Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin
Online ISSN : 1347-5215
Print ISSN : 0918-6158
ISSN-L : 0918-6158
Regular Articles
Comparative Utility of Atypical Antipsychotics for the Treatment of Psychosis in Parkinson’s Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis
Ryo IketaniYohei KawasakiHiroshi Yamada
Author information
JOURNAL FREE ACCESS FULL-TEXT HTML

2017 Volume 40 Issue 11 Pages 1976-1982

Details
Abstract

We performed a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis to determine atypical antipsychotics that are effective and safe for the treatment of psychosis in Parkinson’s disease (PD). We conducted a comprehensive literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Japana Centra Revuo Medicina (Ichu-shi Web). We used randomized controlled trials evaluating the utility of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of psychosis in PD using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Unified PD rating Scale parts III (UPDRS-III) as the endpoints. Posterior distributions of mean differences between each treatment and placebo were estimated using Bayesian network meta-analysis. The distributions describing each treatment effect were expressed as means (95% credible intervals). Ten trials involving any two treatment arms using clozapine (64 subjects in four trials), olanzapine (99 subjects in three trials), quetiapine (79 subjects in five trials), risperidone (five subjects in one trial), or placebo (156 subjects in seven trials) were finally included in the present study. Pooled estimates of each posterior distribution based on the BPRS were as follows: clozapine, −2.0 (−6.7 to 2.7); olanzapine, 0.5 (−2.3 to 3.4); quetiapine, 0.3 (−3.9 to 4.5); and risperidone, −4.7 (−57.4 to 53.3). Based on the UPDRS-III, the pooled estimates were clozapine, 0.7 (−3.8 to 4.3); olanzapine, 2.8 (0.8 to 5.1); quetiapine, 3.3 (−0.7 to 5.8); and risperidone, 4.5 (−57.7 to 63.4). Although clozapine had an effective and relatively safe profile, all atypical antipsychotics included in the present study may be unsafe, as they may worsen motor function when compared to placebo.

Graphical Abstract Fullsize Image
Content from these authors
© 2017 The Pharmaceutical Society of Japan
Previous article Next article
feedback
Top