Biomedical subjects

G D Tollefson

Publications and source records attributed to G D Tollefson.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed1999

Olanzapine versus haloperidol treatment in first-episode psychosis.

OBJECTIVE: It has been hypothesized that the morbidity and mortality associated with schizophrenia can be prevented by providing effective treatment during the first episode of psychosis. Hence, the authors examined patients with first-episode psychosis to determine the efficacy and safety of olanzapine and haloperidol treatment. METHOD: A subpopulation of first-episode patients (N=83) from a large prospective, multicenter, international, double-blind, 6-week acute treatment study was evaluated. These patients were selected from a pool of 1,996 patients who had a DSM-III-R diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder and who also met the following criteria: 1) the length of their current psychotic episode had to be 5 or fewer years, and 2) patients had to be 45 years of age or younger at onset of first psychotic symptoms. RESULTS: Compared to haloperidol, olanzapine showed a statistically significantly greater reduction in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) total and negative scores and in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total and positive scores. Clinical response (defined as 40% or greater improvement in BPRS total score from baseline) was also statistically significantly higher in olanzapine-treated patients (67.2%) than in haloperidol-treated patients (29.2%). Olanzapine-treated patients further showed statistically significant improvements in the Simpson-Angus scale and Barnes Akathisia Scale scores, while haloperidol-treated patients showed a worsening on both measures. Compared to olanzapine-treated multiple-episode patients in the parent study, olanzapine-treated first-episode patients achieved an even statistically significantly higher response. Haloperidol-treated first-episode patients experienced statistically significantly more extrapyramidal symptoms than haloperidol-treated multiple-episode patients. CONCLUSIONS: In patients experiencing first-episode psychosis, olanzapine had a risk-benefit profile significantly superior to that of haloperidol. The study results suggest that novel antipsychotic agents such as olanzapine should be considered as a preferred option in first-episode psychosis, on the basis of both safety and efficacy advantages.

Age of Onset↗

PubMed1999

Olanzapine versus placebo in the treatment of acute mania. Olanzapine HGEH Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: The primary intent of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of olanzapine and placebo in the treatment of acute mania. METHOD: The design involved a random-assignment, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study of 3 weeks' duration. After a 2- to 4-day screening period, qualified patients were assigned to either olanzapine (N = 70) or placebo (N = 69). Patients began double-blind therapy with either olanzapine, 10 mg, or placebo given once per day. After the first day of treatment, the daily dose could be adjusted upward or downward, as clinically indicated, by one capsule (olanzapine, 5 mg/day) within the allowed range of one to four capsules. The primary efficacy measure in the protocol was defined as a change from baseline to endpoint in total score on the Young Mania Rating Scale. Clinical response was defined a priori as a decrease of 50% or more from baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale total score. RESULTS: The olanzapine group experienced significantly greater mean improvement in Young Mania Rating Scale total score than the placebo group. On the basis of the clinical response criteria, significantly more olanzapine-treated patients (48.6%) responded than those assigned to placebo (24.2%). Somnolence, dizziness, dry mouth, and weight gain occurred significantly more often with olanzapine. There were no statistically significant differences between the olanzapine-treated and placebo-treated patients with respect to measures of parkinsonism, akathisia, and dyskinesias. No discontinuations of treatment due to adverse events occurred in the olanzapine treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study suggest that compared with placebo, olanzapine has superior efficacy for the symptoms of acute mania.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1999

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizoaffective disorder. Acute and long-term therapy.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of antipsychotic monotherapy in schizoaffective disorder is limited, and further constrained by safety concerns. AIMS: We aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability and safety profile of the new pharmaceutical, olanzapine, with haloperidol. METHOD: Data were assessed from 300 DSM-III-R schizoaffective subjects from a larger double-blind prospective international study. Subjects were randomly allocated to six weeks of olanzapine (5-20 mg) or haloperidol (5-20 mg) treatment; responders were followed for up to one year of double-blind, long-term maintenance therapy. RESULTS: Olanzapine-treated patients achieved a statistically significant greater improvement than haloperidol treated patients on overall measures of efficacy, including clinical response. Significantly fewer olanzapine patients left the study early, and fewer adverse events were observed among those receiving olanzapine. During maintenance, olanzapine-treated patients continued to experience additional improvement, with fewer EPS but more weight gain than those on haloperidol. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine demonstrated substantial advantages over the conventional antipsychotic haloperidol in the management of schizoaffective disorder.

