Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component Scores Research Articles

EVALUATION OF CLINICAL OUTCOME OF ANTIPSYCHOTIC THERAPY IN SCHIZOPHRENIC PATIENTS IN PALU – INDONESIA

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder characterized by psychotic episodes. The first line of treatment for schizophrenia is the use of antipsychotics that is still subjective. There is still a need for research related to the use of antipsychotics to achieve effective treatment. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the First-Generation Antipsychotic (FGA) haloperidol, trifluoperazine and risperidone antipsychotic therapies as Second-Generation Antipsychotic (SGA) based on symptom reduction using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) method in patients with acute schizophrenia and relapse hospitalization. This research used a quantitative analysis with a prospective approach where the sampling was conducted using total sampling and the data obtained were analyzed using independent t-test and linear regression analysis. There were 40 out of 120 patients who met the inclusion criteria, consisting of patients in groups of haloperidol, trifluoperazine and risperidone therapies with a therapeutic duration of 3–10 days. The results showed that the average PANSS-EC score of haloperidol medication of 15.35 was greater than that of trifluoperazine medication of 14.42 and the p-value showed no significant difference between the use of FGA, haloperidol and trifluoperazine with p = 0.190 (p> 0.05). The average PANSS-EC score of haloperidol medication (FGA) of 15.35 was greater than that of risperidone (SGA) of 13.6 and the p-value showed that there was a significant difference between haloperidol and risperidone with p = 0.027 (p< 0.05). The multivariate analysis showed p = 0.022 (p< 0.05) which means haloperidol showed the greatest symptom reduction among the three antipsychotic medications.

Clinical study on diazepam combined with olanzapine in treatment of agitation in alcohol withdrawal delirium tremors

Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of diazepam combined with olanzapine in treatment of agitation symptoms in patients with alcohol withdrawal delirium tremors(DT). Methods Totally 60 inpatients with DT according to CCMD-3 were enrolled in a 7-day, with 30 patients in the diazepam group (control group) and 30 patients in diazepam combined with olanzapine group (research group). The delirium rating scale(DRS-R-98) was used to evaluate the severity of the delirium symptoms. The positive and negative syndrome scale excited component(PANSS-EC) was used to assess the agitation symptoms.The treatment emergent symptom scale (TESS) was used to assess the safety and the vital signs. Results There was no significant difference in the delirium recovery time between the two groups(M(QR): 24 h(24 h)vs 24 h(6 h))(Z=-0.45, P=0.65). The PANSS-EC score in research group(17.00±2.67) was significant lower than that in control group(19.80±2.43) at the 6 hours after treatment(t=4.26, P 0.05). One case of dizziness, 2 cases of lethargy in the control group; 1 case of nasal congestion, 5 cases of drowsiness, 3 cases of constipation, 3 cases of dry mouth, 1 case of abnormal liver function in the research group. Conclusion The combination of olanzapine with diazepam can not reduce the recovery time of DT, but can quickly improve the agitation behavior. Key words: Delirium tremors; Agitation behavior; Diazepam; Olanzapine

Safety and effectiveness of rapid-acting intra-muscular olanzapine for agitation associated with schizophrenia - Japan postmarketing surveillance study.

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rapid-acting intramuscular (IM) olanzapine in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia in real-world clinical settings in Japan.MethodsIn this multicenter, postmarketing surveillance (PMS) study, patients with acute agitation associated with schizophrenia were treated with IM olanzapine daily in a daily clinical setting. The observational period ranged from 1 to 7 days, including the day of initial administration. Safety was assessed by reporting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale – Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score was used to evaluate effectiveness at baseline and at 2 hours (after each administration), 2 days, and 3 days (end of the observational period) from the last administration of the IM olanzapine injection.ResultsThe safety analysis set included 999 patients, and the initial dose of 10 mg was administered to 955 patients. TEAEs were reported in 28 patients (36 events), the most common of which were dyslalia (5 patients), akathisia and somno lence (4 patients each), hepatic function abnormal (3 patients), and constipation and dehydration (2 patients each). One serious adverse event of akathisia occurred during the observation period. The PANSS-EC score (mean ± standard deviation) was 23.3±6.4 (n=625) at baseline, 16.9±7.0 (n=522) at 2 hours after initial injection, and 14.9±6.5 (n=650) at the last observation carried forward.ConclusionThe results of this Japanese PMS study demonstrated that IM olanzapine is safe and has a favorable effectiveness profile in the treatment of schizophrenia patients with acute agitation.

