end of the study. In the secondstudy, George and colleagues117 found 28% of the partic-ipants who received bupropion SR transdermal nicotinepatch were continuously abstinent from the quit date tothe end of the 10-week study compared with 3% of thosereceiving placeboNRT. In the 6-month follow-up, 14%of the bupropion SR NRT group was still abstinent

    compared with none of the placebo NRT participants.The comparative efficacy of bupropion SR NRT tobupropion SR has not been directly evaluated, so the ex-tent to which the addition of NRT enhances treatment re-sponse is not known.

    The long-term benefits of short-term treatment withbupropion SR have only been examined in 2 studies. At6 months, George and colleagues113 found only modest nu-merical differences in sustained abstinence between thoserandomized to bupropion SR vs placebo (ie 3/16 abstinentin the bupropion SR group vs 1/16 in the placebo group. Incontrast, Evins and colleagues118 followed participants for

    82

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    13/23

    2 years and observed that those receiving bupropion SRhad maintained the decreased CO seen in the trial. How-ever, participants randomized to placebo had lowered theirexpired CO to match the bupropion SR group.118 Partic-ipants in both study groups had received other smokingcessation treatments in the intervening years.

    All the long-term bupropion SR studies examined the

    comparative efficacy of bupropion SR in the context ofa standard psychosocial intervention. Evins and col-leagues112,114,116 provided all participants with a cognitive-behavioralsmokingcessationprogramthatwasadaptedforpeople with schizophrenia from materials developed by theAmerican HeartAssociation andtheAmericanLung Asso-ciation and included education, motivational enhance-ment, problem solving, relapse prevention, andbehavioral goal setting. George and colleagues113,117

    provided all participants with 10 weekly psychosocialsmoking cessation groups; these groups included moti-vational enhancement therapy, education, social skills

    training, and relapse prevention training. These studiessuggest that a concurrent psychosocial intervention maybe necessary to observe the clinical benefit of bupropionSR but were not designed to directly assess whethera psychosocial intervention is required nor do they pro-vide information on the most effective psychosocialinterventions to treat smoking cessation in schizophre-nia. Unfortunately, there are no studies that have com-pared bupropion SR with and without a psychosocialintervention. However, 3 randomized trials have exam-ined psychosocial interventions as the primary treatmentmodality for smoking cessation in schizophrenia. In lightof the potentially critical role of psychosocial interven-tions for the efficacy of bupropion SR, we include a re-view of these studies.

    George and colleagues119 randomly assigned peoplewith schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder to 10weekly sessions of either a specialized smoking cessationprogram developed for smokers with schizophrenia (mo-tivational enhancement, relapse prevention, social skillstraining, and psychoeducation) or to a standard AmericanLung Association program. All participants also receivedNRT. The controlled phase of the study lasted 12 weeks,and participants were followed up for an additional6 months. The groups did not differ in smoking abstinence

    at end point or expired CO levels. There was a trend for theexperimental group to report a greater rate of continuousabstinence in the last 4 weeks of treatment (32.1%) relativeto the comparison group (23.5%). There was a significantdifference in smoking abstinence rates at 6 months favor-ing the comparison group (10.7% in experimental groupvs 17.6% in comparison group).

    Chen and colleagues120 compared an experimentalsmoking cessation program (the American Lung Associ-ation 7-step Program) to a control group (assessmentonly). Participants were assessed at the end of 8 weeksof treatment and at an 8-week posttreatment assessment,

    with quit defined as no smoking in the last 7 days.The experimental group showed an 8% quit rate in theweek following the end of the program vs 0% in controlgroup. Eight weeks later, 16% of experimental group hadquit smoking vs 0% in control group.

    Baker and colleagues121 compared an 8-session behav-ioral/motivational enhancement intervention NRT

    with routine care. Outcomes were assessed at 3-, 6-,and 12-months posttreatment. There were no differencesbetween the conditions in continuous or point prevalenceabstinence rates at all time points. There was a significantgroup difference in smoking reduction at 3 months, with43.5% of the experimental group reduced their smokingby at least 50% relative to baseline as compared with16.6% of the comparison group. This difference wasmaintained at the 12-month follow-up. In the completeranalyses, participants randomized to the experimentalgroup were significantly more likely to have improvedon all outcome variables at 3 months, were more likely

    to be abstinent (point prevalence) at the 6- and 12-monthassessments, and to have reduced their smoking by atleast 50%. In addition, at 3 months, 84% of the treatmentgroup (compared with 29.8% of the comparison group)reported use of NRT. Rates of use of NRT convergedat the 12-month assessment.

