Continuing, reducing, switching, or stopping antipsychotics in individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who are clinically stable: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

The lancet. Psychiatry Pub Date : 2022-08-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-23 DOI:10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00158-4
Giovanni Ostuzzi, Giovanni Vita, Federico Bertolini, Federico Tedeschi, Beatrice De Luca, Chiara Gastaldon, Michela Nosé, Davide Papola, Marianna Purgato, Cinzia Del Giovane, Christoph U Correll, Corrado Barbui
{"title":"Continuing, reducing, switching, or stopping antipsychotics in individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who are clinically stable: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Giovanni Ostuzzi,&nbsp;Giovanni Vita,&nbsp;Federico Bertolini,&nbsp;Federico Tedeschi,&nbsp;Beatrice De Luca,&nbsp;Chiara Gastaldon,&nbsp;Michela Nosé,&nbsp;Davide Papola,&nbsp;Marianna Purgato,&nbsp;Cinzia Del Giovane,&nbsp;Christoph U Correll,&nbsp;Corrado Barbui","doi":"10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00158-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although antipsychotic maintenance treatment is widely recommended to prevent relapse in chronic psychoses, evidence-based guidelines do not provide clear indications on different maintenance treatment strategies, including continuing the antipsychotic at standard doses, reducing the dose, switching to another antipsychotic, or even stopping the antipsychotic. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of these maintenance treatment strategies, hypothesising the superiority of all strategies over stopping, and of continuing at standard doses over both switching and reducing the dose.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated antipsychotics for relapse prevention in adults with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who were clinically stable, and which compared four treatment strategies: continuing the current antipsychotic at standard doses recommended for acute treatment; reducing the current antipsychotic dose; switching to a different antipsychotic; and stopping the antipsychotic and replacing it with placebo. We excluded RCTs with fewer than 25 individuals, a prerandomisation washout period greater than 4 weeks, a follow-up shorter than 6 weeks, and those recruiting treatment-resistant individuals. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and online trial registers for published and unpublished RCTs from inception to Sept 1, 2021, combining terms describing all available antipsychotics, and terms describing continuation, maintenance, or long-term treatment for schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Relative risks (RRs) and standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses. We assessed risk of bias of each RCT with the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool, and confidence of pooled estimates with CINeMA. The primary outcome was relapse prevention. The study protocol was registered in advance in the Open Science Forum registry.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Of 3936 records identified, 119 records, reporting on 101 RCTs, were eligible, 98 of which (including 13 988 individuals) provided data that could be meta-analysed for at least one outcome. The mean proportion of female participants per study was 38% (range 0-100; median 39%, IQR 29-50), whereas for male participants it was 62% (range 0-100; median 61%, IQR 50-71), and the overall mean age was 38·8 years (range 23·2-63·9; median 39·3, IQR 35·0-43·9). Of the 98 RCTs meta-analysed, 89·8% were done in high-income and upper-middle-income countries. The ethnic group White or so-called Caucasian was the most represented (mean 56% participants per study), although this information was relatively scarce. All continuation strategies were significantly more effective in preventing relapse than stopping antipsychotic treatment, with a large risk reduction for continuing at standard doses (RR 0·37, 95% CI 0·32-0·43; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] 3·17, 95% CI 2·94-3·51) and antipsychotic switching (RR 0·44, 0·37-0·53; NNT 3·57, 3·17-4·25), and moderate risk reduction for dose reduction (RR 0·68, 0·51-0·90; NNT 6·25, 4·08-20·00). Continuing and switching antipsychotics did not differ significantly (RR 0·84, 0·69-1·02; with lower values favouring continuing), whereas reducing antipsychotic dose was outperformed by both continuing (RR 0·55, 0·42-0·71; NNT 4·44, 3·45-6·90) and switching (RR 0·65, 0·47-0·89; NNT 5·17, 3·77-18·18). Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses and by several sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including removing studies with abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation or fast tapering (≤4 weeks). No tolerability differences emerged between treatment strategies. According to the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool, version 2, 16·8% of included RCTs had an overall high risk of bias for the primary outcome. We found moderate heterogeneity (τ<sup>2</sup>=0·13; I<sup>2</sup>=61%) and no overall incoherence for the primary analysis. Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Contrary to our original hypothesis, we found that continuing antipsychotic treatment at standard doses or switching to a different antipsychotic are similarly effective treatment strategies, whereas reducing antipsychotic doses below standard doses is associated with higher risk of relapse than the other two maintenance treatment strategies and should therefore be limited to selected cases. Despite limitations, including moderate heterogeneity and moderate certainty of evidence, these results are of pragmatic relevance for clinicians, and should support the update of evidence-based guidelines.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>None.</p>","PeriodicalId":240194,"journal":{"name":"The lancet. Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":"614-624"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The lancet. Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00158-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Background: Although antipsychotic maintenance treatment is widely recommended to prevent relapse in chronic psychoses, evidence-based guidelines do not provide clear indications on different maintenance treatment strategies, including continuing the antipsychotic at standard doses, reducing the dose, switching to another antipsychotic, or even stopping the antipsychotic. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of these maintenance treatment strategies, hypothesising the superiority of all strategies over stopping, and of continuing at standard doses over both switching and reducing the dose.

