Rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Hiroyoshi Takeuchi, Sadhana Thiyanavadivel, Ofer Agid, Gary Remington

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: How antipsychotics should be initiated/titrated in patients with acute schizophrenia as well as patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch remains a question. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials examining rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in patients with schizophrenia were selected. Data on study discontinuation, psychopathology, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were extracted and synthesized in studies including clinically different populations of acute patients and stable patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch. Results: Among 11 studies that met eligibility criteria, 8 and 3 studies involving 809 and 777 patients were identified as acute patient studies and stable patient switching studies, respectively. Rapid antipsychotic initiation was not significantly different from slow antipsychotic initiation in acute patient studies for all-cause study discontinuation, while the former was significantly inferior to the latter in stable patient switching studies (N = 3, n = 777, RR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.05-2.00, P = 0.02). In contrast, rapid initiation was significantly superior to slow initiation for all psychopathology outcomes including the PANSS/BPRS total score (N = 3, n = 336, SMD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.51--0.05, P = 0.02) in acute patient studies, but not different in stable patient switching studies. Any other outcomes except for nausea did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Rapid initiation of antipsychotics may represent a reasonable option for the treatment of acute schizophrenia, while slower initiation may be a safer strategy when switching antipsychotics in stable schizophrenia. Because of the low to very low quality of evidence, findings should be considered preliminary.

Original languageEnglish
JournalSchizophrenia Research
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Antipsychotic Agents
Meta-Analysis
Schizophrenia
Psychopathology
MEDLINE
Nausea
Randomized Controlled Trials

Keywords

  • Antipsychotics
  • Dosing
  • Initiation
  • Schizophrenia
  • Switching
  • Titration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Biological Psychiatry

Cite this

Rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in schizophrenia : A systematic review and meta-analysis. / Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi; Thiyanavadivel, Sadhana; Agid, Ofer; Remington, Gary.

In: Schizophrenia Research, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0a299f304fca472c8cc66fa02d6660f6,
title = "Rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis",
abstract = "Background: How antipsychotics should be initiated/titrated in patients with acute schizophrenia as well as patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch remains a question. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials examining rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in patients with schizophrenia were selected. Data on study discontinuation, psychopathology, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were extracted and synthesized in studies including clinically different populations of acute patients and stable patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch. Results: Among 11 studies that met eligibility criteria, 8 and 3 studies involving 809 and 777 patients were identified as acute patient studies and stable patient switching studies, respectively. Rapid antipsychotic initiation was not significantly different from slow antipsychotic initiation in acute patient studies for all-cause study discontinuation, while the former was significantly inferior to the latter in stable patient switching studies (N = 3, n = 777, RR = 1.45, 95{\%} CI = 1.05-2.00, P = 0.02). In contrast, rapid initiation was significantly superior to slow initiation for all psychopathology outcomes including the PANSS/BPRS total score (N = 3, n = 336, SMD = -0.28, 95{\%} CI = -0.51--0.05, P = 0.02) in acute patient studies, but not different in stable patient switching studies. Any other outcomes except for nausea did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Rapid initiation of antipsychotics may represent a reasonable option for the treatment of acute schizophrenia, while slower initiation may be a safer strategy when switching antipsychotics in stable schizophrenia. Because of the low to very low quality of evidence, findings should be considered preliminary.",
keywords = "Antipsychotics, Dosing, Initiation, Schizophrenia, Switching, Titration",
author = "Hiroyoshi Takeuchi and Sadhana Thiyanavadivel and Ofer Agid and Gary Remington",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1016/j.schres.2017.08.012",
language = "English",
journal = "Schizophrenia Research",
issn = "0920-9964",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in schizophrenia

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis

AU - Takeuchi, Hiroyoshi

AU - Thiyanavadivel, Sadhana

AU - Agid, Ofer

AU - Remington, Gary

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Background: How antipsychotics should be initiated/titrated in patients with acute schizophrenia as well as patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch remains a question. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials examining rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in patients with schizophrenia were selected. Data on study discontinuation, psychopathology, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were extracted and synthesized in studies including clinically different populations of acute patients and stable patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch. Results: Among 11 studies that met eligibility criteria, 8 and 3 studies involving 809 and 777 patients were identified as acute patient studies and stable patient switching studies, respectively. Rapid antipsychotic initiation was not significantly different from slow antipsychotic initiation in acute patient studies for all-cause study discontinuation, while the former was significantly inferior to the latter in stable patient switching studies (N = 3, n = 777, RR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.05-2.00, P = 0.02). In contrast, rapid initiation was significantly superior to slow initiation for all psychopathology outcomes including the PANSS/BPRS total score (N = 3, n = 336, SMD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.51--0.05, P = 0.02) in acute patient studies, but not different in stable patient switching studies. Any other outcomes except for nausea did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Rapid initiation of antipsychotics may represent a reasonable option for the treatment of acute schizophrenia, while slower initiation may be a safer strategy when switching antipsychotics in stable schizophrenia. Because of the low to very low quality of evidence, findings should be considered preliminary.

AB - Background: How antipsychotics should be initiated/titrated in patients with acute schizophrenia as well as patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch remains a question. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials examining rapid vs. slow antipsychotic initiation in patients with schizophrenia were selected. Data on study discontinuation, psychopathology, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were extracted and synthesized in studies including clinically different populations of acute patients and stable patients undergoing an antipsychotic switch. Results: Among 11 studies that met eligibility criteria, 8 and 3 studies involving 809 and 777 patients were identified as acute patient studies and stable patient switching studies, respectively. Rapid antipsychotic initiation was not significantly different from slow antipsychotic initiation in acute patient studies for all-cause study discontinuation, while the former was significantly inferior to the latter in stable patient switching studies (N = 3, n = 777, RR = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.05-2.00, P = 0.02). In contrast, rapid initiation was significantly superior to slow initiation for all psychopathology outcomes including the PANSS/BPRS total score (N = 3, n = 336, SMD = -0.28, 95% CI = -0.51--0.05, P = 0.02) in acute patient studies, but not different in stable patient switching studies. Any other outcomes except for nausea did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Rapid initiation of antipsychotics may represent a reasonable option for the treatment of acute schizophrenia, while slower initiation may be a safer strategy when switching antipsychotics in stable schizophrenia. Because of the low to very low quality of evidence, findings should be considered preliminary.

KW - Antipsychotics

KW - Dosing

KW - Initiation

KW - Schizophrenia

KW - Switching

KW - Titration

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028352040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028352040&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.schres.2017.08.012

DO - 10.1016/j.schres.2017.08.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 28844639

AN - SCOPUS:85028352040

JO - Schizophrenia Research

JF - Schizophrenia Research

SN - 0920-9964

ER -