Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Department of Psychiatry, Department of Psychosis Studies, and Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK.
Université Paris Cité, Centre of Research in Epidemiology and Statistics (CRESS-U1153), INSERM, Paris, France.
Lancet Psychiatry. 2022 Nov;9(11):884-893. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(22)00304-2. Epub 2022 Oct 10.
As comparatively few trials in subgroups of patients with schizophrenia have been done, clinicians need to know whether they can rely on the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the general population of patients with schizophrenia. We aimed to compare the efficacy and side-effects of antipsychotic drugs in different subgroups.
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register (from database inception to April 27, 2020), and PubMed (from April 1, 2020 to June 14, 2021). We excluded studies in patients with stable schizophrenia (ie, relapse prevention studies), studies with a high risk of bias, and studies from mainland China due to quality concerns concerning allocation and masking methods. We included single-blind RCTs or better that assessed one or more of 16 second-generation and 18 first-generation antipsychotics in the general population of patients with schizophrenia or in one or more of the subgroups: children and adolescents (age range as defined in the original studies), patients with a first episode, patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms, patients with comorbid substance use, patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, or older patients (age range as defined in the original studies). Two authors independently screened the results of the search, retrieved full-text articles, and checked the inclusion criteria. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline, all parameters were extracted in duplicate. The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms. We compared drug efficacy between subgroups, by sex, schizoaffective disorder versus schizophrenia, and study origin using random-effects, inverse variance meta-analyses and random-effects subgroup tests, and meta-regression.
We included 537 RCTs with 76 382 participants, 26 627 (34·9%) women, 49 755 (65·1%) men, mean age 37·3 years (range of means 7·9-80·2; ethnicity data not available). 412 RCTs included patients in the general population of patients with schizophrenia, 42 included patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, 25 included children and adolescents, 20 included patients with their first episode, 20 included patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms, 13 included patients with comorbid substance use, and 11 included older patients. Of 507 random-effects subgroup tests done, 46 (9%) showed a significant difference (p<0·05) between subgroups, but there was no clear indication as to which drug should be used in which subgroup.
The effects of antipsychotics in various patient subgroups were usually similar to those in the general population of patients with schizophrenia, but comparably few studies contributed to the subgroups, in particular in terms of side-effects. If the evidence for treatment in a given subgroup is small, guideline makers and clinicians should consider using the results in the much better studied group of the general population of patients with schizophrenia.
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung; FKZ 01KG1508).
由于针对精神分裂症患者亚组的试验相对较少,临床医生需要了解他们是否可以依赖一般精神分裂症患者人群的随机对照试验(RCT)的结果。我们旨在比较不同亚组中抗精神病药物的疗效和副作用。
在这项系统评价和荟萃分析中,我们搜索了之前的系统评价和荟萃分析的参考文献列表、Cochrane 精神分裂症组的基于研究注册库(从数据库建立到 2020 年 4 月 27 日)和 PubMed(从 2020 年 4 月 1 日到 2021 年 6 月 14 日)。我们排除了稳定精神分裂症患者(即复发预防研究)、偏倚风险高的研究以及来自中国大陆的研究,因为对分配和掩蔽方法的质量存在担忧。我们纳入了评估一般精神分裂症患者人群或以下一个或多个亚组中 16 种第二代和 18 种第一代抗精神病药物的单盲 RCT 或更好:儿童和青少年(原始研究中定义的年龄范围)、首发患者、以阴性症状为主或突出的患者、合并物质使用障碍的患者、治疗抵抗性精神分裂症患者或老年患者(原始研究中定义的年龄范围)。两名作者独立筛选搜索结果,检索全文文章,并检查纳入标准。使用系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南,我们重复提取所有参数。主要结局是总体症状的变化。我们通过随机效应、逆方差荟萃分析和随机效应亚组检验,以及荟萃回归,比较了亚组之间的药物疗效、性别、分裂情感障碍与精神分裂症以及研究来源。
我们纳入了 537 项 RCT,涉及 76382 名参与者,其中 26627 名(34.9%)为女性,49755 名(65.1%)为男性,平均年龄 37.3 岁(范围为 7.9-80.2;种族数据不可用)。412 项 RCT 纳入了一般精神分裂症患者人群,42 项 RCT 纳入了治疗抵抗性精神分裂症患者,25 项 RCT 纳入了儿童和青少年,20 项 RCT 纳入了首发患者,20 项 RCT 纳入了以阴性症状为主或突出的患者,13 项 RCT 纳入了合并物质使用障碍的患者,11 项 RCT 纳入了老年患者。在进行的 507 项随机效应亚组检验中,有 46 项(9%)显示亚组之间存在显著差异(p<0.05),但并没有明确指示应该在哪个亚组中使用哪种药物。
抗精神病药物在各种患者亚组中的效果通常与一般精神分裂症患者人群相似,但特别是在副作用方面,相对较少的研究涉及亚组。如果某个亚组的治疗证据较少,指南制定者和临床医生应该考虑使用在一般精神分裂症患者人群中研究更好的组的结果。
德国联邦教育与研究部(Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung;FKZ 01KG1508)。