Levomepromazine versus chlorpromazine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia: a double-blind randomized trial

被引:0
|
作者
Lal, S
Thavundayil, JX
Nair, NPV
Annable, L
Kin, NY
Gabriel, A
Schwartz, G
机构
[1] Douglas Hosp, Res Ctr, Verdun, PQ H4H 1R3, Canada
[2] McGill Univ, Dept Psychiat, Ctr Hlth, Montreal, PQ H3A 2T5, Canada
[3] Montreal Gen Hosp, Dept Psychiat, Montreal, PQ H3G 1A4, Canada
来源
JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY & NEUROSCIENCE | 2006年 / 31卷 / 04期
关键词
chlorpromazine; haloperidol; levomepromazine; schizophrenia; treatment resistance;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Objective: We compared the effect of levomepromazine (LMP) with chlorpromazine (CPZ) in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Methods: We carried out a double-blind, parallel group study (n = 19/arm) with balanced randomization in blocks of 4 and stratification by sex. Subjects entered a 30-week trial, of which phases I-III were open: phase I (wk 0-6) baseline; phase II (wk 7-9) stepwise transition to haloperidol (HAL), 30 mg/d, plus benztropine (BT), 4 mg/d; phase III (wk 10-15) HAL, 40-60 mg/d, plus BT, 4-6 mg/d; phase IV (wk 16-20) stepwise transition to LMP or CPZ (500 mg/d) following randomization; phase V (wk 21-28) stepwise increase of LMP or CPZ (600-1000 mg/d, dose reduction permitted) to establish optimum dose; and phase VI (wk 29-30) optimized dose maintained. Criteria for TRS were based on those established by Kane et al in 1988. The criterion for a response to treatment was a reduction of 25% or more in total Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score. Results: Both LMP (p = 0.007) and CPZ (p = 0.030) improved TRS relative to baseline. Although there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in treatment response at study end point, hierarchical linear modelling of longitudinal outcome revealed a significant (p = 0.006) advantage of LMP over CPZ for the BPRS total score. Ten of 19 participants on LMP and 8 of 19 on CPZ met the criterion for treatment response, and 9 of the 18 responders did so on 200-700 mg/d phenothiazine. The mean dose of responders was 710 (standard deviation [SD] 265) mg/d (LMP) and 722 (SD 272) mg/d (CPZ). Akathisia was associated with a nonresponse to phenothiazines ( p= 0.010). BPRS scores increased significantly on HAL (p = 0.006). Two of 19 participants on LMP and 5 of 19 on CPZ withdrew early from the study. Conclusion: LMP and CPZ may be useful in the management of TRS. A modest advantage of LMP compared with CPZ was seen in longitudinal analysis. High doses of neuroleptics may contribute to TRS; reduction of neuroleptics to modest or moderate doses should be considered before categorizing a patient as treatment resistant.
引用
收藏
页码:271 / 279
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A double-blind comparative study of clozapine versus chlorpromazine on Chinese patients with treatment-refractory schizophrenia
    Hong, CJ
    Chen, JY
    Chiu, HJ
    Sim, CB
    INTERNATIONAL CLINICAL PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 1997, 12 (03) : 123 - 130
  • [42] Olanzapine vs. chlorpromazine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia
    Conley, RR
    Tamminga, CA
    PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY BULLETIN, 1997, 33 (03) : 471 - 471
  • [43] Quetiapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of delirium: a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial
    Maneeton, Benchalak
    Maneeton, Narong
    Srisurapanont, Manit
    Chittawatanarat, Kaweesak
    DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY, 2013, 7 : 657 - 667
  • [44] Olanzapine vs. chlorpromazine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia
    Conley, RR
    Tamminga, CA
    Beasley, C
    BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 1997, 41 : 246 - 246
  • [45] Efficacy and safety of intravenous ketamine treatment in Japanese patients with treatment-resistant depression: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial
    Ohtani, Yohei
    Tani, Hideaki
    Nomoto-Takahashi, Kie
    Yatomi, Taisuke
    Yonezawa, Kengo
    Tomiyama, Sota
    Nagai, Nobuhiro
    Kusudo, Keisuke
    Honda, Shiori
    Moriyama, Sotaro
    Nakajima, Shinichiro
    Yamada, Takashige
    Morisaki, Hiroshi
    Iwabuchi, Yu
    Jinzaki, Masahiro
    Yoshimura, Kimio
    Eiro, Tsuyoshi
    Tsugawa, Sakiko
    Ichijo, Sadamitsu
    Fujimoto, Yu
    Miyazaki, Tomoyuki
    Takahashi, Takuya
    Uchida, Hiroyuki
    PSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES, 2024, 78 (12) : 765 - 775
  • [46] A randomized, double-blind trial of anidulafungin versus fluconazole for the treatment of esophageal candidiasis
    Krause, DS
    Simjee, AE
    van Rensburg, C
    Viljoen, J
    Walsh, TJ
    Goldstein, BP
    Wible, M
    Henkel, T
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2004, 39 (06) : 770 - 775
  • [47] A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND TRIAL OF CEFTRIAXONE VERSUS NO TREATMENT FOR ABDOMINAL HYSTERECTOMY
    MAMSEN, A
    HANSEN, V
    MOLLER, BR
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 1992, 47 (03): : 235 - 238
  • [48] EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF INTRAVENOUS KETAMINE TREATMENT IN JAPANESE PATIENTS WITH TREATMENT-RESISTANT DEPRESSION: A DOUBLE-BLIND, RANDOMIZED, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED TRIAL
    Ohtani, Yohei
    Tani, Hideaki
    Nomoto-Takahashi, Kie
    Yatomi, Taisuke
    Yonezawa, Kengo
    Tomiyama, Sota
    Nagai, Nobuhiro
    Kusudo, Keisuke
    Honda, Shiori
    Nakajima, Shinichiro
    Eiro, Tsuyoshi
    Miyazaki, Tomoyuki
    Takahashi, Takuya
    Uchida, Hiroyuki
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2025, 28 : i318 - i319
  • [49] SULPIRIDE VERSUS HALOPERIDOL IN SCHIZOPHRENIA - DOUBLE-BLIND COMPARATIVE TRIAL
    CASSANO, GB
    CASTROGIOVANNI, P
    CONTI, L
    BONOLLO, L
    CURRENT THERAPEUTIC RESEARCH-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, 1975, 17 (02): : 189 - 201
  • [50] Pindolol augmentation in treatment-resistant obsessive compulsive disorder: a double-blind placebo controlled trial
    Dannon, PN
    Sasson, Y
    Hirschmann, S
    Iancu, I
    Grunhaus, LJ
    Zohar, J
    EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2000, 10 (03) : 165 - 169