Dataset Information

Low dose vs standard dose of antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

It remains unknown as to whether the antipsychotic dose needed for the acute-phase treatment of schizophrenia is also necessary for relapse prevention.

Aim

To compare the efficacy between standard dose [(World Health Organization daily defined dose (DDD)] vs low dose (?50% to <1 DDD) or very low dose (<50% DDD) for relapse prevention in schizophrenia.

Data source

Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials with a follow-up duration of ?24 weeks, including ?2 dosage groups of the same antipsychotic drug for relapse prevention in schizophrenia, were searched using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE (last search: August 2009).

Data extraction

Data on overall treatment failure, hospitalization, relapse, and dropouts due to side effects were extracted and combined in a meta-analysis.

Data synthesis

Thirteen studies with 1395 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Compared with the standard-dose treatment, the low-dose therapy did not show any statistically significant difference in overall treatment failure or hospitalization, while the standard dose showed a trend-level (P = .05) superiority in risk of relapse. The very low-dose group was inferior to the standard-dose group in all efficacy parameters. No significant difference was found in the rate of dropouts due to side effects between either standard dose vs low dose or very low dose.

Conclusions

Although antipsychotic treatment with ?50% to <1 DDD may be as effective as standard-dose therapy, there are insufficient clinical trial data to draw firm conclusions on standard- vs low-dose maintenance antipsychotic therapy for schizophrenia.

SUBMITTER: Uchida H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3122280 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Low dose vs standard dose of antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: meta-analysis.

Uchida Hiroyuki H Suzuki Takefumi T Takeuchi Hiroyoshi H Arenovich Tamara T Mamo David C DC

Schizophrenia bulletin 20091127 4

<h4>Background</h4>It remains unknown as to whether the antipsychotic dose needed for the acute-phase treatment of schizophrenia is also necessary for relapse prevention.<h4>Aim</h4>To compare the efficacy between standard dose [(World Health Organization daily defined dose (DDD)] vs low dose (≥50% to <1 DDD) or very low dose (<50% DDD) for relapse prevention in schizophrenia.<h4>Data source</h4>Double-blind, randomized, controlled trials with a follow-up duration of ≥24 weeks, including ≥2 dosa ...[more]

PMID: 19946012

Similar Datasets

Project description:Few controlled trials compared second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) with first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) regarding relapse prevention in schizophrenia. We conducted a systematic review/meta-analysis of randomized trials, lasting ?6 months comparing SGAs with FGAs in schizophrenia. Primary outcome was study-defined relapse; secondary outcomes included relapse at 3, 6 and 12 months; treatment failure; hospitalization; and dropout owing to any cause, non-adherence and intolerability. Pooled relative risk (RR) (±95% confidence intervals (CIs)) was calculated using random-effects model, with numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) calculations where appropriate. Across 23 studies (n=4504, mean duration=61.9±22.4 weeks), none of the individual SGAs outperformed FGAs (mainly haloperidol) regarding study-defined relapse, except for isolated, single trial-based superiority, and except for risperidone's superiority at 3 and 6 months when requiring ?3 trials. Grouped together, however, SGAs prevented relapse more than FGAs (29.0 versus 37.5%, RR=0.80, CI: 0.70-0.91, P=0.0007, I(2)=37%; NNT=17, CI: 10-50, P=0.003). SGAs were also superior regarding relapse at 3, 6 and 12 months (P=0.04, P<0.0001, P=0.0001), treatment failure (P=0.003) and hospitalization (P=0.004). SGAs showed trend-level superiority for dropout owing to intolerability (P=0.05). Superiority of SGAs regarding relapse was modest (NNT=17), but confirmed in double-blind trials, first- and multi-episode patients, using preferentially or exclusively raw or estimated relapse rates, and for different haloperidol equivalent comparator doses. There was no significant heterogeneity or publication bias. The relevance of the somewhat greater efficacy of SGAs over FGAs on several key outcomes depends on whether SGAs form a meaningful group and whether mid- or low-potency FGAs differ from haloperidol. Regardless, treatment selection needs to be individualized considering patient- and medication-related factors.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine any differential efficacy and safety of low- vs standard-dose IV alteplase for lacunar vs nonlacunar acute ischemic stroke (AIS), we performed post hoc analyzes from the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED) alteplase dose arm.MethodsIn a cohort of 3,297 ENCHANTED participants, we identified those with lacunar or nonlacunar AIS with different levels of confidence (definite/according to prespecified definitions based on clinical and adjudicated imaging findings. Logistic regression models were used to determine associations of lacunar AIS with 90-day outcomes (primary, modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 2-6; secondary, other mRS scores, intracerebral hemorrhage [ICH], and early neurologic deterioration or death) and treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase across lacunar and nonlacunar AIS with adjustment for baseline covariables.ResultsOf 2,588 participants with available imaging and clinical data, we classified cases as definite/probable lacunar (n = 490) or nonlacunar AIS (n = 2,098) for primary analyses. Regardless of alteplase dose received, lacunar AIS participants had favorable functional (mRS 2-6, adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.60 [0.47-0.77]) and other clinical or safety outcomes compared to participants with nonlacunar AIS. Low-dose alteplase (versus standard) had no differential effect on functional outcomes (mRS 2-6, 1.04 [0.87-1.24]) but reduced the risk of symptomatic ICH in all included participants. There were no differential treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase on all outcomes across lacunar and nonlacunar AIS (all p interaction ≥0.07).ConclusionsWe found no evidence from the ENCHANTED trial that low-dose alteplase had any advantages over standard dose for definite/probable lacunar AIS.Classification of evidenceThis study provides Class II evidence that for patients with lacunar AIS, low-dose alteplase had no additional benefit or safety over standard-dose alteplase.Clinical trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01422616.

