ReviewCNS drugs2004
The generic alternative in schizophrenia: opportunity or threat?
Review in CNS drugs, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does China's competitive generic substitution policy deliver equivalent clinical outcomes? A pilot study with two generic formulations of olanzepine.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Rational use of generic psychotropic drugs.CNS drugs · 2013Review
- Article
- A pharmaco-economic analysis of patients with schizophrenia switching to generic risperidone involving a possible compliance loss.BMC health services research · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia often requires careful dosage titration to achieve satisfactory symptom control whilst minimising the risk of adverse effects. Relapses requiring hospitalisation are an important potential source of additional cost for the health service and any inadequate symptom control increases the indirect costs of schizophrenia relating to, for example, the need for sheltered accommodation or intensive social services support. The availability of generic drugs is widely regarded as an opportunity to reduce expenditure on drug costs and deploy limited resources more widely and effectively. However, generic drugs may differ from branded drugs in their formulation and may not show precise bioequivalence with the branded product. This may have consequences for the pharmacokinetic profile of the generic drug. A higher maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) could lead to increased or emergent adverse effects, whereas a decreased absorption or minimum plasma concentration (C(min)) may result in a reduced therapeutic effect. For example, plasma levels of clozapine are critical to therapeutic response. Symptom aggravation occurred in approximately 10% of patients switched from branded to generic clozapine in a small, randomised, crossover study. Patients with schizophrenia may also show suspicion and hostility regarding their treatment. This may result in unwillingness to take an unfamiliar medication and decreased compliance, thus increasing the risk of a relapse. Thus, great care should be taken by psychiatrists when switching patients with schizophrenia from branded to generic antipsychotic drugs; this entails monitoring clinical outcome closely and adjusting the treatment in case of symptom aggravation or emergence of adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.