Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12418608

Amisulpride: progress and outcomes.

Y Lecrubier
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Amisulpride is a unique atypical antipsychotic that selectively blocks D2 and D3 receptors presynaptically in the frontal cortex, possibly enhancing dopaminergic transmission, and postsynaptically in the limbic areas, possibly reducing it. Thus dopaminergic over-activity in the frontal cortex, and under-activity in the limbic areas, can be treated simultaneously, alleviating both positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, respectively. In acute schizophrenia, amisulpride is at least as effective as haloperidol, with a greater number of patients responding to treatment as determined by Clinical Global Impression (CGI scores (p = 0.014). In addition, amisulpride is associated with a lower incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) as determined by Simpson-Angus scores (SAS) when compared with haloperidol (p = 0.0053). Amisulpride showed similar efficacy to risperidone as determined by the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Positive and Negative Symptom Score (PANSS) positive subscale; a trend towards greater improvement of negative symptoms as determined by PANSS negative subscale compared with risperidone; and similar levels of EPS. Amisulpride uniquely benefits patients with negative symptoms and is the only antipsychotic to demonstrate efficacy in patients with predominantly negative symptoms. Amisulpride maintains its efficacy when used for medium/long-term treatment as demonstrated in studies of up to 12 months. Amisulpride demonstrates greater improvement in controlling symptoms compared to haloperidol. In terms of the relevance of the effects, a superiority is observed for quality of life, social adaptation and functioning as measured by the Quality of Life Scale (QLS), Clinical Glocal Impression scale (CGI) and Functional Status Questionnaire (FSQ) scales. Amisulpride also has one of the lowest potentials of all the antipsychotic agents for weight gain. The clinical evidence for amisulpride supports its earlier pre-clinical potential, showing it to be an atypical antipsychotic agent with specific clinical advantages.

Explore related subjects

AmisulprideAntipsychotic AgentsBasal Ganglia DiseasesHumansQuality of LifeReceptors, DopamineSchizophreniaSulpirideTreatment OutcomeJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Y Lecrubier. 2002. Amisulpride: progress and outcomes.. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079902125001083

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

[The benzamides tiapride, sulpiride, and amisulpride in treatment for Tourette's syndrome].

The treatment of Tourette's syndrome is a challenge. Dopamine receptor antagonists are the drugs of first choice for the treatment of tics. Because large controlled trials are lacking, there is no consensus about which of the different neuroleptic drugs should be preferred. In Germany, tiapride seems to be used most often for the treatment of tics in children - although only one small controlled trial has been performed on it till now. In adults, other dopamine receptor antagonists such as risperidone, pimozide, and sulpiride seem to be more effective than tiapride. Today it is unknown whether new atypical neuroleptic drugs including the benzamide amisulpride are more effective than the older benzamides tiapride and sulpiride.

Amisulpride↗
PubMed2006

Is the superior efficacy of new generation antipsychotics an artifact of LOCF?

It has been argued that the efficacy superiority found in meta-analyses for some of the atypical antipsychotics is an artifact of higher dropout rates due to side effects in the haloperidol group combined with last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analyses. We therefore reanalyzed a number of pivotal studies comparing new generation antipsychotics (NGAs) and conventional antipsychotics (CAs). A total of 5 studies (n = 1271) comparing amisulpride and 3 studies (n = 2454) comparing olanzapine with CAs were reanalyzed using original patient data. We applied 4 different models: LOCF, completer analysis, LOCF but excluding dropouts due to adverse events, and LOCF but excluding all dropouts with the exception of dropouts related to efficacy. Effect sizes expressed as standardized mean differences between NGAs and CAs based on the 4 different analysis models were compared. The overall results were not different irrespective of the model used. Single studies, however, showed higher effect sizes when LOCF instead of other models was used. Overall, it does not seem that higher dropout rates due to side effects in the haloperidol groups together with LOCF analyses consistently biased the results in favor of amisulpride and olanzapine. Because the results of the single studies, however, showed that this may occasionally be the case, future studies should look at the data from different angles applying sensitivity analyses, and they may use alternative statistics such as mixed models, which need to be developed further. Ultimately, strategies to reduce dropout rates are needed.

Amisulpride↗