Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796559›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Newer atypical antipsychotic medication versus clozapine for schizophrenia.

A Tuunainen, K Wahlbeck, S M Gilbody

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Chlorpromazine dose for people with schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Schizophrenia.BMJ clinical evidence · 2012
    Pooled it
  4. Clozapine versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  5. Schizophrenia (maintenance treatment).BMJ clinical evidence · 2009
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Newer atypical antipsychotic medication versus clozapine for schizophrenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2000
    Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Indian research: Focus on clozapine.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2010
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Modern antipsychotic drugs: a critical overview.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2005
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

A TuunainenCircadian Pacemaker Laboratory (Dept 0667), University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0667, USA. atuunainen@ucsd.edu
K Wahlbeck
S M Gilbody
Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClozapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug, which is claimed to have superior efficacy and to cause fewer movement disorders. However, clozapine carries a significant risk of serious blood disorders. Newer atypical antipsychotics are safer alternatives that might share the benefits of clozapine. It is thus of interest to compare the effectiveness of newer atypical antipsychotics with the effectiveness of clozapine.

objectivesTo evaluate the clinical effects of newer atypical antipsychotic drugs in comparison to clozapine for schizophrenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: Publications in all languages were searched from the following databases: Biological Abstracts/BIOSIS (1980-1999), The Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials (1998), The Cochrane Library CENTRAL Register (Issue 4, 1999), EMBASE (1980-1998), MEDLINE (1966-1999), LILACS/CD-ROM (1998), and PsycLIT/PsycINFO (1974-1999). Trials were also sought from recent conference proceedings and reference lists of included papers. Authors of recent trials and the manufacturers of clozapine, iloperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, remoxipride, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone and zotepine were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing clozapine with newer atypical antipsychotic drugs were included by independent assessment by two reviewers. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of homogenous dichotomous data were calculated. A random effects model was used for heterogeneous dichotomous data. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) statistic with 95%CI were also calculated. Weighted or standardised means were calculated for continuous data. Due to the small number of included studies, sensitivity analyses or funnel plot statistics were not undertaken for this version of the review. MAIN

resultsThe current review includes eight studies (22 papers), of which three studies are 4-6 weeks in duration and only one study is of more than 12 weeks' duration. Newer atypical drugs seemed to be broadly similar to clozapine using a clinical global index or trialists' definitions of improvement, but this result was obtained from a relatively small number of studies. Due to the small number of studies and patients, wide confidence intervals were seen when their effectiveness as measured by symptom rating scales was compared. Social functioning was better in patients on newer atypical medication (risperidone) than in those on clozapine, but this finding is based on a single underpowered trial and has to be interpreted with caution. Clozapine and newer atypical drugs showed their adverse effect profile to be dissimilar: while clozapine produced more fatigue, hypersalivation, nausea, and orthostatic dizziness, new atypical drugs, with the exception of olanzapine, produced more extrapyramidal symptoms. The impact of these drugs and their effects on patients' day-to-day quality of life, service use, hospital admission, and pharmacoeconomics was not measured. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThe equal effectiveness and tolerability of new atypical drugs in comparison with clozapine is not yet demonstrated. Lack of statistical power to determine the comparative efficacy and effectiveness of newer atypical drugs makes it difficult to judge whether newer drugs are more effective, less effective or equivalent. Trials of sufficient power, with longer duration, measuring clinically important outcomes, are needed to assess the true comparative clinical effectiveness, tolerability and cost effectiveness of newer drugs in relation to clozapine.

Indexed as

Antipsychotic AgentsClozapineHumansSchizophreniaAntipsychotic AgentsClozapine

Identifiers

PMID10796559
PMCPMC11830471
OpenAlexW1532090998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.