Efficacy of lurasidone in the treatment of agitation: A post hoc analysis of five short-term studies in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia.

This post hoc analysis evaluated the effect of lurasidone on agitation in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. Patient-level data were pooled from five 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of fixed-dose, once-daily, oral lurasidone (40, 80, 120, or 160 mg/d). Agitation was assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score, utilizing a mixed model for repeated measurement analysis. In patients with higher levels of agitation at baseline (PANSS-EC score≥14; n=773), lurasidone was associated with significantly greater improvement in least-squares (LS) mean PANSS-EC scores versus placebo at Day 3/4 (-1.6 vs -1.0; p<0.05), Day 7 (-2.3 vs -1.6; p<0.05), and at Week 6 endpoint (-5.5 vs -3.8; p<0.001; effect size=0.43). In patients with lower agitation at baseline (PANSS-EC score<14; n=754), LS mean PANSS-EC score change was significantly greater for lurasidone compared with placebo at Day 7 (-0.8 vs -0.1; p<0. 01) through Week 6 endpoint (-1.9 vs -0.9; p<0.001; effect size=0.31). Higher doses of lurasidone were notably more effective than lower doses in patients with more severe agitation at study baseline. In this pooled analysis of 5 short-term studies, lurasidone provided early and sustained reduction in agitation, assessed using the PANSS-EC score, in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Higher doses of lurasidone were particularly effective in patients with more severe agitation at study baseline. Overall, these results suggest that lurasidone may be a useful treatment option for patients exhibiting agitation associated with acute psychotic symptoms of schizophrenia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00088634 (Study D1050196); NCT00549718 (Study D1050229), NCT00615433 (Study D1050231); NCT00790192 (Study D1050233). Study D1050006 was completed prior to the requirement to register trials.

Plasma levels of Th17-related cytokines and complement C3 correlated with aggressive behavior in patients with schizophrenia.

Increasing evidence indicates that immune inflammatory processes, especially autoimmune reaction, should be considered in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia and aggressive behavior. The present study aimed to explore the correlation between immune factors (C3 and Th17-related cytokines) and aggressive behavior in schizophrenia patients. Forty schizophrenia patients and forty age- and gender-matched healthy controls participated in the study. Blood samples were assessed by ELISA upon enrollment. Positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) and modified overt aggression scale (MOAS) were used to estimate the severity and aggressive symptoms of schizophrenia patients. Plasma levels of IL-17, IL-23, and TGF-β1 in schizophrenia patients were significantly higher than those in healthy controls [(37.63±17.82) vs. (29.34±10.38)pg/ml, p=0.02; (101.40±135.26) vs. (13.09±5.94) pg/ml, p=0.01; (2864.57±2163.61) vs. (1839.69±1797.73)pg/ml, p=0.04], whereas C3 levels were significantly lower in schizophrenia patients [( 120,479.67± 65,612.50) vs. ( 208,060.21± 217,008.21)ng/ml, p=0.02]. IL-17, IL-23, and TGF-β1 levels were positively related to total scores of MOAS (p=0.02, p=0.02 and p=0.03, respectively) and PANSS (p=0.04, p=0.04 and p=0.02, respectively), whereas C3 levels were negatively related to total PANSS scores (p=0.03). IL-17 and IL-23 levels were positively correlated with PANSS excited component scores (p=0.04 and p=0.01, respectively). Our findings suggested that the Th17-related cytokine levels were positively related to the severity of schizophrenia and aggressive behavior, whereas C3 levels were negatively related to the severity of schizophrenia. This study demonstrated that elevated levels of Th17-related cytokines and decreased levels of C3 could be potential biomarkers for schizophrenia and aggressive behavior.

