SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Clozapine dose for schizophrenia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 64 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analyses of clozapine, norclozapine levels and their ratio across three genome wide association studies.Translational psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Evaluating Monitoring Guidelines of Clozapine-Induced Adverse Effects: a Systematic Review.CNS drugs · 2024Pooled it
- Heterogeneity and efficacy of antipsychotic treatment for schizophrenia with or without treatment resistance: a meta-analysis.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Randomised controlled trial of clozapine in resistant schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2025Trial
- Utility of clozapine trough level reporting in clinical practice: A four-year retrospective evaluation from India.Indian journal of psychiatry · 2026Article
- Psychosis in a 47,XXX Adolescent: Clinical Management and Multidisciplinary Follow-up.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Global trends in clozapine utilisation between 2014 and 2024: a longitudinal epidemiological study with data from 75 countries.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Article
- Point-of-care nano zinc oxide carbon paste sensor for non-invasive determination of clozapine in saliva samples.BMC chemistry · 2025Article
- Efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological interventions for schizophrenia non-responsive to prior treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Activation of the nucleus accumbens promotes place preference and counteracts stress-induced hyperthermia.iScience · 2024Article
- Comparative Study of the Efficacy and Side Effects of Brand-Name and Generic Clozapine for Long-Term Maintenance Treatment Among Korean Patients With Schizophrenia: A Retrospective Naturalistic Mirror-Image Study.Psychiatry investigation · 2024Article
- Genomic Stratification of Clozapine Prescription Patterns Using Schizophrenia Polygenic Scores.Biological psychiatry · 2023Article
- Efficacy of sofpironium bromide gel on clozapine-induced hypersalivation in patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia: double-blind, controlled crossover study.BJPsych open · 2023Article
- Noninvasive drug adherence monitoring of antipsychotic patients via finger sweat testing.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
- Clozapine-induced pulmonary embolism in a patient with no pre-existing risk factors: A case report.Clinical case reports · 2022Article
- Clozapine Induces an Acute Proinflammatory Response That Is Attenuated by Inhibition of Inflammasome Signaling: Implications for Idiosyncratic Drug-Induced Agranulocytosis.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 2022Article
- Treatment strategies for clozapine-induced hypotension: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2022Review
- Dried Volumetric Microsampling Approaches for the Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Psychiatric Patients Undergoing Clozapine Treatment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of clozapine in psychotic disorders-a systematic quantitative meta-review.Translational psychiatry · 2021Review
- Clozapine resistant schizophrenia: Newer avenues of management.World journal of psychiatry · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSchizophrenia and related disorders such as schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorder are serious mental illnesses characterised by profound disruptions in thinking and speech, emotional processes, behaviour and sense of self. Clozapine is useful in the treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders, particularly when other antipsychotic medications have failed. It improves positive symptoms (such as delusions and hallucinations) and negative symptoms (such as withdrawal and poverty of speech). However, it is unclear what dose of clozapine is most effective with the least side effects.
objectivesTo compare the efficacy and tolerability of clozapine at different doses and to identify the optimal dose of clozapine in the treatment of schizophrenia, schizophreniform and schizoaffective disorders. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (August 2011 and 8 December 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of blinding status or language, that compared the effects of clozapine at different doses in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, diagnosed by any criteria. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently inspected citations from the searches, identified relevant abstracts, obtained full articles of relevant abstracts, and classified trials as included or excluded. We included trials that met our inclusion criteria and reported useable data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the relative risk (RR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE. MAIN
resultsWe identified five studies that could be included. Each compared the effects of clozapine at very low dose (up to 149 mg/day), low dose (150 mg/day to 300 mg/day) and standard dose (301 mg/day to 600 mg/day). Four of the five included studies were based on a small number of participants. We rated all the evidence reported for the main outcomes of interest as low or very low quality. No data were available for the main outcomes of global state, service use or quality of life. Very low dose compared to low doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low and very low doses of clozapine in terms of average Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored (BPRS-A) endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 3.55, 95% CI -4.50 to 11.60, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in body mass index (BMI) in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD -0.10, 95% CI -0.95 to 0.75, low-quality evidence). Very low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between very low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of average BPRS-A endpoint score (1 RCT, n = 31, MD 6.67, 95% CI -2.09 to 15.43, very low quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 58, MD 0.10, 95% CI -0.76 to 0.96, low-quality evidence) Low dose compared to standard doseWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between low doses and standard doses of clozapine in terms of both clinician-assessed clinical improvement (2 RCTs, n = 141, RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.61, medium-quality evidence) and clinically important response as more than 30% change in BPRS score (1 RCT, n = 176, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.10, medium-quality evidence). One study found no difference between groups in BMI in the short term (1 RCT, n = 57, MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.84 to 1.24, low-quality evidence).We found some evidence of effect for other adverse effect outcomes; however, the data were again limited. Very low dose compared to low doseThere was limited evidence that serum triglycerides were lower at low-dose clozapine compared to very low dose in the short term (1 RCT, n = 59, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.49). Low dose compared to standard doseWeight gain was lower at very low dose compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 27, MD -2.70, 95% CI -5.38 to -0.02). Glucose level one hour after meal was also lower at very lose dose (1 RCT, n = 58, MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.90 to -0.30). Total cholesterol levels were higher at very low compared to standard dose (1 RCT, n = 58, n = 58, MD 1.00, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.80). Low dose compared to standard doseThere was evidence of fewer adverse effects, measured as lower TESS scores, in the low-dose group in the short term (2 RCTs, n = 266, MD -3.99, 95% CI -5.75 to -2.24); and in one study there was evidence that the incidence of lethargy (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), hypersalivation (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.84), dizziness (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.81) and tachycardia (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.71) was less at low dose compared to standard dose. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe found no evidence of effect on mental state between standard, low and very low dose regimes, but we did not identify any trials on high or very high doses of clozapine. BMI measurements were similar between groups in the short term, although weight gain was less at very low dose compared to standard dose in one study. There was limited evidence that the incidence of some adverse effects was greater at standard dose compared to lower dose regimes. We found very little useful data and the evidence available is generally of low or very low quality. More studies are needed to validate our findings and report on outcomes such as relapse, remission, social functioning, service utilisation, cost-effectiveness, satisfaction with care, and quality of life. There is a particular lack of medium- or long-term outcome data, and on dose regimes above the standard rate.
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.