Kennedy E, Song F, Hunter R, Clarke A, Gilbody S
Research and Development Directorate, Gartnavel Royal Hospital, 1055 Great Western Road, Glasgow, UK, G12 0XH.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;2003(2):CD000440. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000440.
The 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs, such as haloperidol and chlorpromazine, are frequently used as the first line treatment for people with schizophrenia. However, about 5-25% of these people show poor response to these treatments and side effects often makes compliance with the 'older generation' of drug treatment problematic. Although the efficacy of these medications with respect to 'positive' symptoms is well described, little evidence exists that 'conventional' antipsychotic treatment has any effect on the 'negative' symptoms of schizophrenia. Risperidone is one of the 'new generation' neuroleptic compounds. As well as its reputed tendency to cause fewer movement disorders it is claimed that risperidone may improve negative symptoms.
To evaluate the effectiveness of risperidone for schizophrenia in comparison to 'conventional' neuroleptic drugs.
Electronic searches of Biological Abstracts (1980-1997), Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (1997), The Cochrane Library (1997, Issue1), EMBASE (1980-1997), MEDLINE (1966-1997), PsycLIT (1974-1997), and SCISEARCH (1997) were undertaken. References of all identified studies were searched for further trial citations. Pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials were contacted.
All randomised trials comparing risperidone to any 'conventional' neuroleptic treatment for those with schizophrenia or other serious mental illnesses.
Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were also independently extracted. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone, haloperidol and duration of illness were undertaken for the primary outcomes of clinical improvement, side effects (movement disorders) and acceptability of treatment. For homogeneous dichotomous data the odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the number needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis.
Twelve short-term studies and two long term studies provided data on 3401 people. This review provides no evidence relating to the effect of risperidone on cognitive or social functioning, quality of life, employment status, discharge from hospital and relapse rates. Risperidone increases the odds of moderate clinical improvement (OR 0.65, CI 0.55-0.77, NNT 10, CI 7-16). It appears to have little or no additional effect on the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia but did have less tendency to cause movement disorders, largely in comparison with haloperidol (OR 0.43, CI 0.34-0.55, NNT 7, CI 5-10) for use of antiparkinsonian medication. Risperidone seems to be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia (OR 0.69 CI 0.57-0.83, NNT 15, CI 10-30, 30% baseline risk of dropping out). Those taking risperidone are also marginally less likely to experience somnolence (OR 0.78, CI 0. 61-0.99, NNT 22). Weight gain, however, is more likely with risperidone (OR 1.51 CI 1.14-2.00, NNT 13). Funnel plots show that smaller studies generally show greater benefit for risperidone than larger studies. A publication bias in favour of risperidone amongst the included studies may explain this effect. Sensitivity analyses on dose of risperidone (excluding those receiving 1 or 2 mg) did not materially change the results for the principal outcomes. Excluding data from those on higher doses of haloperidol (>10mg/day) does marginally change the results. Risperidone is less effective in achieving clinical improvement and preventing dropout but outcomes relating to movement disorders change little.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Little can be concluded about the long term effects of risperidone and generalising results beyond a comparison with haloperidol would be imprudent. Risperidone may be more acceptable to those with schizophrenia and have marginal benefits in terms of limited clinical improvement and side
“传统”抗精神病药物,如氟哌啶醇和氯丙嗪,经常被用作精神分裂症患者的一线治疗药物。然而,这些患者中约有5% - 25%对这些治疗反应不佳,而且副作用常常使患者难以坚持使用“老一代”药物治疗。尽管这些药物对“阳性”症状的疗效已有充分描述,但几乎没有证据表明“传统”抗精神病治疗对精神分裂症的“阴性”症状有任何作用。利培酮是“新一代”抗精神病化合物之一。除了据称它引起运动障碍的倾向较小外,还声称利培酮可能改善阴性症状。
评估利培酮与“传统”抗精神病药物相比治疗精神分裂症的有效性。
对《生物学文摘》(1980 - 1997年)、Cochrane精神分裂症研究组注册库(1997年)、《Cochrane图书馆》(1997年第1期)、EMBASE(1980 - 1997年)、MEDLINE(1966 - 1997年)、PsycLIT(1974 - 1997年)和SCISEARCH(1997年)进行了电子检索。对所有已识别研究的参考文献进行检索以获取更多试验引用。联系了制药公司和试验作者。
所有比较利培酮与任何“传统”抗精神病药物治疗精神分裂症或其他严重精神疾病患者的随机试验。
评审人员独立检查引文,并在可能的情况下检查摘要,整理论文,重新检查并评估质量。数据也由独立人员提取。对利培酮、氟哌啶醇剂量以及病程进行敏感性分析,以评估临床改善、副作用(运动障碍)和治疗可接受性等主要结局。对于同质二分数据,在意向性治疗基础上计算比值比(OR)、95%置信区间(CI),并在适当情况下计算治疗所需人数(NNT)。
12项短期研究和2项长期研究为3401人提供了数据。本综述未提供有关利培酮对认知或社会功能、生活质量、就业状况、出院情况和复发率影响的证据。利培酮增加了中度临床改善的几率(OR 0.65,CI 0.55 - 0.77,NNT 10,CI 7 - 16)。它似乎对精神分裂症的阳性和阴性症状几乎没有或没有额外影响,但与氟哌啶醇相比,引起运动障碍的倾向较小(使用抗帕金森药物的OR 0.43,CI 0.34 - 0.55,NNT 7,CI 5 - 10)。利培酮似乎更易被精神分裂症患者接受(OR 0.69,CI 0.57 - 0.83,NNT 15,CI 10 - 30,基线退出风险30%)。服用利培酮的患者出现嗜睡的可能性也略低(OR 0.78,CI 0.61 - 0.99,NNT 22)。然而,服用利培酮更易导致体重增加(OR 1.51,CI 1.14 - 2.00,NNT 13)。漏斗图显示,一般来说,较小的研究表明利培酮的益处大于较大的研究。纳入研究中存在有利于利培酮的发表偏倚可能解释了这种效应。对利培酮剂量(不包括接受1或2毫克的患者)进行敏感性分析,主要结局的结果没有实质性变化。排除高剂量氟哌啶醇(>10毫克/天)患者的数据会使结果略有变化。利培酮在实现临床改善和预防退出方面效果较差,但与运动障碍相关的结局变化不大。
关于利培酮的长期影响几乎无法得出结论,在与氟哌啶醇比较之外进行结果推广是不谨慎的。利培酮可能更易被精神分裂症患者接受,在有限的临床改善和副作用方面有一定益处。