Comparative Study of Aripiprazole, Quetiapine and Ziprasidone in Treatment of First Episode Psychosis: 3-year Follow-up

Overview

The selection of antipsychotic in early stages of the illness is mainly determined by its clinical effectiveness. Second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are the first line drug treatment for individuals suffering from schizophrenia. It is clear that SGAs are not a homogeneous group and clinical effects and profile of side effects differ between SGAs. Differences among antipsychotics in terms of effectiveness have turned out to be a topic of increasing research interest, although comparisons between the different SGAs are scarce. In first episode of psychosis, SGAs have shown a higher treatment effectiveness compared to first generation antipsychotics (FGAs) (findings primarily driven by Haloperidol). Less evident seems to be the notion that some of the SGAs might be more effective (in terms of treatment discontinuation) than others. Most of the medium-term randomized studies have shown similar rates of all-cause treatment discontinuation in first episode patients treated with different SGAs. It may be concluded that more randomized controlled trails should be accomplished to determine the position of frequently used SGAs in clinical practice. Investigators undertook this study with the major objective of comparing the clinical effectiveness of three widely utilized SGAs (Aripiprazole, Ziprasidone and Quetiapine) in the acute treatment of first-episode non-affective psychosis individuals at 3 years of follow-up.

Study setting and financial support: data for the present investigation were obtained from an ongoing epidemiological and three-year longitudinal intervention program of first-episode psychosis (PAFIP) conducted at the outpatient clinic and the inpatient unit at the University Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla, Spain. Conforming to international standards for research ethics, this program was approved by the local institutional review board. Patients meeting inclusion criteria and their families provided written informed consent to be included in the PAFIP. The Mental Health Services of Cantabria provided funding for implementing the program. None pharmaceutical company supplied any financial support to it. Study design: the severity scale of the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Scale for the Assessment of Positive symptoms (SAPS) and the Scale for the Assessment of Negative symptoms (SANS) were used to evaluate symptomatology. To assess general adverse event experiences the Scale of the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser (UKU), the Simpson-Angus Rating Scale (SARS) and the Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS) were used to assess side effects. The adverse events were evaluated using the UKU Side effect rating scale. Those treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred at a rate of at least 10% in either treatment group are considered. Treatment-emergent akathisia (BAS) and extrapyramidal symptoms (SARS) were assessed by both baseline-to-end changes and newly emergent categorical changes. The same trained psychiatrist (BC-F) completed all clinical assessments.