The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of clozapine for inpatients with severe borderline personality disorder (CALMED study): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2022-04-29 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20451253221090832
Mike J Crawford, Verity C Leeson, Rachel Evans, Barbara Barrett, Aisling McQuaid, Jack Cheshire, Rahil Sanatinia, Gary Lamph, Piyal Sen, Katina Anagnostakis, Louise Millard, Inti Qurashi, Fintan Larkin, Nusrat Husain, Paul Moran, Thomas R E Barnes, Carol Paton, Zoe Hoare, Marco Picchioni, Simon Gibbon
{"title":"The clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of clozapine for inpatients with severe borderline personality disorder (CALMED study): a randomised placebo-controlled trial.","authors":"Mike J Crawford, Verity C Leeson, Rachel Evans, Barbara Barrett, Aisling McQuaid, Jack Cheshire, Rahil Sanatinia, Gary Lamph, Piyal Sen, Katina Anagnostakis, Louise Millard, Inti Qurashi, Fintan Larkin, Nusrat Husain, Paul Moran, Thomas R E Barnes, Carol Paton, Zoe Hoare, Marco Picchioni, Simon Gibbon","doi":"10.1177/20451253221090832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Data from case series suggest that clozapine may benefit inpatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), but randomised trials have not been conducted.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We aimed to recruit 222 inpatients with severe BPD aged 18 or over, who had failed to respond to other antipsychotic medications. We randomly allocated participants on a 1:1 ratio to receive up to 400 mg of clozapine per day or an inert placebo using a remote web-based randomisation service. The primary outcome was total score on the Zanarini Rating scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-harm, aggression, resource use and costs, side effects and adverse events. We used a modified intention to treat analysis (mITT) restricted to those who took one or more dose of trial medication, using a general linear model fitted at 6 months adjusted for baseline score, allocation group and site.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study closed early due to poor recruitment and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of 29 study participants, 24 (83%) were followed up at 6 months, of whom 21 (72%) were included in the mITT analysis. At 6 months, 11 (73%) participants assigned to clozapine and 6 (43%) of those assigned to placebo were still taking trial medication. Adjusted difference in mean total ZAN-BPD score at 6 months was -3.86 (95% Confidence Intervals = -10.04 to 2.32). There were 14 serious adverse events; 6 in the clozapine arm and 8 in the placebo arm of the trial. There was little difference in the cost of care between groups.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We recruited insufficient participants to test the primary hypothesis. The study findings highlight problems in conducting placebo-controlled trials of clozapine and in using clozapine for people with BPD, outside specialist inpatient mental health units.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>ISRCTN18352058. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18352058.</p>","PeriodicalId":23127,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9058570/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20451253221090832","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Data from case series suggest that clozapine may benefit inpatients with borderline personality disorder (BPD), but randomised trials have not been conducted.

Methods: Multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. We aimed to recruit 222 inpatients with severe BPD aged 18 or over, who had failed to respond to other antipsychotic medications. We randomly allocated participants on a 1:1 ratio to receive up to 400 mg of clozapine per day or an inert placebo using a remote web-based randomisation service. The primary outcome was total score on the Zanarini Rating scale for Borderline Personality Disorder (ZAN-BPD) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included self-harm, aggression, resource use and costs, side effects and adverse events. We used a modified intention to treat analysis (mITT) restricted to those who took one or more dose of trial medication, using a general linear model fitted at 6 months adjusted for baseline score, allocation group and site.

Results: The study closed early due to poor recruitment and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of 29 study participants, 24 (83%) were followed up at 6 months, of whom 21 (72%) were included in the mITT analysis. At 6 months, 11 (73%) participants assigned to clozapine and 6 (43%) of those assigned to placebo were still taking trial medication. Adjusted difference in mean total ZAN-BPD score at 6 months was -3.86 (95% Confidence Intervals = -10.04 to 2.32). There were 14 serious adverse events; 6 in the clozapine arm and 8 in the placebo arm of the trial. There was little difference in the cost of care between groups.

Interpretation: We recruited insufficient participants to test the primary hypothesis. The study findings highlight problems in conducting placebo-controlled trials of clozapine and in using clozapine for people with BPD, outside specialist inpatient mental health units.

Trial registration: ISRCTN18352058. https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18352058.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
氯氮平治疗重度边缘型人格障碍住院患者的临床疗效和成本效益(calm研究):一项随机安慰剂对照试验
背景:来自病例系列的数据表明氯氮平可能对边缘性人格障碍(BPD)的住院患者有益,但尚未进行随机试验。方法:多中心、双盲、安慰剂对照试验。我们的目标是招募222名18岁或以上的重度BPD住院患者,他们对其他抗精神病药物没有反应。我们使用基于网络的远程随机化服务,以1:1的比例随机分配参与者,每天接受高达400mg氯氮平或惰性安慰剂。主要结果是6个月时扎纳里尼边缘型人格障碍(Zanarini Rating scale for Borderline Personality Disorder, ZAN-BPD)的总分。次要结果包括自残、攻击、资源使用和成本、副作用和不良事件。我们使用改良的治疗意向分析(mITT),仅限于服用一剂或多剂试验药物的患者,使用6个月时拟合的一般线性模型,调整基线评分、分配组和地点。结果:受新冠肺炎疫情影响和招募不力影响,本研究提前结束。在29名研究参与者中,24名(83%)随访6个月,其中21名(72%)纳入了mITT分析。6个月时,11名(73%)氯氮平组参与者和6名(43%)安慰剂组参与者仍在服用试验药物。6个月时,平均总ZAN-BPD评分的调整差为-3.86(95%置信区间= -10.04至2.32)。严重不良事件14例;氯氮平组6例,安慰剂组8例。两组之间的护理费用几乎没有差别。解释:我们招募的参与者不足以检验主要假设。研究结果强调了氯氮平安慰剂对照试验的问题,以及氯氮平在BPD患者中使用的问题。试验注册ISRCTN18352058。https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18352058
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
35
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of psychopharmacology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in psychopharmacology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area.
期刊最新文献
Use of an injection of aripiprazole given once every 2 months (Abilify Asimtufii®) in people with bipolar I disorder: a Plain Language Summary of Publication. Exploring the clinical factors affecting lithium dose and plasma level and the effect of brand. Low-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder and its comparison with high-frequency stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Risperidone ISM®: review and update of its usefulness in all phases of schizophrenia. Incorporation of a specialist mental health clinical pharmacist within a primary care network: patient referrals, prescribing decisions, and clinical outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1