Acute Disease↗

PubMed1999

Randomised double-blind comparison of the incidence of tardive dyskinesia in patients with schizophrenia during long-term treatment with olanzapine or haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Tardive dyskinesia is important in the side-effect profile of antipsychotic medication. AIMS: The development of tardive dyskinesia was evaluated in patients treated with double-blind, randomly assigned olanzapine or haloperidol for up to 2.6 years. METHODS: Tardive dyskinesia was assessed by the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) and Research Diagnostic Criteria for Tardive Dyskinesia (RD-TD), it was defined as meeting RD-TD criteria at two consecutive assessments. The risk of tardive dyskinesia, the relative risk, incidence rate, and incidence rate ratio were estimated. RESULTS: The relative risk of tardive dyskinesia for the overall follow up period for haloperidol (n = 522) v. olanzapine (n = 1192) was 2.66 (95% CI = 1.50-4.70). Based on data following the initial six weeks of observation (during which patients underwent medication change and AIMS assessments as frequently as every three days), the one-year risk was 0.52% with olanzapine (n = 513) and 7.45% with haloperidol (n = 114). The relative risk throughout this follow-up period was 11.37 (95% CI = 2.21-58.60). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated a significantly lower risk of tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine than with haloperidol.

Antipsychotic Agents↗

PubMed1999

Should we consider mood disturbance in schizophrenia as an important determinant of quality of life?

BACKGROUND: The main objective in the treatment of schizophrenia should be to optimize individual patient functioning and quality of life. Little is known about the possible relationship of concurrent mood symptoms and quality of life. We hypothesized that the quality of life for people with schizophrenia would be inversely related to the severity of concurrent mood disruption. METHOD: We conducted a post hoc analysis of an international, multicenter, double-blind, 28-week study of 339 patients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform, or schizoaffective disorder and were randomized to treatment with either olanzapine or risperidone. Quality of life data were collected at baseline, 8, 16, 24, and 28 weeks or at early discontinuation; Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) data were collected at each visit (weekly to week 8 and monthly thereafter). Correlations were calculated between changes in quality of life (quality of life scale [QLS] total and subscales) and PANSS mood score. Regression models were used to determine the proportion of variability in the QLS total and subscores accounted for by changes in PANSS positive, PANSS negative, and PANSS mood scores. Finally, path analysis was performed to determine the mechanisms used by the PANSS mood scores to affect the QLS total and subscores. RESULTS: Olanzapine demonstrated a significantly greater therapeutic effect on the PANSS mood item than risperidone did. However, mood improvements with either therapy demonstrated correlations of PANSS mood on the QLS total and subscores which were statistically significant, with the strongest correlation against the interpersonal relations (QLS-IPR) subscore. The path analysis results indicate that the PANSS mood item's most significant path in affecting the QLS total and QLS-IPR is direct. CONCLUSION: Changes in the quality of life of schizophrenic patients is inversely related to changes in the concurrent mood disruption. Early therapeutic interventions directed at a broader constellation of schizophrenic symptomatology, including mood, may be helpful in improving an individual patient's quality of life. The possible relative advantages of introducing novel antipsychotic agents earlier in the course of illness for restoration of individual quality of life merit further investigation.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1999

Review of recent clinical studies with olanzapine.

