Peter D. Feldman

A prospective open-label treatment trial of olanzapine monotherapy in children and adolescents with bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE The goal of this study was to assess the effectiveness and tolerability of olanzapine in the treatment of acute mania in children and adolescents. METHODS This was an 8-week, open-label, prospective study of olanzapine monotherapy (dose range 2.5-20 mg/day) involving 23 bipolar youths (manic, mixed, or hypomanic; 5-14 years old). Weekly assessments were made using the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Clinical Global Impressions Severity Scale (CGI-S), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, and Childrens Depression Rating Scale. Adverse events were assessed through self-reports, vital sign and weight monitoring, laboratory analytes, and extrapyramidal symptom rating scales (Barnes Akathisia Scale, Simpson-Angus Scale, and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale). RESULTS Twenty-two of the 23 youths (96%) completed the study. Olanzapine treatment was associated with significant improvement in mean YMRS score (-19.0 +/- 9.2, p < 0.001). Using predefined criteria for improvement of > or = 30% decline in the YMRS and a CGI-S Mania score of < or = 3 at endpoint, the overall response rate was 61%. Overall, olanzapine was well tolerated, and extrapyramidal symptom measures were not significantly different from baseline. Body weight increased significantly over the study (5.0 +/- 2.3 kg, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Open-label olanzapine treatment was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of acute mania in youths with bipolar disorder. Future placebo-controlled, double-blind studies are warranted.

Atomoxetine treatment in children and adolescents with ADHD and comorbid tic disorders

Objective: To test the hypothesis that atomoxetine does not significantly worsen tic severity relative to placebo in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and comorbid tic disorders. Methods: Study subjects were 7 to 17 years old, met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders–IV criteria for ADHD, and had concurrent Tourette syndrome or chronic motor tic disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 72) or atomoxetine (0.5 to 1.5 mg/kg/day, n = 76) for up to 18 weeks. Results: Atomoxetine treatment was associated with greater reduction of tic severity at endpoint relative to placebo, approaching significance on the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale total score (–5.5 ± 6.9 vs –3.0 ± 8.7, p = 0.063) and Tic Symptom Self-Report total score (–4.7 ± 6.5 vs –2.9 ± 5.2, p = 0.095) and achieving significance on the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) tic/neurologic severity scale score (–0.7 ± 1.2 vs –0.1 ± 1.0, p = 0.002). Atomoxetine patients also showed greater improvement on the ADHD Rating Scale total score (–10.9 ± 10.9 vs –4.9 ± 10.3, p < 0.001) and CGI severity of ADHD/psychiatric symptoms scale score (–0.8 ± 1.1 vs –0.3 ± 1.0, p = 0.015). Discontinuation rates were not significantly different between treatment groups. Atomoxetine patients had greater increases in heart rate and decreases of body weight, and rates of treatment-emergent decreased appetite and nausea were higher. No other clinically relevant treatment differences were seen in any other vital sign, adverse event, or electrocardiographic or laboratory measures. Conclusions: Atomoxetine did not exacerbate tic symptoms. Rather, there was some evidence of reduction in tic severity with a significant reduction of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms. Atomoxetine treatment appeared safe and well tolerated.

Comparison of rapidly acting intramuscular olanzapine, lorazepam, and placebo: a double-blind, randomized study in acutely agitated patients with dementia.

This double-blind study investigated the efficacy and safety of rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine in treating agitation associated with Alzheimers disease and/or vascular dementia. At 2 h, olanzapine (5.0 mg, 2.5 mg) and lorazepam (1.0 mg) showed significant improvement over placebo on the PANSS Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and Agitation–Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES), and both 5.0 mg olanzapine and lorazepam showed superiority to placebo on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory. At 24 h, both olanzapine groups maintained superiority over placebo on the PANSS-EC; lorazepam did not. Olanzapine (5.0 mg) and lorazepam improved ACES scores more than placebo. Simpson–Angus and Mini-Mental State Examination scores did not change significantly from baseline. Sedation (ACES ⩾8), adverse events, and laboratory analytes were not significantly different from placebo for any treatment. No significant differences among treatment groups were seen in extrapyramidal symptoms or in corrected QT interval at either 2 h or 24 h, and no significant differences among treatment groups were seen in vital signs, including orthostasis. Intramuscular injection of olanzapine may therefore provide substantial benefit in rapidly treating inpatients with acute dementia-related agitation.