Methods: We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated antipsychotics for relapse prevention in adults with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders who were clinically stable, and which compared four treatment strategies: continuing the current antipsychotic at standard doses recommended for acute treatment; reducing the current antipsychotic dose; switching to a different antipsychotic; and stopping the antipsychotic and replacing it with placebo. We excluded RCTs with fewer than 25 individuals, a prerandomisation washout period greater than 4 weeks, a follow-up shorter than 6 weeks, and those recruiting treatment-resistant individuals. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and online trial registers for published and unpublished RCTs from inception to Sept 1, 2021, combining terms describing all available antipsychotics, and terms describing continuation, maintenance, or long-term treatment for schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Relative risks (RRs) and standardised mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses. We assessed risk of bias of each RCT with the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool, and confidence of pooled estimates with CINeMA. The primary outcome was relapse prevention. The study protocol was registered in advance in the Open Science Forum registry.

Findings: Of 3936 records identified, 119 records, reporting on 101 RCTs, were eligible, 98 of which (including 13 988 individuals) provided data that could be meta-analysed for at least one outcome. The mean proportion of female participants per study was 38% (range 0-100; median 39%, IQR 29-50), whereas for male participants it was 62% (range 0-100; median 61%, IQR 50-71), and the overall mean age was 38·8 years (range 23·2-63·9; median 39·3, IQR 35·0-43·9). Of the 98 RCTs meta-analysed, 89·8% were done in high-income and upper-middle-income countries. The ethnic group White or so-called Caucasian was the most represented (mean 56% participants per study), although this information was relatively scarce. All continuation strategies were significantly more effective in preventing relapse than stopping antipsychotic treatment, with a large risk reduction for continuing at standard doses (RR 0·37, 95% CI 0·32-0·43; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] 3·17, 95% CI 2·94-3·51) and antipsychotic switching (RR 0·44, 0·37-0·53; NNT 3·57, 3·17-4·25), and moderate risk reduction for dose reduction (RR 0·68, 0·51-0·90; NNT 6·25, 4·08-20·00). Continuing and switching antipsychotics did not differ significantly (RR 0·84, 0·69-1·02; with lower values favouring continuing), whereas reducing antipsychotic dose was outperformed by both continuing (RR 0·55, 0·42-0·71; NNT 4·44, 3·45-6·90) and switching (RR 0·65, 0·47-0·89; NNT 5·17, 3·77-18·18). Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses and by several sensitivity and subgroup analyses, including removing studies with abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation or fast tapering (≤4 weeks). No tolerability differences emerged between treatment strategies. According to the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias tool, version 2, 16·8% of included RCTs had an overall high risk of bias for the primary outcome. We found moderate heterogeneity (τ2=0·13; I2=61%) and no overall incoherence for the primary analysis. Results were supported by moderate confidence of evidence and confirmed by secondary analyses.

Interpretation: Contrary to our original hypothesis, we found that continuing antipsychotic treatment at standard doses or switching to a different antipsychotic are similarly effective treatment strategies, whereas reducing antipsychotic doses below standard doses is associated with higher risk of relapse than the other two maintenance treatment strategies and should therefore be limited to selected cases. Despite limitations, including moderate heterogeneity and moderate certainty of evidence, these results are of pragmatic relevance for clinicians, and should support the update of evidence-based guidelines.