Olanzapine is a novel antipsychotic agent displaying a unique and pleotrophic pharmacology, which distinguishes it from other existing treatments. Clinical investigations employing olanzapine have demonstrated a number of potential therapeutic advantages in reference not only to placebo but also to contemporary drug standards in the management of psychosis. This paper reviews data on the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of olanzapine, its benefits for quality of life, and economic aspects to assist clinicians in determining where they can usefully employ it.

Antipsychotic Agents↗

PubMed1998

A double-blind, controlled comparison of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine versus haloperidol or placebo on anxious and depressive symptoms accompanying schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are a common feature of schizophrenia and may represent a core part of the illness. Where present, it has been associated with greater overall morbidity and mortality. Monotherapy with conventional dopamine antagonists may either worsen or bestow a limited therapeutic benefit. Accordingly the use of adjunctive thymoleptics has been explored. In contrast, olanzapine (OLZ), an atypical antipsychotic agent, offers a distinctive and pleotropic pharmacology suggestive of a broader efficacy profile than conventional neuroleptic agents. METHODS: In a 6-week placebo- and haloperidol (HAL)-controlled trial with 335 randomized subjects with chronic schizophrenia in an acute exacerbation, three fixed dose ranges of OLZ (5, 10, or 15 +/- 2.5 mg) were evaluated versus HAL (10-20 mg) or placebo. RESULTS: Baseline to endpoint change in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale including the anxiety-depression cluster (items 1, 2, 5, 9) was analyzed. Two dose ranges of OLZ (10 +/- 2.5, 15 +/- 2.5) were superior to placebo (p < 05) in improving mood status, whereas HAL was not. CONCLUSION: Contributions from a more selective mesolimbic dopaminergic profile, D1 or D4 activity, the release of dopamine/norepinephrine in the prefrontal cortex, and/or serotonin 5-HT2A,C antagonism may explain the differential benefit seen with OLZ in the treatment of comorbid anxious and depressive symptoms in schizophrenia.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Depressive signs and symptoms in schizophrenia: a prospective blinded trial of olanzapine and haloperidol.

BACKGROUND: Depressive signs and symptoms during the course of schizophrenia are common and have been associated with impaired recovery and a higher risk of self-harm. Novel antipsychotic agents introduce new pharmacological avenues that may differentially affect schizophrenic signs and symptoms, including depression. METHODS: This was a 17-country investigation of 1996 patients with schizophrenia or a related diagnosis randomly assigned to a blinded, comparative trial of the novel antipsychotic agent olanzapine (5-20 mg/d) or the conventional D2 antagonist haloperidol (5-20 mg/d). Patients were evaluated with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and the Simpson-Angus Rating Scale. The trial consisted of a 6-week and a 46-week masked responder maintenance period. RESULTS: At least moderate depressive signs and symptoms (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score, > or =16) were seen in slightly more than half of this sample. Although both treatments were associated with short-term baseline-to-end point improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, olanzapine-associated improvements were significantly superior to those observed with haloperidol (P=.001). Furthermore, the response rate for the group receiving olanzapine (> or =50% improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale after at least 3 weeks of treatment) was also significantly higher (P=.008). Analysis demonstrated that improvement in positive, negative, and/or extrapyramidal symptoms was associated with mood improvement (indirect effect); however, most of the olanzapine treatment effect on mood was a primary direct effect (57%) that alone was significantly greater than that seen with haloperidol treatment (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Depressive signs and symptoms in schizophrenia are responsive to treatment. The pleotrophic pharmacological features of olanzapine, through 1 or more non-D2-mediated pathways, likely contribute to its superior treatment effect. Better control of the mood disorders accompanying schizophrenia holds the possibility for improved patient outcomes.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Outcome assessment and clinical improvement in panic disorder: evidence from a randomized controlled trial of fluoxetine and placebo. The Fluoxetine Panic Disorder Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: Although panic attacks account for only a portion of the morbidity of panic disorder and panic attack frequency assessments are unreliable, studies of drug efficacy in panic disorder have generally used reduction in panic attack frequency as the primary measure of improvement. The authors studied the efficacy of fluoxetine treatment in panic disorder and measured the relative contributions of changes in symptoms to overall improvement. METHOD: Patients with a diagnosis of panic disorder (N = 243) were randomly assigned to treatment with 10 or 20 mg/day of fluoxetine or placebo. Primary outcome measures were change in panic attack frequency and clinician-rated Clinical Global Impression improvement scores. Other assessments included a panic attack inventory, clinician-rated and patient-rated versions of the Panic and Phobic Disorder Change Scale, a phobia rating scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and the Sheehan Disability Scale. Correlations were determined between outcomes in individual symptom domains and overall clinical outcome. RESULTS: Fluoxetine, particularly the 20-mg/day dose, was associated with more improvement than was placebo in patients with panic disorder across multiple symptom measures, including global improvement, total panic attack frequency, phobic symptoms, and functional impairment. Global improvement was most highly correlated with reductions in overall anxiety and phobic symptoms and least correlated with reduction in panic attacks. Fluoxetine treatment for panic disorder was well tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with that observed for fluoxetine in other disorders. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide support for the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine treatment in reducing panic attacks, phobic symptoms, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in patients with panic disorder. Reductions in panic attack frequency in subjects given either fluoxetine or placebo were less closely related to overall clinical improvement than reductions in phobic avoidance, anxiety, depressive symptoms, and functional impairment, suggesting that outcome measures in this disorder should be more broadly based.