Olanzapine in the treatment of dopamimetic-induced psychosis in patients with Parkinson's Disease

BACKGROUND Studies in elderly patients demonstrate antipsychotic efficacy and favorable safety profiles for olanzapine. We report results from two placebo-controlled, double-blind studies of olanzapine for treatment of dopamimetic drug-induced psychosis in patients with Parkinsons disease (PD). METHODS Patients were treated with olanzapine or placebo for 4 weeks while dopamimetic therapy was held constant. Olanzapine was initiated at 2.5 mg/day, with 2.5-mg/day increases allowed every 3 to 4 days up to the maximum dose of 15 mg/day. RESULTS Olanzapine patients showed significant improvements from baseline on positive symptoms and most efficacy measures, but no significant treatment-group differences were observed. Olanzapine performed significantly worse than placebo in both studies on the Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) total, Motor, and Activities of Daily Living scales, but not the UPDRS Tremor item or Complications scores. Corrected QT interval, vital signs, and body weight were not significantly different from placebo. CONCLUSIONS These findings did not demonstrate superior efficacy of olanzapine for treatment of dopamimetic-induced psychosis in PD. The initial dose-titration schedule and mild baseline levels of psychosis may account for these findings. Future studies involving gradual dose titration are needed to explore further olanzapines optimum use for patients with PD with treatment-related psychosis.

Olanzapine versus clozapine in treatment-resistant or treatment-intolerant schizophrenia

Clozapine has been the gold standard for treatment of patients with refractory schizophrenia but is associated with serious safety liabilities. This has prompted the search for therapeutic alternatives for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of olanzapine versus clozapine in schizophrenic patients who failed to respond adequately to antipsychotic medication or who experienced intolerable adverse effects associated with the medication. This 18-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel study compared treatment with either olanzapine (5-25 mg/day, n=75) or clozapine (100-500 mg/day, n=72) in patients with schizophrenia who were nonresponsive to, or intolerant of, standard acceptable antipsychotic therapy. At the 18-week endpoint, no statistically significant differences were found between olanzapine and clozapine in any efficacy measure used: Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total, positive, negative, or general psychopathology or Clinical Global Impression severity (CGI-S). Response rates based on the criteria of Kane et al. [Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 45 (1988) 789] were also not significantly different between olanzapine-treated (57.9%) and clozapine-treated patients (60.8%). There were no significant differences in measurements of extrapyramidal symptoms or electrocardiography, and no clinically and statistically significant changes were seen in vital signs or laboratory measures in either group. Both treatments were well tolerated. Olanzapine demonstrated similar efficacy to clozapine in patients who had failed previous treatment because of lack of efficacy (treatment resistance) or intolerable side effects (treatment intolerance). Olanzapine therefore presents a safe alternative in the treatment of refractory schizophrenia.

Long-term efficacy of olanzapine in the control of psychotic and behavioral symptoms in nursing home patients with Alzheimer's dementia

Psychotic symptoms and behavioral disturbances are a leading cause of institutionalization in elderly patients with Alzheimers disease (AD).

Atomoxetine Treatment of ADHD in Children With Comorbid Tourette Syndrome

Objective: This study examines changes in severity of tics and ADHD during atomoxetine treatment in ADHD patients with Tourette syndrome (TS). Method: Subjects (7-17 years old) with ADHD (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-IV) and TS were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with placebo (n = 56) or atomoxetine (0.5-1.5 mg/kg/day, n = 61) for approximately 18 weeks. Results: Atomoxetine subjects showed significantly greater improvement on ADHD symptom measures. Treatment was also associated with significantly greater reduction of tic severity on two of three measures. Significant increases were seen in mean pulse rate and rates of treatment-emergent nausea, decreased appetite, and decreased body weight. No other clinically relevant treatment differences were observed in any other vital sign, adverse event, laboratory parameter, or electrocardiographic measure. Conclusion: Atomoxetine is efficacious for treatment of ADHD and its use appears well tolerated in ADHD patients with comorbid TS. (J. of Att. Dis. 2008; 11(4) 470-481)

Drug-induced psychosis in Parkinson disease : Phenomenology and correlations among psychosis rating instruments