    In summary, the literature suggests that people withschizophrenia can benefit from both pharmacologicaland psychosocial interventions for smoking cessation.The data from several well-designed RCTs suggest thatbupropion SR, with or without NRT, can be a helpfultool for establishing short-term abstinence within thecontext of a supportive environment. The long-term ben-efit of this intervention is unclear. The few studies thathave examined the efficacy of psychosocial interventionssupport their benefit when combined with psychophar-macologic treatment but do not provide sufficient datato delineate the key components of the interventions.

    rTMS for the Treatment of Schizophrenia

    Recommendation. Low-frequency (1 Hz) rTMS, overthe left temporoparietal cortex, is recommended forthe acute treatment of auditory hallucinations thathave not responded to adequate antipsychotic therapy.

    Evidence Summary. Twelve sham-controlled studieshave examined the efficacy of low-frequency (1 Hz)rTMS applied to the left temporoparietal cortex forthe treatment of auditory hallucinations that have notresponded to adequate antipsychotic treatment (ie, re-fractory auditory hallucinations). A meta-analysis of10 of the 12 studies found a significant advantage of ac-tive rTMS treatment vs sham treatment for the acutetreatment of refractory auditory hallucinations (Cohend= 0.76).122 There was significant heterogeneity amongthe studies, which was primarily driven by a single studythat had multiple pauses during the stimulation

    83

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    14/23

    session.123 After exclusion of this study, the difference be-tween active and sham rTMS increased (Cohen d= 0.88).In the 2 studies not included in the meta-analysis, one hadinsufficient data to calculate an effect size124 and theother had not yet been published.125 Rosa and colleaguestreated 11 people with schizophrenia on clozapine withrefractory auditory hallucinations over 10 days with

    low frequency rTMS or sham treatment. No significantdifference was seen between treatments. These latter 2studies suggest that the effect size may be lower than sug-gested in the meta-analysis, but the small sample sizeswould most likely not negate the conclusions of themeta-analysis. Moreover, a second meta-analysis reach-ed the same conclusion that low-frequency rTMS is effec-tive in the acute treatment of refractory auditoryhallucinations.126

    Four studies have examined the persistence of therTMS effect on auditory hallucinations.125,127129 After4 days of rTMS treatment, Chibbaro and colleagues127

    showed a significant change in positive symptoms thatlasted 8 weeks. Poulet and colleagues129 treated peoplefor 5 days and found after 8 weeks half of the rTMS par-ticipants continued to have a >20% decrease in auditoryhallucinations. None of those randomized to sham treat-ment responded to treatment. Rosa and colleagues didnot find a significant group difference between activeand sham rTMS treatment over time, but those receivingrTMS continued to show improvement in symptoms 4weeks after treatment had stopped, whereas sham-treatedparticipants did not continue to improve.129 Hoffmanand colleagues128 reported that the mean survivorship in-terval for the 45 persons receiving either masked orunmasked active rTMS was 13 weeks post-trial. Non-survivorship was defined as a return of hallucination se-verity to 80% of pretrial levels, increase in antipsychoticdrug dose, or change in antipsychotic drug. These studiessuggest that the therapeutic effects of rTMS may persistfor up to 812 weeks.

    Several cases have been published examining the effectof rTMS maintenance treatment for refractory auditoryhallucinations.130134 However, there are no long-termcontrolled studies of rTMS for refractory hallucinations.

    In light of the current evidence for efficacy and the lowrisk of adverse effects, rTMS should be offered as an

    acute treatment option for auditory hallucinations thathave not responded to an adequate trial of antipsychotictherapy. Future studies will need to be conducted to de-termine if maintenance rTMS treatment should be insti-tuted for people who respond to initial treatment and thelong-term efficacy of this intervention.

    Summary Statements

    There were 13 interventions or outcomes for which therewas insufficient evidence to warrant a treatment recom-mendation. A summary of the intervention or outcome,

    the evidence to date and future areas of investigation arepresented for each of these areas. The summaries aregrouped either by intervention or outcome. A more de-tailed presentation of the available evidence for the inter-vention is presented in the online supplemental materials.The absence of a treatment recommendation should notbe construed as a proscription against the particular prac-

    tice. Rather, the interventions may be potentially benefi-cial, but at the time of the PORT review, the evidence didnot reach the level to warrant the designation of anevidence-based practice.

    Adjunctive Treatment Strategies

    Antipsychotic Polypharmacy

    Summary Statement. Many individuals with schizo-phrenia have an incomplete symptom response to anti-psychotic monotherapy. The use of combinations of

    antipsychotic medications (antipsychotic polypharmacy)has become an increasingly common treatment approachfor people who have failed to adequately respond to pre-vious antipsychotic treatment. The majority of studies ofcombinations of antipsychotic medications have exam-ined the efficacy and safety of a single combination: clo-zapine and risperidone. These studies have failed todocument sufficient efficacy and safety of this combina-tion to support a recommendation in people with treat-ment-resistant schizophrenia.