Adult↗

PubMed1998

Oral olanzapine versus oral haloperidol in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia and related psychoses.

BACKGROUND: Three studies compared olanzapine and haloperidol given orally in maintenance therapy for schizophrenia and related psychoses. METHOD: Data were from double-blind extensions of acute studies. The subjects met criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder or schizoaffective disorder. Subjects had responded to acute therapy (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total score decreased > or = 40% from baseline (Studies 1, 2, and 3) or was < or = 18 (Studies 1 and 2)) and were out-patients at their last acute phase visit. Relapse was defined as hospitalisation for psychopathology. Subjects treated with olanzapine in the three studies were pooled to form the olanzapine group and subjects treated with haloperidol were pooled to form the haloperidol group. RESULTS: Olanzapine-treated subjects experienced less relapse (P = 0.034). The Kaplan-Meier estimated one-year risk of relapse was 19.7% with olanzapine and 28% with haloperidol. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in the maintenance therapy of schizophrenia and related psychoses. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: This work was sponsored by Eli Lilly and Company.

Administration, Oral↗

PubMed1998

Health economic evaluations of antidepressants: a review.

In an era of constrained health care financing, clinicians are increasingly faced with considering the economic consequences in addition to the clinical outcomes associated with initiating a patient on antidepressant therapy. This has increased the demand for health economic studies comparing antidepressant use and associated health care expenditures in clinical practice. These health economics studies have used methods ranging from clinical trials to other types of analyses including prospective naturalistic trials or retrospective studies which may be less familiar to clinicians. Prospective and retrospective health economics studies performed in clinical practice complement the experience gained from clinical trials in assessing antidepressant use and economic outcomes in light of patient and provider behavior within the usual care environment of a complex health care system. Broadly considered, health economic studies of antidepressants have consistently found differences in clinical practice between the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) as well as among the SSRIs. These differences relate to the pattern and duration of antidepressant use as well as total direct health care expenditures. Future health economic research studies in clinical practice should focus on the economic consequences of long-term antidepressant use as well as the impact of antidepressant use on indirect costs such as productivity and absenteeism.

Antidepressive Agents↗

PubMed1997

The acute and long-term effect of olanzapine compared with placebo and haloperidol on serum prolactin concentrations.

