Back to Journals » Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment » Volume 13

Comparative efficacy and safety of antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia: a network meta-analysis in a Japanese population

Authors Kishi T, Ikuta T, Matsunaga S, Matsuda Y, Oya K, Iwata N

Received 9 February 2017

Accepted for publication 4 April 2017

Published 11 May 2017 Volume 2017:13 Pages 1281—1302

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/NDT.S134340

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Prof. Dr. Roumen Kirov

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Dr Roger Pinder


Taro Kishi,1,* Toshikazu Ikuta,2,* Shinji Matsunaga,1 Yuki Matsuda,1,3 Kazuto Oya,1 Nakao Iwata1

1Department of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan; 2Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, School of Applied Sciences, University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, USA; 3Department of Psychiatry, National Center Hospital, National Center of Neurology and Psychiatry, Kodaira, Tokyo, Japan

*These authors contributed equally to this work

Background: The relative efficacy and tolerability of antipsychotics for schizophrenia are considerably well studied. This study aimed to examine whether previous findings could be replicated in a genetically distinct and homogenous group (ie, Japanese patients with schizophrenia) and whether previous findings could be extended to a broader range of antipsychotics with previously unclear relative efficacy and tolerability.
Methods: Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed in which randomized trials comparing any of the following interventions were included: second-generation antipsychotics, haloperidol, or placebo. The primary outcomes for efficacy and acceptability were the response rate and all-cause discontinuation. The secondary outcomes included the improvement of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores, discontinuation because of adverse events, and individual adverse events.
Results: Eighteen relevant studies were identified (total n=3,446; aripiprazole =267, blonanserin =285, clozapine =47, clocapramine =295, haloperidol =857, mosapramine =493, olanzapine =179, paliperidone =136, perospirone =146, placebo =138, quetiapine =212, and risperidone =338; mean study duration =8.33±1.41 weeks). In primary outcomes, olanzapine and paliperidone showed efficacy than placebo, and olanzapine and paliperidone showed superior acceptability compared with placebo. There were differences in the incidences of individual adverse events (the best antipsychotic: extrapyramidal symptoms = olanzapine, hyperprolactinemia-related symptoms = quetiapine, sedation = paliperidone, and weight change = blonanserin) among antipsychotics.
Conclusion: Although the current analysis exclusively included Japanese patients with schizophrenia, no remarkable differences were observed in efficacy and safety compared with previous meta-analyses. Diverse hierarchies in safety outcomes also support the implication that individual risk expectations for adverse events can guide clinical decisions. However, the sample size was relatively limited. Additional efficacy and safety data are required to fully obtain a conclusive understanding.

Keywords: antipsychotics, Japanese schizophrenia, network meta-analysis, efficacy, safety

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]