Faculty Bibliography

Background: Despite numerous studies of diabetes mellitus type II (DM-II) in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder, there have been no studies on the glycemic effects of switching patients with long-standing symptomatic DM-II from their current antipsychotic regimen to ziprasidone. Methods: An open-label, prospective inpatient study was conducted with 26 suboptimally responding inpatients with DSM-IV diagnoses of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and comorbid DM-II who were switched to ziprasidone monotherapy and followed for 8 weeks. Outcome measures were fasting glucose, triglycerides, cholesterol, insulin levels, capillary blood glucose levels and weight. After a 3-week cross-titration period, patients were treated with ziprasidone up to a dose of 320 mg daily. Results: Of the 26 study participants, 16 completed the entire study period of 63 days and 10 (38.46%) discontinued participation, primarily due to psychotic relapse. There was a statistically significant reduction in fasting glucose (F=4.43, p=0.05; 14.68 mg/dL mean reduction), capillary blood glucose levels (F=8.90, p=0.01; 25.36 mg/dL mean reduction), weight (F=4.46, p=0.05; 4.68 lb mean weight loss) and Body Mass Index (F=4.40, p=0.05; 3.62 kg/m2 mean reduction). There was also a reduction in the use of antidiabetic medications after the switch to ziprasidone. Nine (34.62%) patients met criteria for metabolic syndrome (MetS) at baseline, as compared to 4 (15.38%) at endpoint. No change was observed in positive symptoms (F=0.62, p=0.44), negative symptoms (F=1.47, p=0.24) and in total PANSS score (F=0.12, p=0.74). Conclusions: This study suggests significant improvement in metabolic side effects and MetS in the subset of the patients who were able to tolerate switching from a polypharmacy regimen to ziprasidone. There was a large discontinuation rate, which limited the sustained beneficial effects of ziprasidone. The decision to switch to ziprasidone in patients with prior suboptimal response has to balance the potential metabolic benefits and the potential relapse risks of the individual patient first and foremost

Objective: The Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder scale is a new rating scale adapted from the Clinical Global Impression scale for use in patients with schizoaffective disorder. The psychometric characteristics of the Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder are described.Design: Content validity was assessed using an investigator questionnaire. Inter-rater reliability was determined with 12 sets of videotaped interviews rated independently by two trained individuals. Test-retest reliability was assessed using 30 randomly selected raters from clinical trials who evaluated the same videos on separate occasions two weeks apart. Convergent and divergent validity and effect size were evaluated by comparing scores between the Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and Young Mania Rating Scale scales using pooled patient data from two clinical trials. Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder scores were then linked to corresponding Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores.Results: Content validity was strong. Inter-rater agreement was good to excellent for most scales and subscales (intra-class correlation coefficient >/=0.50). Test-retest showed good reproducibility, with intraclass correlation coefficients ranging from 0.444 to 0.898. Spearman correlations between Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder domains and corresponding symptom scales were 0.60 or greater, and effect sizes for Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder overall and domain scores were similar to Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Young Mania Rating Scale, and 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores. Raters anticipated that the scale might be less effective in distinguishing negative from depressive symptoms, and, in fact, the results here may reflect that clinical reality.Conclusion: Multiple lines of evidence support the reliability and validity of the Clinical Global Impression for Schizoaffective Disorder for studies in schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Nonparametric item response theory (IRT) was used to examine (a) the performance of the 30 Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) items and their options ((levels of severity), (b) the effectiveness of various subscales to discriminate among differences in symptom severity, and (c) the development of an abbreviated PANSS (Mini-PANSS) based on IRT and a method to link scores to the original PANSS. METHODS: Baseline PANSS scores from 7,187 patients with Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective disorder who were enrolled between 1995 and 2005 in psychopharmacology trials were obtained. Option characteristic curves (OCCs) and Item Characteristic Curves (ICCs) were constructed to examine the probability of rating each of seven options within each of 30 PANSS items as a function of subscale severity, and summed-score linking was applied to items selected for the Mini-PANSS. RESULTS: The majority of items forming the Positive and Negative subscales (i.e. 19 items) performed very well and discriminate better along symptom severity compared to the General Psychopathology subscale. Six of the seven Positive Symptom items, six of the seven Negative Symptom items, and seven out of the 16 General Psychopathology items were retained for inclusion in the Mini-PANSS. Summed score linking and linear interpolation was able to produce a translation table for comparing total subscale scores of the Mini-PANSS to total subscale scores on the original PANSS. Results show scores on the subscales of the Mini-PANSS can be linked to scores on the original PANSS subscales, with very little bias. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated the utility of non-parametric IRT in examining the item properties of the PANSS and to allow selection of items for an abbreviated PANSS scale. The comparisons between the 30-item PANSS and the Mini-PANSS revealed that the shorter version is comparable to the 30-item PANSS, but when applying IRT, the Mini-PANSS is also a good indicator of illness severity.

