Search

Unlabelled: Despite the advantages of antipsychotic treatments via the injectable route of administration, there are still reservations regarding this type of therapy, notably among health professionals. A survey conducted with patients suffering from schizophrenic disorders revealed the positive opinion that they had of their treatment. Another survey showed that nearly half of the patients preferred an injectable form, and two thirds felt they were cared for better, because of the injectable treatment. The slow release form of risperidone allows a choice between two injection sites: the deltoid muscle or the gluteal muscle. A recent study showed the satisfaction of the health professionals towards this novel form. The survey presented here was aimed at collecting the opinion of patients regarding the possibility of choosing the injection site, and the changes it would make., Objectives and Methods: The survey was carried out by the BVA Institute during the first half of 2011. The interviews with the schizophrenic patients, followed-up as out patients and treated with long lasting antipsychotics (n=281), were conducted face to face at the hospital by BVA interviewers specialised in the field of health, without the presence of any health professionals. A total of 32 centres participated in the survey; 38% of the interviews took place in the Paris area and 62% in various regions., Results: Different dimensions were analysed. (1) The perception of injectable treatment was largely positive: among all the patients, 75% claimed they currently felt better once they had started the injectable treatment. (2) The choice of the injection site appeared important to a majority of patients (70% of the total sample; 79% of patients had experienced both sites of injection), 56% claimed that it was legitimate that they be given the choice and they felt that they were thus able to participate in their treatment (58%), their treatment was more acceptable (54%), and they found that their relationship with the doctor or nurse was enhanced (53%). (3) The preference regarding the injection site went to the deltoid muscle, among those who had experienced both sites. (4) The perception of the injection sites confirms this preference, the positive qualifications often being associated with the deltoid site, and the negative qualifications with the gluteal site., Conclusion: The survey presented here could contribute in convincing the health professionals to propose the choice to patients between the two injection sites in order to improve their compliance to treatment. Patients would therefore play a role in the choice of their treatment and hence become more involved in the follow-up., (Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.)

Aims: Neuronal uncoupling proteins are involved in the regulation of reactive oxygen species production and intracellular calcium homeostasis, and thus, play a neuroprotective role. In order to explore the potential consequences of neuronal uncoupling proteins variants we examined their association in a sample of Caucasian patients suffering from schizophrenia and phenotyped them according to antipsychotic response., Materials & Methods: Using a case-control design, we compared the frequencies of 15 genetic variants spanning UCP2, UCP4 and UCP5 in 106 French Caucasian patients suffering from schizophrenia and 127 healthy controls. In addition, patients with schizophrenia who responded to antipsychotic treatment were compared with patients with ultra-resistant schizophrenia (URS). This latter population presented no clinical, social and/or occupational remission despite at least two periods of treatment with conventional or atypical antipsychotic drugs and also with clozapine., Results: There were no differences in the distribution of the respective alleles between URS and responding patients. However, one haplotype spanning UCP4 was found to be significantly under-represented in URS patients. This relationship remained significant after multiple testing corrections., Conclusion: Although our sample is of limited size and not representative of schizophrenia as a whole, the association found between the URS group and the UCP4 haplotype is noteworthy as it may influence treatment outcome in schizophrenia.

Background: Neuroleptic malignant syndrome (NMS) is an uncommon, but potentially life threatening complication of neuroleptic drugs. In 1960, Delay et al. [Ann Med Psychol 118 (1960) 145-152] described the "syndrome akinétique hypertonique"(hypertonic akinetic syndrome) and its cardinal symptoms: hyperthermia, extrapyramidal symptoms, altered mental status and autonomic dysfunctions. The syndrome often develops after a sudden increase in dose of neuroleptic medication or in states of dehydration. The frequency of NMS with conventional neuroleptic drugs ranges from 0.02 to 3.3%. The pathophysiology of NMS is not clearly understood. It has been suggested that the potential to induce NMS of neuroleptics is parallel to the potency of dopamine blockade in the nigrostriatal tract, mesocortical pathway and hypothalamic nuclei. It is, however, intriguing that NMS may appear with atypical antipsychotics (AA) and especially clozapine (CLZ), which is mainly characterized by its low affinity to D1 and D2 receptors., Objective: The purpose of this study was to review cases of NMS induced by AA agents reported in the literature and to discuss the pathophysiology of this complication., Methods: Cases of NMS related to AA were collected by means of a MEDLINE literature search between January 1986 and June 2005. As key words we used: (NMS and AA), amisulpride (AMS), clozapine (CLZ), olanzapine (OLZ), risperidone (RIS), quetiapine (QTP), ziprazidone (ZPS) and side effects. For the purpose of our review, all cases were critically examined against standard NMS diagnostic criteria according to DSM-IV. Cases involving a coprescription of classical neuroleptics were excluded., Results: Our search yielded 47 cases (eight women, 39 men) of NMS associated with AA meeting DSM-IV criteria. Patients' mean age was 37 years, primary patient diagnoses were schizophrenia (n=26), schizoaffective disorder (n=9), bipolar disorder (n=3), mental retardation (n=4) and other diagnoses (n=5). Drugs involved were: CLZ (n=12), OLZ (n=18), OLZ and CLZ (n=1), OLZ and RIS (n=1), RIS (n=11), RIS and CLZ (n=2), QTP (n=3) and ZPS (n=1). No cases were reported with AMS. Twenty-nine of these 47 patients treated with AA received no other concomitant psychotropic medications; the remaining 18 patients received respectively, benzodiazepines (n=5), Valproate (n=5), lithium (n=4) and antidepressants (n=4). A lethal evolution occurred in two patients receiving in one case olanzapine, risperidone in the second, at a normal dose range., Conclusion: Our review indicates that atypical antipsychotics can cause NMS even when prescribed in monotherapy. The occurrence of NMS when prescribing AA and especially CLZ is, however, intriguing, given its low potency to block D2 receptors. This indicates that a low extrapyramidal syndrome-inducing potential does not prevent NMS and suggests the possible role of serotoninergic and noradrénergic receptors in the pathophysiology of NMS.

