Article

Number needed to treat and number needed to harm with paliperidone palmitate relative to long-acting haloperidol, bromperidol, and fluphenazine decanoate for treatment of patients with schizophrenia

Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment (Impact Factor: 2.15). 03/2011; 7:93-101. DOI: 10.2147/NDT.S17177
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We analyzed data retrieved through a PubMed search of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables (haloperidol decanoate, bromperidol decanoate, and fluphenazine decanoate), and a company database of paliperidone palmitate, to compare the benefit-risk ratio in patients with schizophrenia.
From the eight studies that met our selection criteria, two efficacy and six safety parameters were selected for calculation of number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and the likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH) using comparisons of active drug relative to placebo. NNTs for prevention of relapse ranged from 2 to 5 for paliperidone palmitate, haloperidol decanoate, and fluphenazine decanoate, indicating a moderate to large effect size.
Among the selected maintenance studies, NNH varied considerably, but indicated a lower likelihood of encountering extrapyramidal side effects, such as akathisia, tremor, and tardive dyskinesia, with paliperidone palmitate versus placebo than with first-generation antipsychotic depot agents versus placebo. This was further supported by an overall higher NNH for paliperidone palmitate versus placebo with respect to anticholinergic use and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale positive score. LHH for preventing relapse versus use of anticholinergics was 15 for paliperidone palmitate and 3 for fluphenazine decanoate, favoring paliperidone palmitate.
Overall, paliperidone palmitate had a similar NNT and a more favorable NNH compared with the first-generation long-acting injectables assessed.

0 Followers
 · 
147 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: What messages the terms number need to treat (NNT) and number need to harm (NNH) give to the clinician? NNT and NNH terms are epidemiological measures that are commonly used day by day. These terms give their messages to the clinician independent from statistical significance and provide important support when he or she plans patient's treatment protocol. The aim of this review is to give some clues to the clinicians in order to interpret these two terms.
    06/2012; 2(2):91-94. DOI:10.5455/jmood.20120615045043
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: All currently available antipsychotic drugs are the dopamine D2 receptor antagonists and are capable of producing extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS). Anticholinergic drugs are primarily used to treat EPS or prevent EPS induced by antipsychotics in the treatment of psychosis and schizophrenia. However, they can cause a variety of distressing peripheral side-effects (e.g. dry mouth, urinary disturbances, and constipation) and central adverse effects (e.g. cognitive impairment, worsening of tardive dyskinesia, and delirium). Disturbances in cognitive abilities are cardinal features of schizophrenia from its earliest phases and account for much of the functional disability associated with the illness. It is likely that long-term concomitant administration of anticholinergics exacerbates the underlying cognitive impairment in patients with schizophrenia and subsequently affects patients' quality of life. Thus, current treatment guidelines for schizophrenia generally do not recommend the prophylactic and long-term use of anticholinergics. However, the high use of long-term anticholinergic drugs with antipsychotics has been identified as an important issue in the treatment of schizophrenia in several countries. To assess the benefits and limits of anticholinergic use in psychosis and schizophrenia, this article will provide a brief review of the pharmacology and clinical profiles of anticholinergic drugs and will focus on their effects on cognitive function in schizophrenia, particularly during the course of the early phase of the illness. In addition, we will address the effects of discontinuation of anticholinergics on cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia and provide a strategy for adjunctive anticholinergic use in patients treated with long-acting injectable antipsychotics.
    Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences 09/2013; 68(1). DOI:10.1111/pcn.12088 · 1.62 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Schizophrenia in general is notoriously associated with relapses rendering the illness progressive to worse outcomes, a concept of which is compatible with neurotoxicity. Therefore, relapse prevention is of utmost clinical relevance.Methods In this review, we aim to put relapse into clinical context in the realm of natural history of, or heterogeneity in, schizophrenia and summarize risk factors of relapse. We discuss how to effectively ‘define’ relapse in schizophrenia and recent meta-analytic studies on this topic to highlight the importance of continuous antipsychotic treatment.ResultsThe following issues emerged: ‘How low maintenance antipsychotic dosage could be?’, ‘How extended dosing could be?’, ‘Who could be successfully withdrawn from antipsychotics?’ and ‘How relapse could be defined in the first place?’ The question in particular is how better to deliver antipsychotics at the lowest possible, whereby dose and dosing interval are relevant. While ongoing antipsychotic treatment is the rule, recent works are pointing to a possibility of lower dosage in the maintenance phase of the illness.Conclusions Bearing in mind that suboptimal adherence and withdrawal from antipsychotics are an established and unequivocal risk factor for relapse, further investigations are certainly needed to explore user-friendly manner of psychopharmacotherapy to prevent relapse in schizophrenia. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Human Psychopharmacology Clinical and Experimental 09/2014; 29(5). DOI:10.1002/hup.2421 · 1.85 Impact Factor