Penfluridol for schizophrenia

ArticleinCochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) · February 2006with41 Reads
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002923.pub2 · Source: PubMed
Penfluridol, available since 1970, is an unusual long acting oral antipsychotic agent for the treatment of schizophrenia. It may be considered a depot medication as it is administered once a week. To review the effects of penfluridol for treatment of those with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like illnesses in comparison to placebo, other antipsychotic medication or no intervention. We undertook electronic searches of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (2003-5) and LILACS (1982-2005). We hand searched references of all identified studies and sought citations of these studies in the Science Citation Index. We contacted the authors of trials and the manufacturer of penfluridol. We reliably selected all randomised clinical trials comparing penfluridol to placebo or typical or atypical antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia or serious mental illness. We independently extracted and analysed data on an intention-to-treat basis. We calculated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogeneous dichotomous data using a random effects model, and where possible calculated the number needed to treat. We calculated weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous data. We included twenty-five studies with a total of 1024 participants. Most of these studies were undertaken in the 1970s when penfluridol was launched. Ten studies, with 365 patients, compared penfluridol to placebo. In the meta-analysis of medium-term lasting studies, penfluridol was superior to placebo in the main efficacy measures: 'improvement in global state' (n=159, 4 RCTs, RR 0.69 CI 0.6 to 0.8, NNT 3 CI 2 to 10) and 'needing additional antipsychotic' (n=138, 5 RCTs, RR 0.43 CI 0.2 to 0.8, NNT 3 CI 1.8 to 20).A total of 449 patients from eleven studies were randomised to penfluridol or oral typical antipsychotics. There were no particular differences between penfluridol versus chlorpromazine, fluphenazine, trifluoperazine, thioridazine, or thiothixene for the main outcome measures in medium-term trials: 'improvement on global state' (N=2 studies), 'leaving the study early' (N=6), 'needing additional antipsychotic' (N=3), needing antiparkinsonian medication (N=2), and side-effects. Six studies, with 274 patients, compared penfluridol to depot typical antipsychotics. In general, for the efficacy and safety measures, no differences were established, but penfluridol was superior in keeping the patients in treatment; 'leaving the study early' (n=218, 5RCTs, RR 0.55 CI 0.3 to 0.97, NNT 6 CI 3.4 to 50). Although there are shortcomings and gaps in the data, there appears to be enough overall consistency for different outcomes. The efficacy and adverse effects profile of penfluridol are similar to other typical antipsychotics; both oral and depot. Furthermore, penfluridol is shown to be an adequate treatment option for people with schizophrenia, especially those who do not respond to oral medication on a daily basis and do not adapt well to depot drugs. One of the results favouring penfluridol was a lower drop out rate in medium term when compared to depot medications. It is also an option for chronic sufferers of schizophrenia with residual psychotic symptoms who nevertheless need continuous use of antipsychotic medication. An additional benefit of penfluridol is that it is a low-cost intervention.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Blockade of human ether-a-go-go-related gene (hERG) potassium channels is an undesirable activity of many drugs because it may be the primary cause for the prolongation of the QT interval, which appears to be associated with the induction of potentially life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias. Despite the fact that several antipsychotic drugs exert hERG-blocking activity that may underlie their propensity to cause electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities, including QT interval prolongation and associated ventricular arrhythmias, a considerable number of available typical and atypical antipsychotics have not been characterized for hERG-blocking activity. This study has evaluated the hERG-blocking activity of several of these antipsychotic drugs in human embryonic kidney cells (HEK293) stably transfected with the human recombinant hERG potassium channel and using a high throughput whole-cell patch-clamp technique to determine their respective IC(50) values. The ability of antipsychotics to competitively displace [(3)H]-astemizole binding from hERG-transfected HEK293 cells was also examined to properly establish the concentration range for testing in the subsequent patch clamp assays. The results showed that most of the tested antipsychotics effectively blocked the hERG channel in a dose-dependent manner, with IC(50) values ranging from 3.37 nM for the butyrophenone benperidol to >100 microM for the substituted benzamide sulpiride. Markedly, differential potencies were obtained depending on the chemical class, so that butyrophenones and diphenylbutylpiperidines emerged as the most potent hERG-blocking antipsychotics, while dibenzoxazepines and, particularly, substituted benzamides, exhibited the lowest activity. Because the hERG-blocking properties of drugs appear to be associated with their ability to prolong the QT interval, the present results will enable the establishment of the potential arrhythmogenic risk for each antipsychotic evaluated. Thus, their cardiotoxic risk will be discussed on the basis of their hERG-blocking properties and previous clinical data when available.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2007
  • [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.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Pancreatic tumors exhibit enhanced autophagy as compared to any other cancer, making it resistant to chemotherapy. We evaluated the effect of penfluridol against pancreatic cancer. Penfluridol treatment induced apoptosis and inhibited the growth of Panc-1, BxPC-3 and AsPC-1, pancreatic cancer cells with IC50 ranging between 6–7 μM after 24 h of treatment. Significant autophagy was induced by penfluridol treatment in pancreatic cancer cells. Punctate LC3B and autophagosomes staining confirmed autophagy. Inhibiting autophagy by chloroquine, bafilomycin, 3-methyladenine or LC3BsiRNA, significantly blocked penfluridol-induced apoptosis, suggesting that autophagy lead to apoptosis in our model. Penfluridol treatment suppressed the growth of BxPC-3 tumor xenografts by 48% as compared to 17% when treated in combination with chloroquine. Similarly, penfluridol suppressed the growth of AsPC-1 tumors by 40% versus 16% when given in combination with chloroquine. TUNEL staining and caspase-3 cleavage revealed less apoptosis in the tumors from mice treated with penfluridol and chloroquine as compared to penfluridol alone. Penfluridol treatment also suppressed the growth of orthotopically implanted Panc-1 tumors by 80% by inducing autophagy-mediated apoptosis in the tumors. These studies established that penfluridol inhibits pancreatic tumor growth by autophagy-mediated apoptosis. Since penfluridol is already in clinic, positive findings from our study will accelerate its clinical development.
    Full-text · Article · May 2016