Effect of aripiprazole lauroxil on agitation and hostility in patients with schizophrenia.

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of aripiprazole lauroxil on hostility and aggressive behavior in patients with schizophrenia. Patients aged 18-70 years with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and currently experiencing an acute exacerbation or relapse were randomized to intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole lauroxil 441 mg (n=207), 882 mg (n=208), or placebo (n=207) for 12 weeks. In post-hoc analyses, hostility and aggression were assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Hostility item (P7) and a specific antihostility effect was assessed by adjusting for positive symptoms of schizophrenia, somnolence, and akathisia. The PANSS excited component score [P4 (Excitement), P7 (Hostility), G4 (Tension), G8 (Uncooperativeness), and G14 (Poor impulse control)], and the Personal and Social Performance scale disturbing and aggressive behavior domain were also assessed. Of the 147 patients who received aripiprazole lauroxil 882 mg and with a baseline PANSS Hostility item P7 more than 1, there was a significant (P<0.05) improvement versus placebo on the PANSS Hostility item P7 score by mixed-model repeated-measures at the end of the study, which remained significant when PANSS-positive symptoms and somnolence or akathisia were included as additional covariates. The proportion with PANSS Hostility item P7 more than 1 at endpoint was significantly (P<0.05) lower with aripiprazole lauroxil versus placebo (53.6, 46.1, and 66.3% for 441, 882 mg, and placebo). A significant (P<0.05) improvement was found with aripiprazole lauroxil versus placebo for change from baseline in the PANSS excited component score. The proportion of patients with aggressive behavior on the Personal and Social Performance scale was significantly (P<0.05) lower for aripiprazole lauroxil: 30.0% for 441 mg versus 44.1% for placebo (P=0.006) and 22.2% for 881 mg (P<0.001 versus placebo). Treatment with aripiprazole lauroxil resulted in decreases in agitation and hostility in patients with schizophrenia and this antihostility effect appears to be independent of a general antipsychotic effect.

Intramuscular olanzapine for agitated patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intramuscular (IM)-olanzapine (OLA-IM) versus controls in agitated patients. The risk ratio, number-needed-to-treat/harm, and standardized mean difference based on a random effects model were calculated. We identified 13 RCTs (19 comparisons) as follows: 7 comparisons with 1059 patients for OLA-IM versus placebo; 5 comparisons with 613 patients for OLA-IM versus haloperidol (HAL)-IM; 2 comparisons with 108 patients for OLA-IM versus ziprasidone (ZIP)-IM; 2 comparisons with 110 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus midazolam; and 3 comparisons with 412 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus promethazine, 2 comparisons with 355 patients for OLA-IM versus lorazepam-IM (LOR-IM); and 1 comparison with 67 patients for OLA-IM versus HAL-IM plus LOR-IM. OLA-IM was superior to placebo in both Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and Agitation–Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES) scores 2 h after first injection, and had a comparable side effect profile, including over sedation, extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, and anticholinergic use. While there was no significant difference in PANSS-EC scores after 2 h between OLA-IM and HAL-IM, OLA-IM outperformed HAL-IM in ACES after 2 h. Compared with HAL-IM, OLA-IM was associated with fewer side effects, including anticholinergic use, akathisia, extrapyramidal symptoms, and dystonia, and marginally less QT prolongation compared with HAL-IM. Based on our findings, OLA-IM is preferable to HAL-IM for the treatment of agitated patients. However, comparator data for ZIP-IM, LOR-IM and HAL-IM combination therapy were insufficient.

