4.6 Article

Effects of olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone on neurocognitive function in early psychosis: A randomized, double-blind 52-week comparison

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY
Volume 164, Issue 7, Pages 1061-1071

Publisher

AMER PSYCHIATRIC PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.164.7.1061

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: The authors sought to compare the effects of olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone on neurocognitive function in patients with early psychosis. Method: In a 52-week double-blind, 400 patients early in multicenter study, the course of psychotic illness (< 5 years) were randomly assigned to treatment with olanzapine (2.5-20 mg/day), quetiapine (100-800 mg/day), or risperidone (0.5-4 mg/day). The mean modal daily dose was 11.7 mg (SD=5.3) for olanza-pine, 506 mg (SD=215) for quetiapine, and 2.4 mg (SD=1.0) for risperidone. A total of 224 patients completed neurocognitive assessments at baseline and at 12 weeks, and 81 patients also completed them at 52 weeks. Neurocognitive composite scores were calculated from the neurocognitive battery used in the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) and from the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia. Results: At week 12, there was significant improvement in neurocognition for each treatment (p < 0.01), but no significant overall difference between treatment Composite z score improvements on the CATIE neurocognitive battery were 0.17 for olanzapine, 0.33 for quetiapine, and 0.32 for risperidone. Composite z score improvements on the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia were 0.19 for olanzapine, 0.34 for quetiapine, and 0.22 for risperidone. Statistically significant relationships between improvements in neurocognition and functional outcome were observed at weeks 12 and 52. Conclusions: Olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone all produced significant improvements in neurocognition in early-psychosis patients. Although cognitive improvements were modest, their clinical importance was suggested by relationships with improvements in functional outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available