Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride for schizophrenia
ABSTRACT Zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride, given orally, is commonly used for managing the signs and symptoms of schizophrenia.
To determine the effects of zuclopenthixol dhydrochloride for treatment of schizophrenia.
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (December 2004). This register is compiled of methodical searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, Dissertation abstracts, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, RUSSMED, Sociofile, supplemented with hand searching of relevant journals and numerous conference proceedings. To identify further trials we also contacted a pharmaceutical company and authors of relevant studies.
We included all randomised controlled trials comparing zuclopenthixol dihydrocodine with antipsychotics or with placebo (or no intervention) for treatment of schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.
We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers, re-inspected and quality assessed articles and extracted data. For dichotomous data we calculated relative risks (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm statistics. For continuous data we calculated weighted mean differences with 95% CIs for non-skewed data.
We included eighteen trials involving 1578 people. Two trials compared zuclopenthixol with placebo and neither reported global or mental state outcomes. People allocated zuclopenthixol did have increased risk of experiencing extraparamydal symptoms compared with placebo (n=64, RR 5.37, CI 1.12 to 29.34 NNH 2 CI 2 to 31). Ten short trials (total n=478) compared zuclopenthixol with other typical antipsychotics. Risk of being unchanged or worse was decreased by allocation to zuclopenthixol (n=357, 7 RCTs, RR 0.72 CI 0.53 to 0.98, NNT 10 CI 6 to 131). No findings suggest any clear difference between zuclopenthixol and other typical antipsycotics across a whole range of adverse effects, including movement disorders (n=280, 6 RCTs, RR needing additional antiparkinsonian medication 1.07 CI 0.86 to 1.33) and general agitation (n=162, 3 RCTs, RR needing treatment with hypnotic/sedative drugs 1.09 CI 0.76 to 1.56). Fewer people allocated zuclopenthixol left in the short term compared with those given other typical antipsychotics (n=424, 22% vs 30%, 8 RCTs, RR 0.70 CI 0.51 to 0.95, NNT 12 CI 7 to 67). Three short trials (total n=233) compared zuclopenthixol with atypical antipsychotics. Zuclopenthixol was associated with no greater risk of being unchanged or worse compared with risperidone (n=98, 1 RCT, RR 1.30 CI 0.80 to 2.11). People allocated zuclopenthixol were prescribed antiparkinsonian medication more frequently compared to those treated with risperidone (n=98, 1 RCT, RR 1.92 CI 1.12 to 3.28, NNH 3 CI 3 to 17). Weight gain was equal for people allocated zuclopenthixol and those given sulpiride (n=61, 1 RCT, WMD 1.60 CI 8.35 to 5.15). Many people left these short studies early (45% zuclopenthixol vs 30% risperidone, n=159, 2 RCTs, RR 1.48 CI 0.98 to 2.22). The two isomers of zuclopenthixol, when compared in four short studies (total n=140), did not result in clearly different outcomes.
