Skip to content Skip to navigation
University of Warwick
  • Study
  • |
  • Research
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Alumni
  • |
  • News
  • |
  • About

University of Warwick
Publications service & WRAP

Highlight your research

  • WRAP
    • Home
    • Search WRAP
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse WRAP by Year
    • Browse WRAP by Subject
    • Browse WRAP by Department
    • Browse WRAP by Funder
    • Browse Theses by Department
  • Publications Service
    • Home
    • Search Publications Service
    • Browse by Warwick Author
    • Browse Publications service by Year
    • Browse Publications service by Subject
    • Browse Publications service by Department
    • Browse Publications service by Funder
  • Help & Advice
University of Warwick

The Library

  • Login
  • Admin

Risperidone (depot) for schizophrenia

Tools
- Tools
+ Tools

Sampson, Stephanie, Hosalli, Prakash, Furtado, Vivek and Davis, John M. (2016) Risperidone (depot) for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (4). CD004161. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004161.pub2

[img]
Preview
PDF
WRAP_Sampson_et_al-2016-The_Cochrane_library (1).pdf - Published Version - Requires a PDF viewer.

Download (3001Kb) | Preview
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004161.pub2

Request Changes to record.

Abstract

Background: Risperidone is the first new generation antipsychotic drug made available in a long-acting injection formulation.
Objectives

To examine the effects of depot risperidone for treatment of schizophrenia or related psychoses in comparison with placebo, no treatment or other antipsychotic medication.

To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the resource use, cost and cost-effectiveness of risperidone (depot) for schizophrenia.

Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (December 2002, 2012, and October 28, 2015). We also checked the references of all included studies, and contacted industry and authors of included studies.
Selection criteria:
Randomised clinical trials comparing depot risperidone with other treatments for people with schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

Data collection and analysis:
Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed trial quality and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we calculated the risk ratio (RR), with 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD). We assessed risk of bias for included studies and created 'Summary of findings' tables using GRADE.

Main results:
Twelve studies, with a total of 5723 participants were randomised to the following comparison treatments:

Risperidone depot versus placebo

Outcomes of relapse and improvement in mental state were neither measured or reported. In terms of other primary outcomes, more people receiving placebo left the study early by 12 weeks (1 RCT, n=400, RR 0.74 95% CI 0.63 to 0.88, very low quality evidence), experienced severe adverse events in short term (1 RCT, n=400, RR 0.59 95% CI 0.38 to 0.93, very low quality evidence). There was however, no difference in levels of weight gain between groups (1 RCT, n=400, RR 2.11 95% CI 0.48 to 9.18, very low quality evidence).

Risperidone depot versus general oral antipsychotics

The outcome of improvement in mental state was not presented due to high levels of attrition, nor were levels of severe adverse events explicitly reported. Most primary outcomes of interest showed no difference between treatment groups. However, more people receiving depot risperidone experienced nervous system disorders (long-term:1 RCT, n=369, RR 1.34 95% CI 1.13 to 1.58, very-low quality evidence).

Risperidone depot versus oral risperidone

Data for relapse and severe adverse events were not reported. All outcomes of interest were rated as moderate quality evidence. Main results showed no differences between treatment groups with equivocal data for change in mental state, numbers leaving the study early, any extrapyramidal symptoms, weight increase and prolactin-related adverse events.

Risperidone depot versus oral quetiapine

Relapse rates and improvement in mental state were not reported. Fewer people receiving risperidone depot left the study early (long-term: 1 RCT, n=666, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.74 to 0.95, moderate quality evidence). Experience of serious adverse events was similar between groups (low quality evidence), but more people receiving depot risperidone experienced EPS (1 RCT, n=666, RR 1.83 95% CI 1.07 to 3.15, low quality evidence), had greater weight gain (1 RCT, n=666, RR 1.25 95% CI 0.25 to 2.25, low quality evidence) and more prolactin-related adverse events (1 RCT, n=666, RR 3.07 95% CI 1.13 to 8.36, very low quality evidence).

Risperidone depot versus oral aripiprazole

Relapse rates, mental state using PANSS, leaving the study early, serious adverse events and weight increase were similar between groups. However more people receiving depot risperidone experienced prolactin-related adverse events compared to those receiving oral aripiprazole (2 RCTs, n=729, RR 9.91 95% CI 2.78 to 35.29, very low quality of evidence).

Risperidone depot versus oral olanzapine

Relapse rates were not reported in any of the included studies for this comparison. Improvement in mental state using PANSS and instances of severe adverse events were similar between groups. More people receiving depot risperidone left the study early than those receiving oral olanzapine (1 RCT, n=618, RR 1.32 95% CI 1.10 to 1.58, low quality evidence) with those receiving risperidone depot also experiencing more extrapyramidal symptoms (1 RCT, n=547, RR 1.67 95% CI 1.19 to 2.36, low quality evidence). However, more people receiving oral olanzapine experienced weight increase (1 RCT, n=547, RR 0.56 95% CI 0.42 to 0.75, low quality evidence).

Risperidone depot versus atypical depot antipsychotics (specifically paliperidone palmitate)

Relapse rates were not reported and rates of response using PANSS, weight increase, prolactin-related adverse events and glucose-related adverse events were similar between groups. Fewer people left the study early due to lack of efficacy from the risperidone depot group (long term: 1 RCT, n=749, RR 0.60 95% CI 0.45 to 0.81, low quality evidence), but more people receiving depot risperidone required use of EPS-medication (2 RCTs, n=1666, RR 1.46 95% CI 1.18 to 1.8, moderate quality evidence).

Risperidone depot versus typical depot antipsychotics

Outcomes of relapse, severe adverse events or movement disorders were not reported. Outcomes relating to improvement in mental state demonstrated no difference between groups (low quality evidence). However, more people receiving depot risperidone compared to other typical depots left the study early (long-term:1 RCT, n=62, RR 3.05 95% CI 1.12 to 8.31, low quality evidence).

Authors' conclusions:
Depot risperidone may be more acceptable than placebo injection but it is hard to know if it is any more effective in controlling the symptoms of schizophrenia. The active drug, especially higher doses, may be associated with more movement disorders than placebo. People already stabilised on oral risperidone may continue to maintain benefit if treated with depot risperidone and avoid the need to take tablets, at least in the short term. In people who are happy to take oral medication the depot risperidone is approximately equal to oral risperidone. It is possible that the depot formulation, however, can bring a second-generation antipsychotic to people who do not reliably adhere to treatment. People with schizophrenia who have difficulty adhering to treatment, however, are unlikely to volunteer for a clinical trial. Such people may gain benefit from the depot risperidone with no increased risk of extrapyramidal side effects.

Item Type: Journal Article
Subjects: R Medicine > RM Therapeutics. Pharmacology
Divisions: Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School > Health Sciences > Mental Health and Wellbeing
Faculty of Medicine > Warwick Medical School
Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH): Risperidone , Schizophrenia -- treatment
Journal or Publication Title: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
ISSN: 1469-493X
Book Title: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Official Date: 2016
Dates:
DateEvent
2016Published
14 April 2016Available
6 April 2016Accepted
Number: 4
Article Number: CD004161
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004161.pub2
Status: Peer Reviewed
Publication Status: Published
Access rights to Published version: Open Access
Funder: National Institute for Health Research (Great Britain) (NIHR)

Request changes or add full text files to a record

Repository staff actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

View more statistics

twitter

Email us: wrap@warwick.ac.uk
Contact Details
About Us