长效注射与口服抗精神病药物治疗早期精神分裂症谱系障碍患者的疗效和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2024-06-02 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20451253241257062
Giovanni Vita, Angelantonio Tavella, Giovanni Ostuzzi, Federico Tedeschi, Michele De Prisco, Rafael Segarra, Marco Solmi, Corrado Barbui, Christoph U Correll
{"title":"长效注射与口服抗精神病药物治疗早期精神分裂症谱系障碍患者的疗效和安全性:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Giovanni Vita, Angelantonio Tavella, Giovanni Ostuzzi, Federico Tedeschi, Michele De Prisco, Rafael Segarra, Marco Solmi, Corrado Barbui, Christoph U Correll","doi":"10.1177/20451253241257062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) have advantages over oral antipsychotics (OAPs) in preventing relapse and hospitalization in chronically ill patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSDs), but evidence in patients with first-episode/recent-onset, that is, early-phase-SSDs is less clear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the relative medium- and long-term efficacy and safety of LAIs <i>versus</i> OAPs in the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase SSDs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched major electronic databases for head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LAIs and OAPs for the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase-SSDs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Pairwise, random-effects meta-analysis. Relapse/hospitalization and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) measured at study-endpoint were co-primary outcomes, calculating risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses sought to identify factors moderating differences in efficacy or acceptability between LAIs and OAPs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 11 head-to-head RCTs (<i>n</i> = 2374, median age = 25.2 years, males = 68.4%, median illness duration = 45.8 weeks) lasting 13-104 (median = 78) weeks, no significant differences emerged between LAIs and OAPs for relapse/hospitalization prevention (RR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.58-1.06, <i>p</i> = 0.13) and acceptability (RR = 0.92, 95%CI = 0.80-1.05, <i>p</i> = 0.20). The included trials were highly heterogeneous regarding methodology and patient populations. LAIs outperformed OAPs in preventing relapse/hospitalization in studies with stable patients (RR = 0.65, 95%CI = 0.45-0.92), pragmatic design (RR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.54-0.82), and strict intent-to-treat approach (RR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.52-0.80). Furthermore, LAIs were associated with better acceptability in studies with schizophrenia patients only (RR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.79-0.95), longer illness duration (RR = 0.88, 95%CI = 0.80-0.97), unstable patients (RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99) and allowed OAP supplementation of LAIs (RR = 0.90, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LAIs and OAPs did not differ significantly regarding relapse prevention/hospitalization and acceptability. However, in nine subgroup analyses, LAIs were superior to OAPs in patients with EP-SSDs with indicators of higher quality and/or pragmatic design regarding relapse/hospitalization prevention (four subgroup analyses) and/or reduced all-cause discontinuation (five subgroup analyses), without any instance of OAP superiority <i>versus</i> LAIs. More high-quality pragmatic trials comparing LAIs with OAPs in EP-SSDs are needed.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>CRD42023407120 (PROSPERO).</p>","PeriodicalId":23127,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11145998/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable <i>versus</i> oral antipsychotics in the treatment of patients with early-phase schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Giovanni Vita, Angelantonio Tavella, Giovanni Ostuzzi, Federico Tedeschi, Michele De Prisco, Rafael Segarra, Marco Solmi, Corrado Barbui, Christoph U Correll\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20451253241257062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) have advantages over oral antipsychotics (OAPs) in preventing relapse and hospitalization in chronically ill patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSDs), but evidence in patients with first-episode/recent-onset, that is, early-phase-SSDs is less clear.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the relative medium- and long-term efficacy and safety of LAIs <i>versus</i> OAPs in the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase SSDs.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched major electronic databases for head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LAIs and OAPs for the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase-SSDs.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Pairwise, random-effects meta-analysis. Relapse/hospitalization and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) measured at study-endpoint were co-primary outcomes, calculating risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses sought to identify factors moderating differences in efficacy or acceptability between LAIs and OAPs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 11 head-to-head RCTs (<i>n</i> = 2374, median age = 25.2 years, males = 68.4%, median illness duration = 45.8 weeks) lasting 13-104 (median = 78) weeks, no significant differences emerged between LAIs and OAPs for relapse/hospitalization prevention (RR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.58-1.06, <i>p</i> = 0.13) and acceptability (RR = 0.92, 95%CI = 0.80-1.05, <i>p</i> = 0.20). The included trials were highly heterogeneous regarding methodology and patient populations. LAIs outperformed OAPs in preventing relapse/hospitalization in studies with stable patients (RR = 0.65, 95%CI = 0.45-0.92), pragmatic design (RR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.54-0.82), and strict intent-to-treat approach (RR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.52-0.80). Furthermore, LAIs were associated with better acceptability in studies with schizophrenia patients only (RR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.79-0.95), longer illness duration (RR = 0.88, 95%CI = 0.80-0.97), unstable patients (RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99) and allowed OAP supplementation of LAIs (RR = 0.90, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LAIs and OAPs did not differ significantly regarding relapse prevention/hospitalization and acceptability. However, in nine subgroup analyses, LAIs were superior to OAPs in patients with EP-SSDs with indicators of higher quality and/or pragmatic design regarding relapse/hospitalization prevention (four subgroup analyses) and/or reduced all-cause discontinuation (five subgroup analyses), without any instance of OAP superiority <i>versus</i> LAIs. More high-quality pragmatic trials comparing LAIs with OAPs in EP-SSDs are needed.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>CRD42023407120 (PROSPERO).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23127,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11145998/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20451253241257062\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20451253241257062","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:长效注射用抗精神病药物(LAIs)与口服抗精神病药物(OAPs)相比,在预防精神分裂症谱系障碍(SSDs)慢性病患者复发和住院治疗方面具有优势,但在初发/复发,即早期SSDs患者中的证据并不明确:评估LAIs与OAPs在早期SSD患者维持治疗中的中长期疗效和安全性:我们在主要电子数据库中检索了头对头随机对照试验(RCT),比较了LAIs和OAPs在早期SSD患者维持治疗中的疗效:设计:配对随机效应荟萃分析。以研究终点衡量的复发/住院和可接受性(全因停药)为共同主要结果,计算风险比(RR)及其95%置信区间(CI)。亚组分析旨在确定调节LAIs和OAPs疗效或可接受性差异的因素:在11项头对头RCT(n = 2374,中位年龄 = 25.2岁,男性 = 68.4%,中位病程 = 45.8周)中,持续13-104周(中位 = 78周)的LAI和OAP在预防复发/住院(RR = 0.79,95%CI = 0.58-1.06,p = 0.13)和可接受性(RR = 0.92,95%CI = 0.80-1.05,p = 0.20)方面无显著差异。纳入的试验在方法和患者人群方面存在很大差异。在有稳定患者(RR = 0.65,95%CI = 0.45-0.92)、实用设计(RR = 0.67,95%CI = 0.54-0.82)和严格意向治疗方法(RR = 0.64,95%CI = 0.52-0.80)的研究中,LAIs在预防复发/住院方面优于OAPs。此外,在仅对精神分裂症患者(RR = 0.87,95%CI = 0.79-0.95)、病程较长(RR = 0.88,95%CI = 0.80-0.97)、病情不稳定的患者(RR = 0.89,95%CI = 0.81-0.99)进行的研究中,LAIs与更好的可接受性相关,并允许在LAIs中补充OAP(RR = 0.90,95%CI = 0.81-0.99):结论:LAIs和OAPs在预防复发/住院和可接受性方面没有明显差异。然而,在九个亚组分析中,在预防复发/住院(四个亚组分析)和/或减少全因停药(五个亚组分析)方面,LAIs在EP-SSD患者中优于OAPs,而OAPs在预防复发/住院(四个亚组分析)和/或减少全因停药(五个亚组分析)方面的质量指标和/或实用性设计指标均高于LAIs,但没有任何OAPs优于LAIs的实例。需要在 EP-SSDs 中开展更多比较 LAI 与 OAP 的高质量务实试验:试验注册:CRD42023407120(PROCEO)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in the treatment of patients with early-phase schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) have advantages over oral antipsychotics (OAPs) in preventing relapse and hospitalization in chronically ill patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders (SSDs), but evidence in patients with first-episode/recent-onset, that is, early-phase-SSDs is less clear.