Prolactin elevation is both a common and a persistent event with the currently marketed antipsychotics, excluding clozapine. Elevations have been associated with both acute (galactorrhea, amenorrhea) and chronic (predisposition to osteoporosis) treatment-emergent adverse events. One of the defining criteria for an atypical antipsychotic is the relative lack of persistent prolactinemia. A double-blind, placebo- (N = 68) and haloperidol- (Hal: 15 +/- 5 mg/day, N = 69) controlled trial of three dose ranges of olanzapine (Olz-L: 5 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 65; Olz-M: 10 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 64; Olz-H: 15 +/- 2.5 mg/day, N = 69) in the treatment of schizophrenia afforded the opportunity to assess the temporal course of the influence of olanzapine and haloperidol on serum prolactin concentration. Consistent with its potent D2 antagonism, haloperidol was associated with a statistically significantly higher incidence of treatment-emergent prolactin elevation (72%) than seen with placebo (8%; p < 0.001) at week 2 of therapy. Expectedly, this elevation was also persistent at weeks 4 and 6. In contrast, olanzapine-associated treatment-emergent prolactin elevations were both lower in magnitude and transient. At week 2, 38% of the Olz-H, 24% of the Olz-M, and 13% of the Olz-L treatment groups exhibited a treatment-emergent prolactin elevation, with a mean increase of 0.35, 0.52, and 0.61 nmol/l, respectively; for haloperidol the mean increase was 1.23 nmol/l. For only the Olz-M and the Olz-H treatment groups did the week 2 incidence of treatment-emergent prolactin elevations differ statistically significantly from placebo. Both the incidence of elevations and the mean increase, in prolactin concentration were less than that seen with haloperidol. Furthermore, by treatment week 6, all three olanzapine groups exhibited incidences of treatment-emergent prolactin elevation that were comparable to placebo and were statistically significantly less than observed with haloperidol. Rapid adaptation was observed in the temporal course of prolactin elevations associated with olanzapine based on both the categorical analysis of treatment-emergent high values and the analyses of temporal change in mean concentrations. In contrast to haloperidol, the magnitudes of the treatment-emergent elevations associated with olanzapine were minimal. The rates of elevation were approximately one-half to one-third those observed with haloperidol and were significantly more transient. Olanzapine, even at the highest doses (15 +/- 2.5 mg/day) used, was not associated with persistent elevations of prolactin, consistent with an 'atypical' pharmacologic profile.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Effects of xanomeline, a selective muscarinic receptor agonist, on cognitive function and behavioral symptoms in Alzheimer disease.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the therapeutic effects of selective cholinergic replacement with xanomeline tartrate, an m1 and m4 selective muscarinic receptor (mAChR) agonist in patients with probable Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: A 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial followed by a 1-month, single-blind, placebo washout. SETTING: Outpatients at 17 centers in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 343 men and women at least 60 years of age with mild to moderate AD. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received 75, 150, or 225 mg (low, medium, and high doses) of xanomeline per day or placebo for 6 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: Scores on the cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog), the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC+), the Alzheimer's Disease Symptomatology Scale (ADSS), and the Nurses' Observational Scale for Geriatric Patients (NOSGER). RESULTS: A significant treatment effect existed for ADAS-Cog (high dose vs placebo; P < or = .05), and CIBIC+ (high dose vs placebo; P < or = .02). Treatment Emergent Signs and Symptoms analysis of the ADSS, which assesses behavioral symptoms in patients with AD, disclosed significant (P < or = .002) dose-dependent reductions in vocal outbursts, suspiciousness, delusions, agitation, and hallucinations. On end-point analysis, NOSGER, which assesses memory, instrumental activities of daily living, self-care, mood, social behavior, and disturbing behavior in the elderly, also showed a significant dose-response relationship (P < or = .02). In the high-dose arm, 52% of patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events; dose-dependent adverse events were predominantly gastrointestinal in nature. Syncope, defined as loss of consciousness and muscle tone, occurred in 12.6% of patients in the high-dose group. CONCLUSIONS: The observed improvements in ADAS-Cog and CIBIC+ following treatment with xanomeline provide the first evidence, from a large-scale, placebo-controlled clinical trial, that a direct-acting muscarinic receptor agonist can improve cognitive function in patients with AD. Furthermore, the dramatic and favorable effects on disturbing behaviors in AD suggest a novel approach for treatment of noncognitive symptoms.