Objectives:To describe further the phenomenology of drug-induced psychosis (DIP) in patients with Parkinson disease (PD) and assess which items on two common psychosis rating instruments-the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI)-are the best measure of DIP by comparing them with the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGIS). Methods:Baseline data from two placebo-controlled, double-blind studies of olanzapine in PD patients with DIP were collected and analyzed. Results:A total of 157 of 160 patients had hallucinations, with visual hallucinations being the most common (97% of subjects), followed by auditory (48%), tactile (23%), and olfactory (16%). Seventy-six percent of subjects experienced delusions, and all types of delusions occurred with relatively equal frequency. The CGIS correlated with suspiciousness, hallucinatory behavior, unusual thought content, and hostility on the BPRS; and delusions, hallucinations, agitation, aberrant motor behavior, and sleep on the NPI. Conclusion:Nonvisual hallucinations and delusions may occur more frequently in DIP than previously thought. These symptoms, plus agitation and hostility, may ultimately be the best measure of DIP in patients with PD.

Olanzapine in the acute treatment of bipolar I disorder with a history of rapid cycling

BACKGROUND A substantial proportion of patients with bipolar disorder are characterized by a rapidly cycling course and are particularly resistant to conventional treatment. METHODS This secondary analysis, defined a priori, was conducted on a larger data set from patients with bipolar I disorder to determine the efficacy of a 3-week treatment with the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine (5-20 mg/day, n=19) versus placebo (n=26) in patients with >or=4 episodes in the preceding year. RESULTS Significantly fewer placebo patients completed treatment (34.6 vs. 73.7%, P=0.016), and more than half discontinued due to lack of efficacy (53.8 vs. 21.1%, P=0.035). Olanzapine reduced Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores significantly more than placebo (-13.9 vs. -4.1, P=0.011). Clinical responses, defined as >or=50% improvement in YMRS, were achieved in 58% of olanzapine patients, compared with 28% of placebo patients (P=0.066). Extrapyramidal symptoms were not significantly changed in either group. Somnolence was the most common adverse event in both groups (olanzapine: 52.6%, placebo: 23.1%; P=0.060). No event occurred significantly more frequently with olanzapine than with placebo. No patients discontinued due to an adverse event. LIMITATIONS The duration of this study was limited to 3 weeks, precluding conclusions about long-term efficacy of olanzapine. Moreover, a sizeable placebo effect was obtained, possibly masking optimal therapeutic effect. Despite these limitations, treatment differences in efficacy were highly significant. CONCLUSIONS These results indicate that olanzapine was effective in reducing symptoms of mania and well tolerated in patients with bipolar I disorder with a rapid-cycling course.

Retrospective Cohort Study of Diabetes Mellitus and Antipsychotic Treatment in a Geriatric Population in the United States

OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to investigate risk of diabetes among elderly patients during treatment with antipsychotic medications. DESIGN We conducted a longitudinal, retrospective study assessing the incidence of new prescription claims for antihyperglycemic agents during antipsychotic therapy. SETTING Prescription claims from the AdvancePCS claim database were followed for 6 to 9 months. PARTICIPANTS Study participants consisted of patients in the United States aged 60+ and receiving antipsychotic monotherapy. The following cohorts were studied: an elderly reference population (no antipsychotics: n = 1,836,799), those receiving haloperidol (n = 6481) or thioridazine (n = 1658); all patients receiving any conventional antipsychotic monotherapy (n = 11,546), clozapine (n = 117), olanzapine (n = 5382), quetiapine (n = 1664), and risperidone (n = 12,244), and all patients receiving any atypical antipsychotic monotherapy (n = 19,407). MEASUREMENTS We used Cox proportional hazards regression to determine the risk ratio of diabetes for antipsychotic cohorts relative to the reference population. Covariates included sex and exposure duration. RESULTS New antihyperglycemic prescription rates were higher in each antipsychotic cohort than in the reference population. Overall rates were no different between atypical and conventional antipsychotic cohorts. Among individual antipsychotic cohorts, rates were highest among patients treated with thioridazine (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1- 5.7), lowest with quetiapine (95% CI, 1.3-2.9), and intermediate with haloperidol, olanzapine, and risperidone. Among atypical cohorts, only risperidone users had a significantly higher risk (95% CI, 1.05-1.60; P = 0.016) than for haloperidol. Conclusions about clozapine were hampered by the low number of patients. CONCLUSION These data suggest that diabetes risk is elevated among elderly patients receiving antipsychotic treatment. However, causality remains to be demonstrated. As a group, the risk for atypical antipsychotic users was not significantly different than for users of conventional antipsychotics.