A single‐dose, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial of sublingual asenapine for acute agitation

To assess sublingual asenapine for acute agitation. Agitated adults 18-65 years (any diagnosis) presenting for treatment in an emergency department and found to have a score of ≥14 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) were randomized to receive either a single dose of a sublingual 10 mg tablet of asenapine or placebo. Primary outcome measure was change in the PANSS-EC score from baseline to 2 h after medication or placebo administration. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of responders with a ≥ 40% reduction from baseline on the PANSS-EC score at 2 h. A total of 120 subjects were randomized, 60 each to sublingual asenapine or placebo. Mean (SE) baseline PANSS-EC scores for the asenapine-treated and placebo-treated subjects were 19.4 ± 0.66 and 20.1 ± 0.61, respectively. Mean PANSS-EC scores at endpoint (LOCF) was 7.4 ± 0.65 for the asenapine-treated subjects and 14.7 ± 0.98 for the placebo-treated subjects. Change in PANSS-EC score at 2 h was statistically significantly greater for the asenapine-treated subjects compared with the placebo-treated subjects. NNT for response vs. placebo was 3 (95% CI 2-4). Sublingual asenapine was efficacious in the treatment of agitation with an effect size comparable to that observed in prior studies of intramuscular antipsychotics.

Comparison of risperidone oral solution and intramuscular haloperidol with the latter shifting to oral therapy for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia

This randomized, parallel-group, open study investigated the efficacy and safety of risperidone oral solution (RIS-OS) in combination with clonazepam and intramuscular haloperidol for the treatment of acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia, and the study explored the possibility of decreasing the efficacy of an acute 6-week treatment by switching intramuscular haloperidol injection to RIS-OS. Two hundred and five agitation-exhibiting schizophrenic inpatients at six hospitals were originally included in the study. The 47-day trial consisted of 5 days (session I) of receiving either oral treatment (RIS-OS plus clonazepam) or intramuscular treatment (intramuscular haloperidol) and a 42-day (session II) period of either withdrawing from clonazepam or shifting from intramuscular haloperidol to a RIS-OS period. The primary efficacy outcome was measured as the change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) in session I and the change in the PANSS in session II. Safety was assessed by the frequency of the adverse events. Mean PANSS-EC improvement was significant after 5 days of treatment in both groups (P>0.05) and was similar between the two treatment groups (P<0.01). Most patients' PANSS-EC scores improved or remained stable during the drawback/shift treatment period. Efficacy was not significantly different between the two treatment groups after the 6-week treatment (P>0.05). However, combination treatment exhibited greater efficacy, and adverse events, especially extrapyramidal symptoms, were lower with the oral treatment than with the intramuscular treatment in session I. These results show that RIS-OS in combination with clonazepam is an effective treatment, comparable with intramuscular haloperidol, and is well-tolerated for acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia.

Rapid acute treatment of agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder: a multicenter, randomized, placebo‐controlled clinical trial with inhaled loxapine

The present study evaluated inhaled loxapine for the acute treatment of agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder. A Phase 3, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group inpatient study was performed at 17 psychiatric research facilities. Agitated patients (N=314) with bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed episodes) were randomized (1:1:1) to inhaled loxapine 5 mg or 10 mg, or inhaled placebo using the Staccato® system. Following baseline assessments, patients received Dose 1 and were evaluated for 24 hours. If required, up to two additional doses of study drug and/or lorazepam rescue medication were given. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score two hours after Dose 1. The key secondary endpoint was the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score at two hours after Dose 1. Additional endpoints included the changes from baseline in the PANSS-EC from 10 min through 24 hours after Dose 1. Safety was assessed by adverse events, vital signs, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. For the primary and key secondary endpoints, both doses of inhaled loxapine significantly reduced agitation compared with placebo. Reduced agitation, as reflected in PANSS-EC score, was evident 10 min after Dose 1 with both doses. Inhaled loxapine was well tolerated, and the most common adverse events were known effects of loxapine or minor oral effects common with inhaled medications (dysgeusia was reported in 17% of patients receiving active drug versus 6% receiving placebo). Inhaled loxapine provided a rapid, non-injection, well-tolerated acute treatment for agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.