There is an indication that zuclopenthixol causes movement disorders, perhaps more so than the newer generation of drugs, though no more frequently than the older generation of antipsychotics. There is some suggestion from this review that oral zuclopenthixol may have some clinical advantage, at least in the short term, over other older drugs in terms of global state. If an older drug is going to be prescribed, zuclopenthixol dihydrochloride is a viable option but may be best taken with additional medication to offset movement disorders that occur in about half the people taking this drug. There is no information on service, functional, behavioural outcomes and important outcomes such as relapse, for such a widely used drug this would indicate the need for further studies. We feel that it should remain a choice in the treatment of those for whom older generation drugs are indicated.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Zuclopenthixol is a thioxanthene-based neuroleptic. It may cause acute intoxication in children with neurological and consciousness disorders. Immunochromatography is unable to identify the molecule and diagnosis requires mass spectroscopy and HP chromatography. The short time needed for this technique significantly improves the exploration and treatment of Clopixol® poisoning.Archives de Pédiatrie 03/2013; 20(3):286–288. DOI:10.1016/j.arcped.2012.12.009 · 0.41 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: During the last three decades, an increasing understanding of the etiology, psychopathology, and clinical manifestations of schizophrenia spectrum disorders, in addition to the introduction of second-generation antipsychotics, has optimized the potential for recovery from the illness. Continued development of various models of psychosocial intervention promotes the goal of schizophrenia treatment from one of symptom control and social adaptation to an optimal restoration of functioning and/or recovery. However, it is still questionable whether these new treatment approaches can address the patients' needs for treatment and services and contribute to better patient outcomes. This article provides an overview of different treatment approaches currently used in schizophrenia spectrum disorders to address complex health problems and a wide range of abnormalities and impairments resulting from the illness. There are different treatment strategies and targets for patients at different stages of the illness, ranging from prophylactic antipsychotics and cognitive-behavioral therapy in the premorbid stage to various psychosocial interventions in addition to antipsychotics for relapse prevention and rehabilitation in the later stages of the illness. The use of antipsychotics alone as the main treatment modality may be limited not only in being unable to tackle the frequently occurring negative symptoms and cognitive impairments but also in producing a wide variety of adverse effects to the body or organ functioning. Because of varied pharmacokinetics and treatment responsiveness across agents, the medication regimen should be determined on an individual basis to ensure an optimal effect in its long-term use. This review also highlights that the recent practice guidelines and standards have recommended that a combination of treatment modalities be adopted to meet the complex health needs of people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. In view of the heterogeneity of the risk factors and the illness progression of individual patients, the use of multifaceted illness management programs consisting of different combinations of physical, psychological, and social interventions might be efficient and effective in improving recovery.Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 01/2013; 9:1311-1332. DOI:10.2147/NDT.S37485 · 2.15 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objective: To compare in a generalizable sample/setting objective outcomes in patients receiving first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables (FGA-LAIs) or risperidone-LAI (RIS-LAI). Methods: Nationwide, retrospective inception cohort study of adults with International Classification of Diseases-10 schizophrenia using Danish registers from 1995 to 2009 comparing outcomes between clinician's/patient's choice treatment with FGA-LAIs or RIS-LAI. Primary outcome was time to psychiatric hospitalization using Cox-regression adjusting for relevant covariates. Secondary outcomes included time to all-cause discontinuation and psychiatric hospitalization in patients without LAI possession gap >28 days, and number of bed-days after psychiatric hospitalization. Results: Among 4532 patients followed for 2700 patient-years, 2078 received RIS-LAI and 2454 received FGA-LAIs (zuclopenthixol decanoate = 52.2%, perphenazine decanoate = 37.2%, haloperidol decanoate = 5.0%, flupenthixol decanoate = 4.4%, fluphenazine decanoate = 1.3%). RIS-LAI was similar to FGA-LAIs regarding time to hospitalization (RIS-LAI = 246.2±323.7 days vs FGA-LAIs = 276.6±383.3 days; HR = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.87-1.03, P = 0.199) and time to all-cause discontinuation (RIS-LAI = 245.8±324.0 days vs FGA-LAIs = 287.0±390.9 days; HR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.86-1.02, P = 0.116). Similarly, in patients without LAI discontinuation, RIS-LAI and FGA-LAIs did not differ regarding time to hospitalization (RIS-LAI = 175.0±268.1 days vs FGA-LAIs = 210.7±325.3 days; HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.86-1.04, P = 0.254). Finally, duration of hospitalization was also similar (incidence rate ratio = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.78-1.19, P = 0.744). Results were unchanged when analyzing only patients treated after introduction of RIS-LAI. Conclusions: In this nationwide cohort study, RIS-LAI was not superior to FGA-LAIs regarding time to psychiatric hospitalization, all-cause discontinuation, and duration of hospitalization. Given the cost of hospitalization and second-generation antipsychotic (SGA)-LAIs, these findings require consideration when making treatment choices, but also need to be balanced with the individual relevance of adverse effects/patient centered outcomes. In future, head-to-head trials and additional nationwide database studies including other SGA-LAIs is needed.Schizophrenia Bulletin 09/2014; DOI:10.1093/schbul/sbu128 · 8.61 Impact Factor