Stephanie Winkelbeiner1,2,3,4, Stefan Leucht5, John M Kane1,2,3, Philipp Homan1,2,3. 1. Center for Psychiatric Neuroscience, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, New York. 2. Division of Psychiatry Research, Zucker Hillside Hospital, Northwell Health, New York, New York. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Zucker School of Medicine at Northwell/Hofstra, Hempstead, New York. 4. University Hospital of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
Importance: An assumption among clinicians and researchers is that patients with schizophrenia vary considerably in their response to antipsychotic drugs in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Objective: To evaluate the overall variation in individual treatment response from random variation by comparing the variability between treatment and control groups. Data Sources: Cochrane Schizophrenia, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, BIOSIS Previews, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from January 1, 1955, to December 31, 2016. Study Selection: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, RCTs of adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and prescription for licensed antipsychotic drugs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Means and SDs of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale pretreatment and posttreatment outcome difference scores were extracted. Data quality and validity were ensured by following the PRISMA guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome measure was the overall variability ratio of treatment to control in a meta-analysis across RCTs. Individual variability ratios were weighted by the inverse-variance method and entered into a random-effects model. A personal element of response was hypothesized to be reflected by a substantial overall increase in variability in the treatment group compared with the control group. Results: An RCT was simulated, comprising 30 patients with schizophrenia randomized to either the treatment or the control group. The different components of variation in RCTs were illustrated with simulated data. In addition, we assessed the variability ratio in 52 RCTs involving 15 360 patients with a schizophrenia or schizoaffective diagnosis. The variability was slightly lower in the treatment compared with the control group (variability ratio = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, no evidence was found in RCTs that antipsychotic drugs increased the outcome variance, suggesting no personal element of response to treatment but instead indicating that the variance was slightly lower in the treatment group than in the control group; although the study cannot rule out that subsets of patients respond differently to treatment, it suggests that the average treatment effect is a reasonable assumption for the individual patient.
Importance: An assumption among clinicians and researchers is that patients with schizophrenia vary considerably in their response to antipsychotic drugs in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Objective: To evaluate the overall variation in individual treatment response from random variation by comparing the variability between treatment and control groups. Data Sources: Cochrane Schizophrenia, MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane CENTRAL, BIOSIS Previews, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from January 1, 1955, to December 31, 2016. Study Selection: Double-blind, placebo-controlled, RCTs of adults with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders and prescription for licensed antipsychotic drugs. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Means and SDs of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale pretreatment and posttreatment outcome difference scores were extracted. Data quality and validity were ensured by following the PRISMA guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcome measure was the overall variability ratio of treatment to control in a meta-analysis across RCTs. Individual variability ratios were weighted by the inverse-variance method and entered into a random-effects model. A personal element of response was hypothesized to be reflected by a substantial overall increase in variability in the treatment group compared with the control group. Results: An RCT was simulated, comprising 30 patients with schizophrenia randomized to either the treatment or the control group. The different components of variation in RCTs were illustrated with simulated data. In addition, we assessed the variability ratio in 52 RCTs involving 15 360 patients with a schizophrenia or schizoaffective diagnosis. The variability was slightly lower in the treatment compared with the control group (variability ratio = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, no evidence was found in RCTs that antipsychotic drugs increased the outcome variance, suggesting no personal element of response to treatment but instead indicating that the variance was slightly lower in the treatment group than in the control group; although the study cannot rule out that subsets of patients respond differently to treatment, it suggests that the average treatment effect is a reasonable assumption for the individual patient.
Authors: Michael F Egan; Xin Zhao; Andrew Smith; Matthew D Troyer; Victor N Uebele; Valerii Pidkorytov; Kevin Cox; Michael Murphy; Duane Snavely; Christopher Lines; David Michelson Journal: Hum Psychopharmacol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 1.672
Authors: Herbert Y Meltzer; Josephine Cucchiaro; Robert Silva; Masaaki Ogasa; Debra Phillips; Jane Xu; Amir H Kalali; Edward Schweizer; Andrei Pikalov; Antony Loebel Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2011-06-15 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Robert E Litman; Mark A Smith; James J Doherty; Alan Cross; Shane Raines; Lev Gertsik; Stephen R Zukin Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2016-02-26 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Toby Pillinger; Emanuele F Osimo; Stefan Brugger; Valeria Mondelli; Robert A McCutcheon; Oliver D Howes Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Marta M Maslej; Toshiaki A Furukawa; Andrea Cipriani; Paul W Andrews; Benoit H Mulsant Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Philipp Homan; Miklos Argyelan; Christina L Fales; Anita D Barber; Pamela DeRosse; Philip R Szeszko; Delbert G Robinson; Todd Lencz; Anil K Malhotra Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Robert A McCutcheon; Toby Pillinger; Orestis Efthimiou; Marta Maslej; Benoit H Mulsant; Allan H Young; Andrea Cipriani; Oliver D Howes Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2022-06 Impact factor: 79.683
Authors: Harriet L Mills; Julian P T Higgins; Richard W Morris; David Kessler; Jon Heron; Nicola Wiles; George Davey Smith; Kate Tilling Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 4.822
Authors: James R Staley; Frank Windmeijer; Matthew Suderman; Matthew S Lyon; George Davey Smith; Kate Tilling Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2021-10-15 Impact factor: 12.434
Authors: Maria S Neumeier; Stephanie Homan; Stefan Vetter; Erich Seifritz; John M Kane; Maximilian Huhn; Stefan Leucht; Philipp Homan Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2021-10-21 Impact factor: 7.348