Comparison of Risperidone Orodispersible Tablet and Intramuscular Haloperidol in the Treatment of Acute Psychotic Agitation: A Randomized Open, Prospective Study

Objectives: Psychotic agitation of psychiatric patients is a common manifestation that needs emergent management. Traditionally, parenteral or intramuscular injection of antipsychotics was conducted for treatment of psychotic agitation. Considering that the rapidly absorbed form of risperidone (risperidone orodispersible tablet) could be used for the agitated patient, comparison of oral risperidone and intramuscular haloperidol was performed in emergency treatment of psychotic agitation in this study. Methods: 124 patients with psychotic agitation were recruited at the emergency room or inpatient ward. They were randomly assigned to either the group of oral risperidone or intramuscular haloperidol. Efficacy of both treatments was measured and compared using the 5-item acute agitation cluster from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-S). Tolerability and safety were also compared between the two groups. Results: The PANSS-EC and CGI-S scores were significantly decreased over time in both treatment groups without any significant group difference and time by group interaction effect (F = 459.7, p < 0.0001). There were no serious adverse events in both groups. Conclusion: For the emergency treatment of psychotic agitation, risperidone orodispersible tablet was as effective and tolerable as intramuscular administration of haloperidol. Therefore, we might choose oral medication instead of intramuscular injection for treatment of patients with acute psychotic agitation.

A Naturalistic Study of Consecutive Agitated Emergency Department Patients Treated With Intramuscular Olanzapine Prior to Consent

A Naturalistic Study of Consecutive Agitated Emergency Department Patients Treated With Intramuscular Olanzapine Prior to Consent

Validation of a Clinical Global Impression Scale for Aggression (CGI-A) in a sample of 558 psychiatric patients

Objective Clinical management of aggression depends on the availability of easily administrable measurements allowing reliable evaluation. The present study's aim is to validate a Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Aggression scale (CGI-A). Method 558 inpatients with psychiatric disorders and an agitated–aggressive syndrome at baseline were continuously assessed over 5 days using CGI-A and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC). Equipercentile linking, correlation analyses and linear regression were applied. Results Relationship between CGI-A and PANSS-EC total score was found to be linear. On a 5-level CGI-A scale, values of 1 to 5 points were found to correspond to PANSS-EC scores of 12.2, 16.7, 21.3, 25.8, and 30.4, respectively (average increase: 4.6). All findings remained stable when only data from patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders were analyzed. Conclusions The CGI-A is proposed as a quickly administrable scale for the assessment of patients' aggressiveness.

Aripiprazole Effects in Patients With Acute Schizophrenia Experiencing Higher or Lower Agitation

Patients with acute schizophrenia who are agitated typically manifest worse overall symptomatology and are generally more challenging to treat than nonagitated patients. In order to determine whether baseline agitation level influences treatment response, the effects of oral aripiprazole in acute patients with schizophrenia experiencing either higher or lower levels of agitation were examined. A post hoc analysis of pooled data from the first 4 or 6 weeks of 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled aripiprazole trials was conducted. Patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of acute schizophrenia randomly assigned to treatment with either aripiprazole 10, 15, 20, or 30 mg/day (N = 790) or placebo (N = 397) were divided into groups experiencing higher or lower agitation at baseline. Higher agitation was defined as a baseline Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)-Excited Component (PEC) score of > or = 14 and a score of > or = 4 on at least 1 PEC item (excitement, hostility, tension, uncooperativeness, or poor impulse control). Analysis of covariance was used to evaluate PANSS total, Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I), and PEC scores between aripiprazole and placebo within the higher and lower agitation groups. In both the higher and lower agitation groups, aripiprazole treatment produced significantly lower PANSS total, CGI-I, and PEC scores at weeks 2 to 6, compared with placebo (p < .05 for each measure). Percentage of concomitant benzodiazepine use was similar at end point for aripiprazole and placebo, and adverse events were generally mild across groups. Aripiprazole significantly improved the core symptoms of acute schizophrenia regardless of baseline agitation level. In particular, agitation symptoms were significantly decreased in patients with higher baseline agitation. Improvements appeared to be independent of benzodiazepine use or excessive sedation effects. These results suggest that oral aripiprazole is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with acute schizophrenia who manifest agitation symptoms.