Alzheimer Disease↗

PubMed1997

Olanzapine versus haloperidol: acute phase results of the international double-blind olanzapine trial.

A 6-week acute phase of an international 1-year double-blind study was conducted comparing three dose ranges of olanzapine (5 +/- 2.5 mg/day, 10 +/- 2.5 mg/day, and 15 +/- 2.5 mg/day) with a fixed dose of olanzapine (1.0 mg/day) and with a dose range of haloperidol (15 +/- 5 mg/day) in the treatment of 431 patients with schizophrenia. The purpose was to determine whether olanzapine demonstrated a dose-related ability to decrease overall psychopathology with minimal associated extrapyramidal symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. The high-dose olanzapine group showed statistically significantly greater improvement in overall psychopathology based on mean change in the CGI Severity score and statistically significantly greater improvement in positive psychotic symptoms based on mean change in both the BPRS positive score and the PANSS positive score compared with the 1.0-mg/day olanzapine group. Analyses indicated that an increasing dose-response curve was observed across the range of all olanzapine dose groups. Acute extrapyramidal syndromes were reported less frequently among all olanzapine groups compared with the haloperidol group. Endpoint mean change on both the Simpson-Angus Scale and the Barnes Akathisia Scale reflected improvement for all olanzapine treatment groups compared with worsening for the haloperidol group. Olanzapine was associated with weight gain but did not appear to have any clinically meaningful effect on vital signs. Although olanzapine was associated with some increase in prolactin concentrations, increases were transient, occurred less often, and were of lesser magnitude than those observed with haloperidol.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Double-blind comparison of olanzapine versus risperidone in the treatment of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders.

Olanzapine and risperidone, both second-generation antipsychotic agents, represent two different pharmacologic strategies. Although they share some in vitro properties, they differ by virtue of their chemical structure, spectrum of receptor binding affinities, animal neuropharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and in vivo neuroimaging profile. Based on such differences, it was hypothesized that the two compounds would show distinct safety and/or efficacy characteristics. To test this hypothesis, an international, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, 28-week prospective study was conducted with 339 patients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder. Results of the study indicated that both olanzapine and risperidone were safe and effective in the management of psychotic symptoms. However, olanzapine demonstrated significantly greater efficacy in negative symptoms (Scale for Assessment of Negative Symptoms summary score), as well as overall response rate (> or = 40% decrease in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score). Furthermore, a statistically significantly greater proportion of the olanzapine-treated than risperidone-treated patients maintained their response at 28 weeks based on Kaplan-Meier survival curves. The incidence of extrapyramidal side effects, hyperprolactinemia, and sexual dysfunction was statistically significantly lower in olanzapine-treated than risperidone-treated patients. In addition, statistically significantly fewer adverse events were reported by olanzapine-treated patients than by their risperidone-treated counterparts. Thus, the differential preclinical profiles of these two drugs were also evident in a controlled, clinical investigation. Olanzapine seemed to have a risk-versus-benefit advantage.

Adult↗

PubMed1997

Olanzapine versus haloperidol in the treatment of schizophrenia and schizoaffective and schizophreniform disorders: results of an international collaborative trial.

OBJECTIVE: This international, multicenter double-blind trial was designed to compare the therapeutic profile of an atypical antipsychotic, olanzapine, with that of a conventional dopamine D2 antagonist, haloperidol. METHOD: A total of 1,996 patients at 174 sites in Europe and North America were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine (N = 1,336) or haloperidol (N = 660) over 6 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis involved the mean change from baseline to endpoint in total scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Secondary analyses included comparisons of the mean change in positive and negative symptoms, comorbid depression, extrapyramidal symptoms, and overall drug safety. RESULTS: Olanzapine demonstrated clinical results superior to those of haloperidol on overall improvement according to the BPRS and on every secondary measure, including depression. Olanzapine was also associated with significantly fewer discontinuations of treatment due to lack of drug efficacy or adverse events. Substantially more olanzapine-treated patients (66.5%) than haloperidol-treated patients (46.8%) completed 6 weeks of therapy. Statistically significant advantages of olanzapine treatment were related to 1) change in negative symptoms, 2) extrapyramidal symptom profile, 3) effect on prolactin levels, and 4) response rate. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine shows a superior and broader spectrum of efficacy in the treatment of schizophrenic psychopathology, with a substantially more favorable safety profile, than haloperidol. It meets several of the criteria for a novel atypical antipsychotic agent.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1997