Project description:ImportanceThe doses of antipsychotic drugs needed for relapse prevention in schizophrenia is a debated issue.ObjectiveTo examine dose-response findings in a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Data sourcesStudies were identified through the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (March 9, 2020), PubMed (January 1, 2021), and previous reviews. First authors and/or pharmaceutical companies were contacted for additional information.Study selectionTwo reviewers independently selected randomized clinical trials that compared fixed doses of a second-generation antipsychotic, haloperidol, or fluphenazine for relapse prevention in patients with stable schizophrenia.Data extraction and synthesisUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline, all parameters in duplicate were extracted and frequentist dose-response random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.Main outcomes and measuresStudy-defined relapse (primary outcome), rehospitalization, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale or Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total score reduction from baseline, all-cause discontinuation, and dropouts due to adverse events.ResultsEvidence from 72 dose arms from 26 studies with 4776 participants was analyzed. The efficacy-related dose-response curves had a hyperbolic shape meaning that the probability to relapse decreased rapidly with doses of up to 5-mg/d risperidone equivalent (relative relapse risk, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.57; standardized mean difference for Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score reduction, -0.55; 95% CI, -0.68 to -0.41), but flattened thereafter. In contrast, dropouts due to adverse events continued to increase beyond this dose (relative risk at 5 mg/d, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.87-2.55; relative risk at 15 mg/d, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.49-4.62). In a subgroup analysis of patients in remission, a plateau was reached earlier, at approximately 2.5-mg/d risperidone equivalent.Conclusions and relevanceThe findings of this meta-analysis suggest that doses higher than approximately 5-mg/d risperidone equivalent may provide limited additional benefit for relapse prevention but more adverse events. For patients in remission or who are receiving high-potency first-generation antipsychotics, doses as low as 2.5-mg/d risperidone equivalent may be sufficient. However, caution is needed at this low dose end when further decreases of dose may be accompanied by a disproportionally higher relapse risk. Moreover, the observations are averages, and factors such as slow or rapid metabolism, age, illness stage, comorbidities, and drug-drug interactions suggest that individual patients will often need higher or lower doses.