Intramuscular Aripiprazole in the Control of Agitation

To evaluate response to intramuscular (IM) aripiprazole injections using secondary analyses from clinical trials. Data from one trial in patients with bipolar I disorder and two trials in patients with schizophrenia were assembled and used for three secondary analyses. Analysis 1 looked at data from "nonsedated" patients (i.e., patients with scores < 8 [deep sleep] or 9 [unarousable] on the Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale [ACES]). In analysis 2, patients were subdivided into "higher" and "lower" agitation groups according to a median split on the baseline score for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Excited Component (PEC) (median = 18). Analysis 3 looked at the patients who received a second injection within the 24-hour study period. In each analysis, the mean change from baseline in PEC scores was re-evaluated. Analysis 1 found that nonsedated patients with bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia showed significant decreases in PEC scores following treatment with aripiprazole IM (p < 0.005). Analysis 2 found that aripiprazole IM significantly reduced agitation compared with placebo in patients with bipolar I disorder who had lower baseline agitation (p < 0.01), while patients with bipolar I disorder who had higher baseline agitation showed similarly large PEC decreases with aripiprazole (-9.9) and placebo (-7.9). Patients with schizophrenia showed significant reductions in PEC scores compared with placebo regardless of baseline level of agitation (p < 0.01). Analysis 3 found that a second injection of aripiprazole IM significantly reduced agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder or schizophrenia (p < 0.05); repeated injections were safe and well tolerated. Improvements with aripiprazole IM appeared to be specific to core agitation symptoms, as opposed to nonspecific sedation, and to be independent of baseline level of agitation. Furthermore, patients benefited from a repeated aripiprazole injection when clinically warranted. These results address important clinical issues regarding use of aripiprazole IM in treating agitation.

The Efficacy and Tolerability of Quetiapine versus Divalproex for the Treatment of Impulsivity and Reactive Aggression in Adolescents with Co-Occurring Bipolar Disorder and Disruptive Behavior Disorder(s)

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine and divalproex for the treatment of impulsivity and reactive aggression in adolescents with co-occurring bipolar disorder and disruptive behavior disorders. Patients were included in this post hoc analysis if they scored > or = 14 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Excited Component (EC) and > or = 4 on at least one of the PANSS EC items, had a current diagnosis of bipolar I disorder, manic or mixed episode, and had a lifetime and/or current diagnosis of a disruptive behavioral disorder (DBD) [conduct disorder (CD) or oppositional defiant disorder (ODD)]. Thirty-three (92%) of the 36 subjects with bipolar disorder and DBD met the PANSS EC inclusion criteria. These thirty-three adolescents were randomized to quetiapine (400-600 mg/day) or divalproex (serum level 80-120 microg/mL) for 28 days in this double-blinded study. The primary efficacy measure was change in PANSS Excited Component (EC) score over the study period and at each time point. Repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) demonstrated statistically significant within-treatment-group effects for divalproex (baseline = 20.6, end point = 13.3, p < 0.0001) and quetiapine (baseline = 18.8, end point = 10.8, p < 0.0001) for the PANSS EC. There were no statistically significant treatment group differences in PANSS EC changes from baseline to end point scores (p = 0.7, d = 0.14). Mixed regression analyses (comparison of slopes, DAY*TREATMENT) revealed that there was no significant difference in the rate of improvement in the PANSS EC scores between the two treatment groups [F(1,31) = 0.78, p = 0.39, d = 0.28]. Quetiapine and divalproex showed similar efficacy for the treatment of impulsivity and reactive aggression related to co-occurring bipolar and disruptive behavior disorders in adolescents. Quetiapine and divalproex are both useful as monotherapy for the treatment of impulsivity and reactive aggression in adolescents with bipolar and disruptive behavior disorders. Placebo-controlled studies are necessary.

