Olanzapine vs. Low-dose Olanzapine Plus Trifluoperazine

March 4, 2016 updated by: Ching-Hua Lin, MD, PhD, Kaohsiung Kai-Suan Psychiatric Hospital

A Randomized, Double-blind, Comparison of the Efficacy and Safety of Olanzapine Versus Low-dose Olanzapine Plus Low-dose Trifluoperazine in the Treatment of Schizophrenia

The investigators hypothesis is that an antipsychotic drug combination of low-dose olanzapine plus low-dose trifluoperazine is similar to regular-dose olanzapine monotherapy in efficacy and safety for treatment of schizophrenia.The goal of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the olanzapine (10 mg/d) and olanzapine (5 mg/d) plus trifluoperazine (5 mg/d) in the treatment of acute psychotic exacerbations of schizophrenia.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Antipsychotic monotherapy is recognized as the treatment of choice for patients with schizophrenia. Surveys have shown that antipsychotic polypharmacy are frequently prescribed, yet few randomized, double-blind clinical trials have examined this practice. Olanzapine, an atypical antipsychotic agent, has low incidence of extrapyramidal symptom but with high cost compared to trifluoperazine. It has been reported that mean doses of typical antipsychotics less than 600 mg per day of chlorpromazine or its equivalent has no higher risk of extrapyramidal symptom than atypical antipsychotics. The objective of the study is to compare the efficacy and safety of the olanzapine (10 mg per day) and olanzapine (5 mg per day) plus trifluoperazine (5 mg per day) in the treatment of acute psychotic exacerbations of schizophrenia. In this 6-week, double-blind, fixed-dose study, patients with schizophrenia are randomly assigned to olanzapine (10 mg per day)) or olanzapine (5 mg per day) plus trifluoperazine (5 mg per day). The hypothesis is that the two treatment groups have the similar efficacy and safety, but different cost. The primary efficacy measure is change from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores; secondary outcomes include Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF), Short Form-36 (SF-36), Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Safety assessments include the change from baseline on Simpson-Angus Rating Scale (SAS), Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS), and UKU Side-effects Rating Scale, and the change from baseline in prolactin levels, body weight, vital sign, blood pressure, Bazett's correction of QT interval (QTc interval), fasting glucose level, and lipid panel (cholesterol, high density lipid protein, low density lipid protein, and triglyceride).

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

94

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 802
        • Kai-Suan Psychiatric Hospital
      • Kaohsiung, Taiwan
        • Kai-Suan Psychiatric Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

16 years to 53 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • were physically healthy and had all laboratory parameters within normal limits
  • were aged 18 to 55 years
  • satisfied the DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia
  • had baseline Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) scale score of 4 or greater
  • had no DSM-IV diagnosis of substance abuse or dependence (including alcohol)
  • had not received depot antipsychotic drugs for the preceding 3 months
  • gave written informed consent to participate in the study after a full explanation of the study's aims and procedures.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • those with a history of serious adverse reaction to olanzapine or trifluoperazine or a history of tardive dyskinesia or neuroleptic malignant syndrome
  • female subjects who were pregnant or at risk for pregnancy or lactation
  • those that had a diagnosis of treatment-resistant schizophrenia or having previously received clozapine or electroconvulsive therapy

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: trifluoperazine plus olanzapine
trifluoperazine 5mg/day + olanzapine 5mg/day
trifluoperazine 5mg/d
Other Names:
  • polypharmacy
Active Comparator: full-dose olanzapine
olanzapine 10mg/day
trifluoperazine 5mg/d
Other Names:
  • polypharmacy

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
The changes in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The PANSS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The PANSS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
The changes in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The CGI-S was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The CGI-S was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The CDSS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The CDSS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The GAF was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The GAF was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) scores from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The SF-36 was rated at baseline and again at week 6.
The SF-36 was rated at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The MMSE was rated at baseline and again at week 6.
The MMSE was rated at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the Simpson-Angus Rating Scale (SAS) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The SAS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The SAS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The AIMS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The AIMS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The BAS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The BAS was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the UKU Side-effects Rating Scale (UKU) scores from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The UKU was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The UKU was rated at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the Bazett's correction of QT interval (QTc interval) from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The QTc interval was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The QTc interval was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the body weight from baseline to the end of the study.
Time Frame: The body weight was assayed at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The body weight was assayed at baseline, and again at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 (or on early termination).
The changes in the fasting glucose level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The fasting glucose level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The fasting glucose level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the prolactin level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The prolactin level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The prolactin level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the cholesterol level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The cholesterol level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The cholesterol level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the high density lipoprotein (HDL) level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The HDL level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The HDL level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the low density lipoprotein (LDL) level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The LDL level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The LDL level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The changes in the triglyceride level from baseline to week 6.
Time Frame: The triglyceride level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.
The triglyceride level was assayed at baseline and again at week 6.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Ching-Hua Lin, MD, PhD, Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan
  • Study Chair: Cheng-Chung Cheng, MD, PhD, Kaohsiung Municipal Kai-Syuan Psychiatric Hospital, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

January 1, 2012

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2016

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2016

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

February 27, 2016

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 4, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

March 10, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

March 10, 2016

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 4, 2016

Last Verified

March 1, 2016

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Schizophrenia

Clinical Trials on full-dose olanzapine

3
Subscribe