Funding: None.

临床稳定的精神分裂症谱系障碍患者继续、减少、切换或停用抗精神病药物:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析
背景:虽然抗精神病药物维持治疗被广泛推荐用于预防慢性精神病复发,但基于证据的指南并没有提供不同维持治疗策略的明确适应症,包括继续使用标准剂量的抗精神病药物,减少剂量,切换到另一种抗精神病药物,甚至停止使用抗精神病药物。我们的目的是比较这些维持治疗策略的有效性,假设所有策略都优于停止治疗,继续使用标准剂量优于切换和减少剂量。方法:我们对随机对照试验(RCTs)进行了系统回顾和网络荟萃分析,这些试验研究了抗精神病药物预防临床稳定的精神分裂症谱系障碍成人复发的作用,并比较了四种治疗策略:继续使用目前推荐的标准剂量抗精神病药物用于急性治疗;减少当前抗精神病药物的剂量;换一种不同的抗精神病药物;停止使用抗精神病药物,用安慰剂代替。我们排除了少于25人的随机对照试验,随机前洗脱期大于4周,随访时间短于6周,以及招募治疗抵抗个体的随机对照试验。我们检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、CINAHL、CENTRAL和在线试验注册库,检索从开始到2021年9月1日已发表和未发表的随机对照试验,结合描述所有可用抗精神病药物的术语,以及描述精神分裂症谱系障碍的继续、维持或长期治疗的术语。相对风险(rr)和标准化平均差异采用随机效应两两和网络荟萃分析进行汇总。我们使用Cochrane risk -of- bias 2工具评估了每个RCT的偏倚风险,并使用CINeMA评估了汇总估计的置信度。主要结局是预防复发。研究方案已提前在开放科学论坛注册中心注册。结果:在确定的3936条记录中,有119条记录,报告了101项随机对照试验,符合条件,其中98项(包括13988名个体)提供了可以对至少一个结果进行荟萃分析的数据。每项研究中女性参与者的平均比例为38%(范围0-100;中位数39%,IQR 29-50),而男性参与者为62%(范围0-100;中位数61%,IQR 50-71),总体平均年龄38.8岁(范围23.2 - 69.3;中位数为39.3,IQR为35.0 ~ 43.9)。在98项随机对照试验荟萃分析中,89.8%是在高收入和中高收入国家进行的。白人或所谓的白种人是最具代表性的(平均56%的研究参与者),尽管这方面的信息相对较少。所有继续治疗策略在预防复发方面都明显比停止抗精神病药物治疗更有效,在标准剂量下继续治疗的风险大大降低(RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.32 - 0.43;需要治疗的人数[NNT] 3.17, 95% CI 2.94 -3·51)和抗精神病药物转换(RR 0.44, 0.37 - 0.53;NNT 3·57,3·17-4·25)和剂量减少的中度风险降低(RR 0·68,0·51-0·90;NNT 6.25, 4.08 - 20.00)。继续和切换抗精神病药物无显著差异(RR = 0.84, 0.69 - 1.02;较低的值有利于持续治疗),而减少抗精神病药物剂量的效果优于两种持续治疗(RR = 0.55, 0.42 - 0.71;NNT为4.44,3.45 - 6.90)和开关(RR为0.65,0.47 - 0.89;NNT 5.17, 3.77 - 18.18)。结果得到了中等可信度的证据支持,并得到了二次分析和几个敏感性和亚组分析的证实,包括删除了抗精神病药物突然停药或快速减量(≤4周)的研究。治疗策略之间的耐受性没有差异。根据Cochrane风险偏倚工具,在纳入的rct中,2.8%的rct在主要结局方面存在总体高偏倚风险。我们发现中度异质性(τ2=0·13;I2=61%),初步分析无总体不一致性。结果有中等可信度的证据支持,并经二次分析证实。解释:与我们最初的假设相反,我们发现继续标准剂量的抗精神病药物治疗或切换到不同的抗精神病药物是同样有效的治疗策略,而将抗精神病药物剂量降低到标准剂量以下比其他两种维持治疗策略有更高的复发风险,因此应仅限于选定的病例。尽管存在局限性,包括证据的中度异质性和中度确定性,但这些结果对临床医生具有实用意义,并应支持循证指南的更新。资金:没有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信