A Pilot, Open-Label Safety Study of Quetiapine for Treatment of Moderate Psychotic Agitation in the Emergency Setting

The goal of this pilot study was primarily to explore the safety and, secondarily, the efficacy of the use of "prn" quetiapine for treatment of moderate agitation accompanied by psychosis in an emergency department setting. This was an open-label study in which 20 patients with psychotic agitation were treated in the emergency department with 100, 150, or 200 mg of quetiapine. Physicians who were unaffiliated with the study established the diagnoses and selected the doses to be used for each patient. A rater who was blinded to the dose performed the assessments. The primary safety measure was the onset of orthostatic hypotension. The primary efficacy measure was a 40% reduction in scores on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) over 120 minutes. The secondary efficacy measure was a reduction of 2 points or more on the Behavioral Activity Rating Scale (BARS) at 120 minutes post-dose. All subjects provided written informed consent. With regard to safety outcomes, 40% of subjects exhibited orthostasis by 120 minutes, although only 25% of these patients described clinically significant symptoms. In terms of efficacy, 50% of subjects experienced at least a 40% reduction in PANSS-EC scores at 2 hours, while 68.8% showed reductions of 2 points or more in scores on the BARS over the same time period. Quetiapine demonstrated some efficacy as a sedative agent in the emergency setting, although no clear dose-response pattern emerged over the narrow dose range tested. Orthostasis was common and did not correlate with dosing. This small study did not support the use of quetiapine to treat acute agitation in potentially volume-depleted patients.

A comparison of the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus haloperidol during transition from intramuscular to oral therapy

Background: Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia who receive intramuscular (IM) medications typically are switched to oral (PO) antipsychotic maintenance therapy. Objective: The goal of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus those of haloperidol during transition from IM to PO therapy. We used additional data from a previously reported trial to test the hypothesis that the reduction in agitation achieved by IM olanzapine 10 mg or IM haloperidol 7.5 mg would be maintained following transition to 4 days of PO olanzapine or PO haloperidol (5–20 mg/d for both). We also hypothesized that olanzapine would maintain its more favorble extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) safety profile. Methods: This was a multinational (hospitals in 13 countries), double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Acutely agitated inpatients with schizophrenia were treated with 1 to 3 IM injections to olanzapine 10 mg or haloperidol 7.5 mg over 24 hours and were entered into a 4-day PO treatment period with the same medication (5–20 mg/d for both). The primary efficacy measurement was reduction in agitation, as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score. Adverse events and scores on EPS rating scales were assessed. Results: A total of 311 patients (204 men, 107 women; mean [SD] age, 38.2 [11.6] years) were enrolled (131, 126, and 54 patients in the olanzapine, haloported more acute dystonia and akathisia, experienced more treatment-emergent akathisia, and required more anticholinergics. PANSS-EC scores were markedly reduced from the IM period baseline to the PO period baseline (24 hours after the first IM injection) and yet patients improved further during 4 days of PO treatment. This sustained alleviation of agitation following transition from IM to PO therapy indicates that clinicians can maintain or enhance agitation improvements when advised only to switch patients to olanzapine or haloperidol 5 to 20 mg/d. Thus, sustained alleviation of agitation during the switch from IM to 4 days of PO treatment was achieved with both olanzapine and haloperidol. However, haloperidol-treated patients experienced more acute dystonia and akathisia and required more anticholinergics than olanzapine-treated patients during both IM and PO treatments, a finding in keeping with previous reports. 5,6 The low risk for acute dystonia and akathisia during treatment with IM or PO olanzapine may provide an advantage over haloperidol. Rapid calming with an IM atypical antipsychotic and subsequent transition to its PO formulation may reduce the risk for breakthrough symptoms that could result from changing between antipsychotics, and may reduce the risk for acute dystonia and akathisia. These advantages may lessen the possibility of further upsetting already distressed patients, and may promote compliance with maintenance treatment, thus lowering the potential for further acute episodes.