Objectives: To assess the relative medium- and long-term efficacy and safety of LAIs versus OAPs in the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase SSDs.

Method: We searched major electronic databases for head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LAIs and OAPs for the maintenance treatment of patients with early-phase-SSDs.

Design: Pairwise, random-effects meta-analysis. Relapse/hospitalization and acceptability (all-cause discontinuation) measured at study-endpoint were co-primary outcomes, calculating risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses sought to identify factors moderating differences in efficacy or acceptability between LAIs and OAPs.

Results: Across 11 head-to-head RCTs (n = 2374, median age = 25.2 years, males = 68.4%, median illness duration = 45.8 weeks) lasting 13-104 (median = 78) weeks, no significant differences emerged between LAIs and OAPs for relapse/hospitalization prevention (RR = 0.79, 95%CI = 0.58-1.06, p = 0.13) and acceptability (RR = 0.92, 95%CI = 0.80-1.05, p = 0.20). The included trials were highly heterogeneous regarding methodology and patient populations. LAIs outperformed OAPs in preventing relapse/hospitalization in studies with stable patients (RR = 0.65, 95%CI = 0.45-0.92), pragmatic design (RR = 0.67, 95%CI = 0.54-0.82), and strict intent-to-treat approach (RR = 0.64, 95%CI = 0.52-0.80). Furthermore, LAIs were associated with better acceptability in studies with schizophrenia patients only (RR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.79-0.95), longer illness duration (RR = 0.88, 95%CI = 0.80-0.97), unstable patients (RR = 0.89, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99) and allowed OAP supplementation of LAIs (RR = 0.90, 95%CI = 0.81-0.99).

Conclusion: LAIs and OAPs did not differ significantly regarding relapse prevention/hospitalization and acceptability. However, in nine subgroup analyses, LAIs were superior to OAPs in patients with EP-SSDs with indicators of higher quality and/or pragmatic design regarding relapse/hospitalization prevention (four subgroup analyses) and/or reduced all-cause discontinuation (five subgroup analyses), without any instance of OAP superiority versus LAIs. More high-quality pragmatic trials comparing LAIs with OAPs in EP-SSDs are needed.

Trial registration: CRD42023407120 (PROSPERO).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
35
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of psychopharmacology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in psychopharmacology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信