OBJECTIVES: To describe therapeutic antibiotic use patterns in dogs at a small animal teaching hospital. METHODS: A retrospective case analysis of randomly sampled antibiotic prescriptions in dogs from May 20, 2008 to May 20, 2009, deemed to be for therapeutic use, was performed. Records were reviewed to determine if there was documentation of confirmed, suspected or no evidence of infection. The five most frequently prescribed antibiotics were identified and analysed for their distribution in these categories. RESULTS: In 17% of therapeutic antibiotic prescriptions there was confirmed infection, in 45% suspected infection, and in 38% there was no documented evidence of infection. Amoxicillin-clavulanate was the most frequently prescribed antibiotic, followed by cefazolin/cephalexin, enrofloxacin, ampicillin/amoxicillin and doxycycline. Doxycycline was the most frequently prescribed with no documented evidence of infection, and amoxicillin-clavulanate was the most frequently prescribed with either confirmed or suspected evidence of infection. DISCUSSION: Clinicians use a variety of tools when deciding whether or not to prescribe an antibiotic and which antibiotic to use. As in human medicine, there is likely overuse and inappropriate use of antibiotics in veterinary medicine. Veterinarians should engage in discussions regarding clinically applicable guidelines for appropriate antibiotic use.

Despite its superior efficacy, clozapine is helpful in only a subset of patients with schizophrenia unresponsive to other antipsychotics. This lack of complete success has prompted the frequent use of various clozapine combination strategies despite a paucity of evidence from randomized controlled trials supporting their efficacy. Pimozide, a diphenylbutylpiperidine, possesses pharmacological and clinical properties distinct from other typical antipsychotics. An open-label trial of pimozide adjunctive treatment to clozapine provided promising pilot data in support of a larger controlled trial. Therefore, we conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-designed 12-week trial of pimozide adjunctive treatment added to ongoing optimal clozapine treatment in 53 patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder partially or completely unresponsive to clozapine monotherapy. An average dose of 6.48 mg/day of pimozide was found to be no better than placebo in combination with clozapine at reducing Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total, positive, negative, and general psychopathology scores. There is no suggestion from this rigorously conducted trial to suggest that pimozide is an effective augmenting agent if an optimal clozapine trial is ineffective. However, given the lack of evidence to guide clinicians and patients when clozapine does not work well, more controlled trials of innovative strategies are warranted

Quetiapine is often prescribed at doses higher than those approved by regulatory authorities, with limited evidence from controlled trials. The objective of this study was to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of high-dose quetiapine (1200 mg/d) compared with a standard dose of 600 mg/d among patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder hospitalized at 2 state-operated psychiatric facilities. In order to be eligible for randomization, subjects were required to prospectively fail to demonstrate an initial therapeutic response during a 4-week run-in phase with quetiapine at 600 mg/d (immediate release and dosed twice a day). Lack of an adequate initial response was defined a 15% or lower decrease in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score. Patients were then randomized to either continue quetiapine at 600 mg/d for an additional 8 weeks or to receive 1200 mg/d quetiapine instead. No significant differences were observed between the high dose (n = 29) and standard dose (n = 31) groups in change from baseline to endpoint on extrapyramidal symptoms, electrocardiographic changes, or most laboratory measures between groups. There was a significant difference between groups for triglycerides (P = 0.035), and post hoc tests revealed a decrease in triglycerides from baseline (mean [SD], 162.7 [59.3] mg/dL) to endpoint (mean [SD], 134.8 [62.7] mg/dL) for the 600 mg/d group (P = 0.019). The mean change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score did not differ between groups. In conclusion, quetiapine at 1200 mg/d, although reasonably tolerated, did not confer any advantages over quetiapine at 600 mg/d among patients who had failed to demonstrate an adequate response to a prospective 4-week trial of 600 mg/d