    Anticonvulsants and Lithium for Treatment-Resistant

    Positive SymptomsSummary Statement. A substantial proportion of peo-ple with schizophrenia treated with antipsychotic medi-cations continue to exhibit residual positive symptoms.Lithium and anticonvulsants are used extensively to aug-ment antipsychotic treatment of these symptoms. How-ever, few studies have been conducted to formallyevaluate the efficacy of these approaches. Of the anticon-vulsants, carbamazepine, valproate/valproic acid, lamo-trigine, and topirimate have been the most extensivelystudied, but none of these agents have demonstrated suf-ficient efficacy to support a recommendation in people

    with residual positive symptoms. There is little evidenceto support the efficacy of lithium for these symptoms.

    Benzodiazepines for Anxiety, Depression, or Hostility

    SummaryStatement. Individuals with schizophrenia of-ten experience symptoms of anxiety, depression, and hos-tility, which are not amenable to antipsychotic treatment.Adjunctive treatment with benzodiazepines is frequentlyused to treat these ancillary symptoms. However, thereare almost no RCTs to formally examine the efficacyof these agents. In light of the lack of such studies, thecurrent level of evidence is insufficient to support

    84

    R. W. Buchanan et al.

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    15/23

    a recommendation for the use of benzodiazepines fortreating the symptoms of anxiety, depression, or hostilityin people with schizophrenia.

    Antidepressant Treatment for Depression

    Summary Statement. Many people with schizophrenia

    experience symptoms of depression, which can interferewith role functioning and negatively impact quality oflife. Although antidepressants are widely prescribed forpeople with schizophrenia, there are a number of impor-tant gaps in the empirical evaluation of the efficacy ofadjunctive antidepressants for the treatment of co-occur-ring depression in this population, including the limitednumber of trials evaluating new generation antidepres-sants (eg, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) andthe lack of any controlled trials of new generation anti-depressants with SGA medications. In light of these gaps,the level of evidence is currently insufficient to support

    a recommendation for the use of adjunctive antidepres-sants for the treatment of co-occurring depression in peo-ple with schizophrenia.

    Pharmacological Treatment of Non-Positive SymptomOutcome Measures

    Pharmacological Treatment of Negative Symptoms

    Summary Statement. A significant proportion of peoplewith schizophrenia presents with primary or persistentnegative symptoms. These symptoms are robustly asso-

    ciated with poor outcomes in schizophrenia and representan important unmet treatment need. Antipsychotic med-ications have not been shown to be effective for treatingprimary or persistent negative symptoms. Trials of selec-tive monoamine oxidase B inhibitors, mirtazapine, andselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors appear promisingbut require replication. In light of these limitations, thelevel of evidence is currently insufficient to supporta treatment recommendation for any pharmacologicaltreatment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia.

    Pharmacological Treatments to Improve Cognition

    Summary Statement. People with schizophrenia arecharacterized by a broad range of cognitive impairments.These impairments are a core component of the illness,are robustly associated with poor outcomes in schizo-phrenia, and represent a major unmet treatment need.A large number of studies have examined the efficacyof FGA and SGA medications for cognitive impairments,with little evidence that these agents have significant cog-nitive-enhancing effects. In addition, there is currently in-sufficient evidence to support the use of any adjunctiveagent for the treatment of cognitive impairments in peo-ple with schizophrenia.

    Antipsychotics, Quality of Life, and Functional Outcomes

    Summary Statement. Achieving functional recoveryand leading a satisfying life is important for individualswith schizophrenia. However, antipsychotic medicationtreatment is associated with only small to modestimprovements in psychosocial functioning, vocational

    functioning, and quality of life. There is insufficient ev-idence to support a recommendation for the preferentialuse of SGAs over FGAs or the use of particular antipsy-chotic medications to achieve gains in these outcomedomains in individuals with first-episode, multi-episode,or treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

    Treatment of Antipsychotic-Related Side Effects

    Antipsychotic Choice and Treatments for TD

    Summary Statement. TD is an abnormal movement dis-order, which is frequently caused by antipsychotic treat-ment and may be distressing or disabling to the personwith such movements. SGA medications, including clo-zapine, and several adjunctive agents have been evaluatedfor the treatment of TD. However, there is insufficientevidence to support a recommendation for the use ofany specific agent to treat TD.