Negative symptoms: a path analytic approach to a double-blind, placebo- and haloperidol-controlled clinical trial with olanzapine.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated whether primary negative symptoms of schizophrenia are enduring or treatment-responsive. METHODS: Previously, a double-blind, random-assignment trial of the novel antipsychotic olanzapine (in low, medium, and high dose ranges), placebo, or haloperidol (10-20 mg/day) for 335 schizophrenic inpatients was conducted for up to 52 weeks. Changes in the treatment groups from baseline to endpoint in summary scores on the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) and several secondary measures were compared. This article describes a path analysis to determine to what extent the total treatment effect on negative symptoms was direct or indirect (i.e., mediated by differential effects on positive symptoms, extrapyramidal symptoms, or mood). RESULTS: Significantly greater improvement was achieved with high-dose olanzapine than with placebo or haloperidol. Olanzapine had a significantly greater direct effect than placebo on all SANS dimensions except anhedonia-asociality. Olanzapine also demonstrated a significantly greater direct effect than haloperidol on negative symptoms, especially on the dimensions of affective flattening and avolition-apathy. Olanzapine's superior effects were replicated in a subgroup with SANS-defined prominent negative symptoms (N = 116) and a subgroup with a BPRS-defined cross-sectional proxy for the deficit state (N = 117). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the negative symptoms of schizophrenia are directly responsive to treatment. The significantly greater direct and indirect effects of olanzapine than of haloperidol on negative symptoms are likely related to olanzapine's pleotrophic pharmacology, which includes dopaminergic, serotonergic, muscarinic, and adrenergic activities. The results contribute to the hypothesis that negative symptoms may be under the influence of several neurotransmitters within one or more neuroanatomic circuits.

Adolescent↗

PubMed1997

Blind, controlled, long-term study of the comparative incidence of treatment-emergent tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine or haloperidol.

OBJECTIVE: Tardive dyskinesia is a serious and common complication of neuroleptic treatment. Olanzapine is a novel antipsychotic agent exhibiting regional mesolimbic dopaminergic selectivity and a broad-based pharmacology encompassing serotonin, dopamine, muscarinic, and adrenergic receptor binding affinities. The authors' goal was to compare the incidence of tardive dyskinesia among patients receiving olanzapine and those receiving the conventional dopamine 2 antagonist haloperidol. METHOD: Data were analyzed from three actively controlled and blind long-term responder studies of subjects meeting DSM-III-R criteria for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder treated with olanzapine (N = 707, up to 20 mg/day, 237 median days of exposure) or haloperidol (N = 197, up to 20 mg/day, 203 median days of exposure) who did not have evidence of tardive dyskinesia at baseline. All of the subjects had a chronic disease course (mean greater than 10 years), and there were no significant between-treatment group differences in demographic or disease characteristics. The Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale and research diagnostic criteria for tardive dyskinesia were used to define the comparative incidence rates of long-term treatment-emergent tardive dyskinesia. RESULTS: The incidence of newly emergent tardive dyskinesia at any visit after baseline, at the final visit, and at the final two clinical assessments was statistically significantly lower among olanzapine-treated patients than among haloperidol-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support an atypical extrapyramidal symptom profile and the potential of a significantly lower risk of tardive dyskinesia with olanzapine than with haloperidol among patients requiring maintenance antipsychotic treatment.

Adult↗