Aim: The World Health Organization has defined quality of life as "the perception of an individual, his/her place in life, in the context of the culture and the system of values in which he/she lives and in relation to his/her objectives, expectations, standards and concerns". The quality of life of the schizophrenic patients has been largely studied for the evaluation of their medical, social and therapeutic needs. The impact of neuroleptics, in particular atypical neuroleptics, on the subjective quality of life of these patients remains to be specified. The aim of this study was to compare the subjective quality of life of schizophrenic patients treated with classical neuroleptics (CN) or atypical neuroleptics (AN)., Methods: One hundred patients meeting DSM IV criteria for the diagnosis of schizophrenia (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) were included in the study. Sixty-four schizophrenic patients were treated with CN and thirty-six with AN. The symptomatology of the patients was assessed using the Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale, (PANSS, Kay et al., 1987) and the Schedule for the Deficit Syndrome (SDS, Kirkpatrick et al., 1989). The extra-pyramidal symptoms were assessed using the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale (Chouinard et al., 1980). The Subjective quality of life was studied using the Lehman Quality of Life Interview (QOLI, Lehman, 1988) translated and validated in France., Results: The patients treated by CN did not differ from the patients treated by AN in terms of severity of the positive and negative symptoms. The patients treated with AN presented significantly less extrapyramidal side effects than the patients treated with CN. No significant difference in terms of quality of life was found between both groups of patients., Conclusion: The kind of neuroleptic (CN vs AC) does not seem to influence the quality of subjective life of schizophrenic patients.

Background: Approximately 40% to 70% of neuroleptic-resistant schizophrenic patients are nonresponders to clozapine. Several clozapine augmentation strategies have come into clinical practice although often without evidence-based support. Among these strategies, the combined use of clozapine with another antipsychotic has been reported for up to 35% of patients receiving clozapine., Objective: The purposes of the present work were to (1) review the available literature on the efficacy and safety of the clozapine augmentation with another antipsychotic using a MEDLINE search of the literature from 1978 to December 2005 and (2) to propose an operational definition of schizophrenia refractory to clozapine ("ultraresistant schizophrenia") for the implementation and homogenization of future therapeutic trials., Conclusion: Case controls and open clinical trials largely dominate the literature, and there are only 4 double-blind studies of clozapine augmentation with antipsychotics. The results of these studies are somewhat discrepant. Moreover, the heterogeneity of definitions of resistance to clozapine, of outcome measures and of dose and duration of pharmacological trials is a major limitation for drawing conclusions.

Background: Polypharmacy without evidence-based support is sometimes needed for patients treated with 40% to 70% clozapine who are clozapine nonresponders. Several somatic augmentation strategies are proposed in the scientific literature, with different levels of evidence for safety and efficacy., Objectives: The purpose of the present study is to review the available literature on the efficacy and safety of clozapine augmentation with somatic agents other than antipsychotics. The following classes of agents are considered: (1) mood stabilizers, (2) antidepressants, (3) electroconvulsive therapy and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, (4) glutamatergic agents, (5)fatty acids supplements, and (6) benzodiazepines., Results: Case controls and small-size clinical trials largely dominate the literature, limiting the power to draw conclusions concerning safety issues and the meaning of negative studies. Moreover, variable definitions of clozapine resistance, heterogeneous outcome measures, and short duration of treatment trials are additional limitations., Conclusion: Generally, adjunctive strategies for clozapine-resistant patients remain based on scarce evidence of efficacy and significant safety concerns. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, fatty acids supplements, and mirtazapine showed good tolerability and some efficacy, but the results need replication.