    Antipsychotics and NMS

    Summary Statement. NMS occurs rarely but has beenassociated with treatment with both FGA and SGA med-ications. Since the last update, there is additional evi-dence available on the risk of NMS with antipsychotic

    medications, including clozapine, and therefore, the pre-vious recommendation to select clozapine as the first-linetreatment for individuals with previous NMS is no longerbeing included. There is insufficient evidence to recom-mend the use of a specific antipsychotic medication forpeople who have previously developed NMS.

    Pharmacological Prevention and Treatment ofAntipsychotic-Associated Weight Gain in Schizophrenia

    Summary Statement. In comparison to the general pop-ulation, people with schizophrenia have higher rates ofmorbidity and mortality, which are thought to be due,

    in part, to increased rates of obesity. Antipsychotic-induced weight gain is thought to be an important mod-ifiable contributor to the high rates of obesity in thispopulation. Treatment approaches for excess weight gainassociated with antipsychotic medications are importantto help improve the physical health and quality of lifeof people with schizophrenia. Three possible pharmacolog-ical interventions have been evaluated for antipsychotic-associated weight gain: (1) switching the current antipsy-chotic medication to an antipsychotic medication witha lower weight gain liability, (2) addition of a medicationwhen an antipsychotic agent is initiated to prevent weight

    85

    2009 Schizophrenia PORT Treatment Recommendations

  • 7/30/2019 Buchanan Schizo Pharma

    16/23

    gain, and (3) addition of a medication during current an-tipsychotic therapy to promote weight loss. There is cur-rently insufficient evidence to recommend a specificpharmacological intervention for the prevention or treat-ment of antipsychotic-induced weight gain. However,clinicians should monitor weight gain due to antipsy-chotic medications and consider the use of an evi-

    dence-based psychosocial weight loss intervention,which is recommended for this indication (see Dixonet al,135 this issue).

    Antipsychotic-Induced Prolactin Elevations, HormonalSide Effects, and Sexual Dysfunction

    Summary Statement. Antipsychotic medications mayelevate prolactin levels, which can cause secondary sideeffects. While side effects related to prolactin elevationand sexual dysfunction warrant attention and treatment,there is currentlyinsufficient evidence to support a recom-mendation for either switching from a prolactin-raising

    antipsychotic to a prolactin-sparing antipsychotic or us-ing an adjunctive pharmacological treatment to mitigatethese side effects.

    Treatment of Co-occurring Substance Misuse Disorders

    Pharmacological Interventions for Alcohol and SubstanceAbuse/Dependence in Schizophrenia

    Summary Statement. Co-occurring alcohol and illegalsubstance misuse is a serious problem in people withschizophrenia. However, few studies have evaluatedthe pharmacological treatment of alcohol or illegal

    substance abuse or dependence for people with co-occurring schizophrenia and substance misuse disorders.In general, the studies that have examined this issue havehad small samples sizes and are significantly underpow-ered. At this time, there is insufficient evidence to supporta recommendation for a pharmacological intervention totreat alcohol or illegal substance misuse disorders inschizophrenia over and above what is known aboutthe pharmacological agents developed to treat substanceabuse/dependence in the general population. Cliniciansshould evaluate their patients for co-occurring substanceuse disorders and consider using an evidence-based psy-

    chosocial intervention for this indication (see Dixonet al,135 this issue).

    Other Summary Statements

    ECT for the Treatment of Schizophrenia

    Summary Statement. ECT has a long history of use inpeople with schizophrenia. ECT has been shown to beeffective for acute positive psychotic symptoms butshows no efficacy advantage compared with antipsy-chotic medications and is not as easy to use as antipsy-chotic medications for the ongoing treatment of these

    symptoms. There is currently insufficient evidence tosupport a recommendation for the use of ECT for thecore symptoms of schizophrenia for treatment-resistantindividuals.

    DiscussionThe Schizophrenia PORT Psychopharmacology ERGreviewed over 400 studies on pharmacological and othersomatic treatments of schizophrenia, which resulted in16 treatment recommendations: we updated 11 previoustreatment recommendations; we identified 5 additionaltreatment areas for which the evidence was sufficientlystrong to support a treatment recommendation; and weeliminated 3 previous recommendations. We reviewedfor the first time pharmacological treatments for a num-ber of health conditions that disproportionately affectindividuals with schizophrenia, including cigarette

    smoking, drug addiction, and weight gain resultingfrom antipsychotic treatment. These reviews led toa new PORT recommendation for a combined psycho-pharmacological and psychosocial approach to smokingcessation, a significant unmet treatment need and majorpublic health concern in this population. The other newrecommendations include the choice of antipsychoticagent for the treatment of people with first-episodeschizophrenia, monitoring clozapine levels, antipsy-chotic treatment of acute agitation, and rTMS for theshort-term treatment of refractory auditory hallucina-tions. There were 13 reviewed areas for which the sc