BACKGROUND:: Treatment options for clozapine resistance are diverse whereas, in contrast, the evidence for augmentation or combination strategies is sparse.
AIMS:: We aimed to extract levels of evidence from available data and extrapolate recommendations for clinical practice.
METHODS:: We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed/MEDLINE database and in the Cochrane database. Included meta-analyses were assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria, with symptom improvement as the endpoint, in order to develop a recommendation grade for each clinical strategy identified.
RESULTS:: Our search identified 21 meta-analyses of clozapine combination or augmentation strategies. No strategies met Grade A criteria. Strategies meeting Grade B included combinations with first- or second-generation antipsychotics, augmentation with electroconvulsive therapy for persistent positive symptoms, and combination with certain antidepressants (fluoxetine, duloxetine, citalopram) for persistent negative symptoms. Augmentation strategies with mood-stabilisers, anticonvulsants, glutamatergics, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation or cognitive behavioural therapy met Grades C-D criteria only.
CONCLUSION:: More high-quality clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of add-on treatments for symptom improvement in patients with clozapine resistance. Applying definitions of clozapine resistance would improve the reporting of future clinical trials. Augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics and first-generation antipsychotics can be beneficial, but the supporting evidence is from low-quality studies. Electroconvulsive therapy may be effective for clozapine-resistant positive symptoms.
Clozapine is considered to be the most effective antipsychotic drug for patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia, but up to a third of the patients do not respond to this treatment. Various strategies have been tried to augment the effect of clozapine in non-responders, one of these strategies being electroconvulsive therapy. However, its efficacy and safety are not yet clear. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening 30 databases, we identified six systematic reviews including 55 studies, among them six randomized controlled trials addressing clozapine-resistant schizophrenia. We combined the evidence using meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings following the GRADE approach. We concluded electroconvulsive therapy probably augments response to clozapine in patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia, but it is not possible to determine if it leads to cognitive adverse effects because the certainty of the evidence is very low.
[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 71(2) of <i>Nordic Journal of Psychiatry</i> (see record [rid]2017-02956-013[/rid]). In the original article, there were some errors. On page 236, 2nd column, lines 5-6, regarding review question 8: the correct effect size for positive symptoms is 0.18 (95% CI 0.06-0.30) and for negative symptoms 0.13 (95% CI (-0.01)-0.27). Thus, the endorsement for CBT currently has to be limited to persisting positive symptoms. There were also errors in supplementary Table 8. The errors in supplementary Table 8 have been corrected in the online version.] Background and aim: The Danish Health and Medicines Authority assembled a group of experts to develop a national clinical guideline for patients with schizophrenia and complex mental health needs. Within this context, ten explicit review questions were formulated, covering several identified key issues. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were performed stepwise for each review question to identify relevant guidelines, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. The quality of the body of evidence for each review question was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Clinical recommendations were developed on the basis of the evidence, assessment of the risk-benefit ratio, and perceived patient preferences. RESULTS: Based on the identified evidence, a guideline development group (GDG) recommended that the following interventions should be offered routinely: antipsychotic maintenance therapy, family intervention and assertive community treatment. The following interventions should be considered: long-acting injectable antipsychotics, neurocognitive training, social cognitive training, cognitive behavioural therapy for persistent positive and/or negative symptoms, and the combination of cognitive behavioural therapy and motivational interviewing for cannabis and/or central stimulant abuse. SSRI or SNRI add-on treatment for persistent negative symptoms should be used only cautiously. Where no evidence was available, the GDG agreed on a good practice recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of this guideline in daily clinical practice can facilitate good treatment outcomes within the population of patients with schizophrenia and complex mental health needs. The guideline does not cover all available interventions and should be used in conjunction with other relevant guidelines. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)
Clozapine constitutes the treatment of choice in patients with schizophrenia with persisting symptoms despite antipsychotics at adequate dose and treatment duration. However, an important proportion does not respond to optimal doses of clozapine, so the addition of a second antipsychotic might increase clinical response. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening multiple databases, we identified 17 systematic reviews comprising 62 studies addressing the question of this article, including 26 randomized trials. We combined the evidence using meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings following the GRADE approach. We concluded adding a second antipsychotic to clozapine in patients with refractory schizophrenia probably leads to little or no difference in clinical response, and increases adverse effects.
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: According to some cohort studies, the prevalence of refractory schizophrenia (RS) is 20-40 percent. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aripiprazole, paliperidone, quetiapine and risperidone for treating RS. METHODS: This was a critical appraisal of Cochrane reviews published in the Cochrane Library, supplemented with reference to more recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on RS. The following databases were searched: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline) (1966-2009), Controlled Trials of the Cochrane Collaboration (2009, Issue 2), Embase (Excerpta Medica) (1980-2009), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (Lilacs) (1982-2009). There was no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating atypical antipsychotics for treating RS were included. RESULTS: Seven Cochrane systematic reviews and 10 additional RCTs were included in this review. The data generally showed minor differences between the atypical antipsychotics evaluated and typical antipsychotics, regarding improvement in disease symptoms, despite better adherence to treatment with atypical antipsychotics. Risperidone was specifically evaluated in patients with RS in one of the systematic reviews included, with favorable outcomes, but without definitive superiority compared with other drugs of proven efficacy, like amisulpride, clozapine and olanzapine. CONCLUSIONS: The findings underscore the difficulty in treating these patients, with high dropout rates and treatment patterns of modest improvement in assessments of effectiveness. Atypical antipsychotics have advantages over typical antipsychotics mainly through their better safety profile, which leads to better adherence to treatment. A combination of antipsychotics may also be an option for some refractory patients.
: Treatment options for clozapine resistance are diverse whereas, in contrast, the evidence for augmentation or combination strategies is sparse.
AIMS:
: We aimed to extract levels of evidence from available data and extrapolate recommendations for clinical practice.
METHODS:
: We conducted a systematic literature search in the PubMed/MEDLINE database and in the Cochrane database. Included meta-analyses were assessed using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria, with symptom improvement as the endpoint, in order to develop a recommendation grade for each clinical strategy identified.
RESULTS:
: Our search identified 21 meta-analyses of clozapine combination or augmentation strategies. No strategies met Grade A criteria. Strategies meeting Grade B included combinations with first- or second-generation antipsychotics, augmentation with electroconvulsive therapy for persistent positive symptoms, and combination with certain antidepressants (fluoxetine, duloxetine, citalopram) for persistent negative symptoms. Augmentation strategies with mood-stabilisers, anticonvulsants, glutamatergics, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation or cognitive behavioural therapy met Grades C-D criteria only.
CONCLUSION:
: More high-quality clinical trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of add-on treatments for symptom improvement in patients with clozapine resistance. Applying definitions of clozapine resistance would improve the reporting of future clinical trials. Augmentation with second-generation antipsychotics and first-generation antipsychotics can be beneficial, but the supporting evidence is from low-quality studies. Electroconvulsive therapy may be effective for clozapine-resistant positive symptoms.
