Psychiatric Services
Journal Home Search Current Issue Past Issues Subscribe All APPI Journals Help Contact Us
 
Psychiatr Serv 59:523-525, May 2008
doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.59.5.523
© 2008 American Psychiatric Association
Quicksearch
Advanced Search
Or Search All APPI Journals
This Article
* Full Text
* Full Text (PDF)
* Alert me when this article is cited
* Alert me if a correction is posted
* Citation Map
Services
* Email this article to a Colleague
* Similar articles in this journal
* Similar articles in PubMed
* Alert me to new issues of the journal
* Add to My Articles & Searches
* Download to citation manager
* reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
* Citing Articles via HighWire
Google Scholar
* Articles by Carpenter, W. T.
* Articles by Buchanan, R. W.
PubMed
* PubMed Citation
* Articles by Carpenter, W. T.
* Articles by Buchanan, R. W.
Related Collections
* Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders
* Atypical Neuroleptics
* Conventional Neuroleptics
*Related Articles

Special Section on Implications of CATIE

Lessons to Take Home From CATIE

William T. Carpenter, M.D. and Robert W. Buchanan, M.D.

The publicly funded Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) did not support superiority hypotheses for second-generation antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia. Instead, the study supported the view that first- and second-generation antipsychotics have similar therapeutic properties and diverse adverse effect profiles. This emphasizes the importance of designing pharmacotherapy for the individual in order to optimize the benefit-to-risk profile. First- and second-generation antipsychotic drugs are extensively similar in mechanism of action, efficacy for psychosis, and lack of efficacy for avolition and impaired cognition. However, adverse effect profiles vary between drugs. The authors review the clinical implications of these data, with an emphasis on individualizing pharmacotherapy in an effort to reduce risk. Rather than selecting drugs on the basis of unfounded expectations of superior efficacy, clinicians can focus on selecting drugs and optimizing dosages to minimize adverse effects without sacrificing efficacy. Tardive dyskinesia may be a good reason to avoid a high dosage of first-generation antipsychotics, although the evidence for differential risk is less compelling for a modest dosage of low-affinity first-generation antipsychotics. Similarly, the metabolic effects of some second-generation antipsychotics can be decisive in considering risks. In either case, the clinician should detect earliest signs and take action while dyskinetic or metabolic effects are most reversible. Bottom line: the dichotomy between first- and second-generation antipsychotics was not supported by efficacy data (and now, is not supported effectiveness data). Only clozapine has documented superiority in treatment-resistant cases.


Related Articles:

May 2008: This Month's Highlights
Psychiatr Serv 2008 59: 475. [Full Text] [PDF]

Introduction to the CATIE Special Section
Marvin S. Swartz
Psychiatr Serv 2008 59: 497-499. [Full Text] [PDF]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Psychiatr. Serv.Home page
M. S. Swartz
Introduction to the CATIE Special Section
Psychiatr Serv, May 1, 2008; 59(5): 497 - 499.
[Full Text] [PDF]




Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2008 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us

American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 1825, Arlington, VA 22209-3901 * 800-368-5777 * appi at psych.org