Leucht Stefan, Helfer Bartosz, Hartung Benno
Klinik und Poliklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie, Technische Universität München Klinikum rechts der Isar, Ismaningerstrasse 22, München, Germany, 81675.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 15;2014(1):CD002832. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002832.pub3.
Perazine is an old phenothiazine derivative used for the treatment of people with schizophrenia and is reputed to have a low level of extrapyramidal adverse effects. As far as we are aware, its use is limited to Germany, Poland, the former Yugoslavia and the Netherlands.
To examine the effects of perazine for those with schizophrenia or related psychoses in comparison with placebo, no treatment or other antipsychotic medications.
We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register, which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the bibliographic databases Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, LILACS, PSYNDEX, Sociological Abstracts and Sociofile. We searched the references of all included studies for further trials. We contacted pharmaceutical companies and authors of trials. We updated this search on 16th July 2012.
We selected all randomised controlled trials that compared perazine with other treatments for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses, or both.
The review authors (SL, BH, BHe) independently inspected the citations and where possible abstracts and ordered papers for re-inspection and quality assessment. We independently extracted data. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We inspected all data for heterogeneity, assessed trials for risk of bias and created summary of findings tables using GRADE.
The review now includes seven trials with a total of 479 participants. In only one trial, with 95 participants, perazine appeared superior to 'active placebo' (trimipramine) at five weeks for the outcome of 'no important global improvement' (n = 95, RR 0.43 CI 0.2 to 0.8, low quality evidence), but there was no statistically significant difference in most measures of mental state. Perazine did not induce more general adverse events than placebo but more participants received at least one dose of antiparkinson medication (n = 95, RR 4.50 CI 1.0 to 19.5, very low quality evidence).Six small trials comparing perazine with other antipsychotics, including 384 participants in total, were incompletely reported and the outcomes were presented in various ways so that meta-analysis was not possible on most occasions. In the six studies, a similar number of participants receiving perazine or comparator antipsychotics (amisulpride, haloperidol, olanzapine, ziprasidone, zotepine) left the studies early (n = 384, RR 0.97 CI 0.68 to 1.38, low quality evidence). The results on efficacy could not be meta-analysed because the authors presented their results in very different ways. No obvious differences in adverse events between perazine and other antipsychotics could be derived from the limited data. Two haloperidol comparisons did not present extrapyramidal side-effects in a way that was suitable for use in meta-analysis, but three small comparisons with the second-generation antipsychotics zotepine and amisulpride showed no higher risk of akathisia (n = 111, RR 0.31 CI 0.1 to 1.1), dyskinesia (n = 111, RR 0.47 CI 0.1 to 3.5), parkinsonism (n = 81, RR 1.21 CI 0.5 2.8) or tremor (n = 40, RR 0.80 CI 0.3 to 2.6) with perazine.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The number, size and reporting of randomised controlled perazine trials are insufficient to present firm conclusions about the properties of this antipsychotic. It is possible that perazine is associated with a similar risk of extrapyramidal side-effects as some atypical antipsychotics but this is based on small comparisons. This should be clarified in larger, well-designed trials.
奋乃静是一种用于治疗精神分裂症患者的老一代吩噻嗪衍生物,据称其锥体外系不良反应程度较低。据我们所知,其使用仅限于德国、波兰、前南斯拉夫和荷兰。
与安慰剂、不治疗或其他抗精神病药物相比,研究奋乃静对精神分裂症或相关精神病患者的疗效。
我们检索了Cochrane精神分裂症研究组试验注册库,其中包括来自生物摘要数据库、护理学与健康领域数据库、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE、医学期刊数据库、心理学文摘数据库、拉丁美洲及加勒比地区卫生科学数据库、精神索引数据库、社会学摘要数据库和社会科学文献数据库的相关随机对照试验。我们检索了所有纳入研究的参考文献以查找更多试验。我们联系了制药公司和试验作者。我们于2012年7月16日更新了此检索。
我们选择了所有将奋乃静与其他治疗方法用于精神分裂症或精神分裂症样精神病患者或两者兼有的患者进行比较的随机对照试验。
综述作者(SL、BH、BHe)独立检查了文献引用,如有可能还检查了摘要,并订购论文进行重新检查和质量评估。我们独立提取数据。我们使用随机效应模型计算风险比(RR)和95%置信区间(CI)。对于连续性数据,我们计算平均差(MD)。我们检查了所有数据的异质性,评估了试验的偏倚风险,并使用GRADE创建了结果总结表。
该综述目前纳入了7项试验,共479名参与者。仅在一项有95名参与者的试验中,在五周时,对于“无重要总体改善”这一结果,奋乃静似乎优于“活性安慰剂”(曲米帕明)(n = 95,RR 0.43,CI 0.2至0.8,低质量证据),但在大多数精神状态测量指标上无统计学显著差异。奋乃静诱导的一般不良事件不比安慰剂多,但更多参与者接受了至少一剂抗帕金森药物(n = 95,RR 4.50,CI 1.0至19.5,极低质量证据)。6项比较奋乃静与其他抗精神病药物的小型试验,共384名参与者,报告不完整,结果呈现方式各异,因此大多数情况下无法进行荟萃分析。在这6项研究中,接受奋乃静或对照抗精神病药物(氨磺必利、氟哌啶醇、奥氮平、齐拉西酮、佐替平)的参与者提前退出研究的人数相近(n = 384,RR 0.97,CI 0.68至1.38,低质量证据)。由于作者呈现结果的方式差异很大,因此无法对疗效结果进行荟萃分析。从有限的数据中无法得出奋乃静与其他抗精神病药物在不良事件方面的明显差异。两项与氟哌啶醇的比较未以适合荟萃分析的方式呈现锥体外系副作用,但三项与第二代抗精神病药物佐替平和氨磺必利的小型比较显示,使用奋乃静时,静坐不能(n = 111,RR 0.31,CI 0.1至1.1)、运动障碍(n = 111,RR 0.47,CI 0.1至3.5)、帕金森症(n = 81,RR 1.21,CI 0.5至2.8)或震颤(n = 40,RR 0.80,CI 0.3至2.6)的风险并无更高。
奋乃静随机对照试验的数量、规模和报告情况不足以就这种抗精神病药物的特性得出确凿结论。奋乃静可能与某些非典型抗精神病药物具有相似的锥体外系副作用风险,但这是基于小型比较得出的。这一点应在规模更大、设计良好的试验中加以明确。