Bitter Istvan, Dossenbach Martin R K, Brook Shlomo, Feldman Peter D, Metcalfe Stephen, Gagiano Carlo A, Füredi János, Bartko György, Janka Zoltan, Banki Csaba M, Kovacs Gabor, Breier Alan
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2004 Jan;28(1):173-80. doi: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2003.09.033.
Clozapine has been the gold standard for treatment of patients with refractory schizophrenia but is associated with serious safety liabilities. This has prompted the search for therapeutic alternatives for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus clozapine in schizophrenic patients who failed to respond adequately to antipsychotic medication or who experienced intolerable adverse effects associated with the medication. This 18-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel study compared treatment with either olanzapine (5-25 mg/day, n=75) or clozapine (100-500 mg/day, n=72) in patients with schizophrenia who were nonresponsive to, or intolerant of, standard acceptable antipsychotic therapy. At the 18-week endpoint, no statistically significant differences were found between olanzapine and clozapine in any efficacy measure used: Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total, positive, negative, or general psychopathology or Clinical Global Impression severity (CGI-S). Response rates based on the criteria of Kane et al. [Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 45 (1988) 789] were also not significantly different between olanzapine-treated (57.9%) and clozapine-treated patients (60.8%). There were no significant differences in measurements of extrapyramidal symptoms or electrocardiography, and no clinically and statistically significant changes were seen in vital signs or laboratory measures in either group. Both treatments were well tolerated. Olanzapine demonstrated similar efficacy to clozapine in patients who had failed previous treatment because of lack of efficacy (treatment resistance) or intolerable side effects (treatment intolerance). Olanzapine therefore presents a safe alternative in the treatment of refractory schizophrenia.
氯氮平一直是难治性精神分裂症患者治疗的金标准,但它存在严重的安全问题。这促使人们寻找治疗难治性精神分裂症的替代疗法。本研究的目的是比较奥氮平与氯氮平在对抗精神病药物反应不佳或出现与药物相关的无法耐受的不良反应的精神分裂症患者中的疗效和安全性。这项为期18周的随机、双盲、平行研究比较了奥氮平(5 - 25毫克/天,n = 75)或氯氮平(100 - 500毫克/天,n = 72)对那些对标准可接受的抗精神病治疗无反应或不耐受的精神分裂症患者的治疗效果。在18周的终点,在使用的任何疗效指标上,奥氮平和氯氮平之间均未发现统计学上的显著差异:阳性和阴性症状量表(PANSS)总分、阳性、阴性或一般精神病理学指标或临床总体印象严重程度(CGI - S)。根据凯恩等人的标准[《美国普通精神病学杂志》45(1988)789],奥氮平治疗组(57.9%)和氯氮平治疗组(60.8%)的缓解率也没有显著差异。锥体外系症状或心电图测量没有显著差异,两组的生命体征或实验室指标也没有临床和统计学上的显著变化。两种治疗耐受性都良好。在因疗效不佳(治疗抵抗)或无法耐受的副作用(治疗不耐受)而先前治疗失败的患者中,奥氮平显示出与氯氮平相似的疗效。因此,奥氮平为难治性精神分裂症的治疗提供了一种安全的替代选择。