Project description:ImportanceA lower dose of intravenous alteplase appears to be a safer treatment option than the standard dose, reducing the risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. There is uncertainty, however, over how this effect translates into an overall clinical benefit for patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).ObjectiveTo assess whether older, Asian, or severely affected patients with AIS who are considered at high risk of thrombolysis may benefit more from low-dose rather than standard-dose alteplase treatment.Design, setting, and participantsThis study is a prespecified secondary analysis of the Enhanced Control of Hypertension and Thrombolysis Stroke Study (ENCHANTED), an international, randomized, open-label, blinded, end-point clinical trial of low-dose vs standard-dose intravenous alteplase for patients with AIS. From March 1, 2012, to August 31, 2015, a total of 3310 patients who had a clinical diagnosis of AIS as confirmed by brain imaging and who fulfilled the local criteria for thrombolysis treatment were included in the alteplase-dose arms. Patients were randomly assigned to receive low-dose (0.6 mg/kg; 15% as bolus and 85% as infusion over 1 hour) or standard-dose (0.9 mg/kg; 10% as bolus and 90% as infusion over 1 hour) alteplase. Of the 3310 randomized patients, 13 patients were excluded for missing consent, mistaken randomization, and duplicate randomization numbers. This secondary analysis was conducted between May 1, 2016, and April 28, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was a poor outcome defined by the combination of death and any disability as scored by the modified Rankin Scale (scores range from 2 to 6, with the highest score indicating death) at 90 days.ResultsOf the 3297 patients included in the analysis, 1248 (37.9%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 67 (13) years. No significant differences in the treatment effects were observed between low- and standard-dose alteplase for poor outcomes (death or disability) by age, ethnicity, or severity (all P > .37 for interaction). Similarly, the treatment effects of low- vs standard-dose alteplase on function outcome (ordinal shift of the modified Rankin Scale) in Asians (odds ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.22) was consistent with non-Asians (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.14) (P = .32 for interaction). There were generally consistent reductions in rates of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage with low-dose alteplase, although this reduction was not statistically significant by age, ethnicity, or severity.Conclusions and relevanceThis analysis found that the effects of low-dose alteplase were not clearly superior to the effects of standard-dose alteplase on death or disability in key demographic subgroups of patients with AIS. Further investigation is required to identify patients with AIS who may benefit from low-dose alteplase.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01422616.

Project description:Compared with oral antipsychotics (OAPs), long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) should improve medication adherence and reduce relapses in schizophrenia. However, meta-analyses of randomized trials and mirror-image studies yielded inconsistent results. Nonrandomized cohort studies with parallel comparisons of LAIs and OAPs offer a third design to examine this issue. We meta-analyzed cohort studies with ≥24 weeks duration and hospitalization data. Primary outcome was hospitalization rate, ie, number of hospitalizations per person-year. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization risk, ie, proportion of patients experiencing ≥1 hospitalizations, all-cause discontinuation, and total hospitalization days. Patient severity and/or chronicity at baseline was also meta-analyzed and explored as a potential effect size moderator. Altogether, 42 studies (n = 101 624; follow-up = 18.6 ± 10.0 mo) were meta-analyzed. LAIs were superior to OAPs regarding hospitalization rate (studies = 15, person-years = 68 009, rate ratio = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.78-0.93, P < .001) and all-cause discontinuations (studies = 10, n = 37 293, risk ratio = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.67-0.91, P = .001), but not regarding hospitalization risk (studies = 33, n = 51 733, risk ratio = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.84-1.00, P = .06), and hospitalization days (studies = 11, n = 21 328, Hedges' g = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.16 to 0.06, P = .39). Illness severity/chronicity was significantly greater in patients prescribed LAIs vs OAPs when all available information was pooled together (studies = 23, n = 61 806, Hedges' g = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.03-0.26, P = .01), but not when examined separately. In summary, this meta-analysis of cohort studies, which included patients that are broadly representative of clinical practice, indicates that LAIs are superior to OAPs. The lack of significant superiority of LAIs for hospitalization risk and hospital days needs to be interpreted in the context of naturalistic treatment selection with subsequently greater illness severity/chronicity in LAI-treated patients.

Dataset Information

Low dose vs standard dose of antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: meta-analysis.

Background

Aim

Data source

Data extraction

Data synthesis

Conclusions

Publications

Low dose vs standard dose of antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets