Risperidone compared with both lithium and haloperidol in mania: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Combination of a mood stabilizer with risperidone or haloperidol for treatment of acute mania: a double-blind, placebo-controlled comparison of efficacy and safety. Adjunctive treatment of manic agitation with lorazepam versus haloperidol: a double-blind study. Psychoactive drugs in mania. A controlled comparison of lithium carbonate, chlorpromazine, and haloperidol. A controlled Nordic multicentre study of zuclopenthixol acetate in oil solution, haloperidol and zuclopenthixol in the treatment of acute psychosis. Lithium combined with carbamazepine or haloperidol in the treatment of mania. A 12-week, double-blind comparison of olanzapine vs haloperidol in the treatment of acute mania. Carbamazepine compared to haloperidol in acute mania. Acute and continuation risperidone monotherapy in bipolar mania: a 3-week placebo-controlled trial followed by a 9-week double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol. A randomized comparison of divalproex oral loading versus haloperidol in the initial treatment of acute psychotic mania. A comparison of haloperidol, lithium carbonate and their combination in the treatment of mania.
Case reports and studies of other neuroleptics suggest the efficacy of risperidone in the treatment of mania. Forty-five inpatients with DSM-IV mania were studied in a 28-day randomized, controlled, double-blind trial of either 6 mg daily of risperidone, 10 mg daily of haloperidol, or 800 to 1200 mg daily of lithium. The patients in all three groups showed a similar improvement on the total score for all rating scales at day 28 (Brief Psychiatric rating scale; lithium 9.1, haloperidol 4.9, risperidone 6.5, F = 1.01, df = 2, p = 0.37; Mania rating scale; lithium 15.7, haloperidol 10.2, risperidone 12.4, F = 1.07, df = 2, p = 0.35 [analysis of variance]). The Global Assessment of Functioning and Clinical Global Impression data showed a similar pattern of improvement. This study suggests that risperidone is of equivalent efficacy to lithium and haloperidol in the management of acute mania. The extrapyramidal side effects of risperidone and haloperidol were not significantly different. The study assessed the efficacy and safety of risperidone as an adjunctive agent to mood stabilizers in the treatment of acute mania.
                This 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 156 bipolar disorder patients with a current manic or mixed episode who received a mood stabilizer (lithium or divalproex) and placebo, risperidone, or haloperidol. The primary efficacy measure was the Young Mania Rating Scale. Other assessments used the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and safety measures.
                The trial was discontinued by 25 (49%) of the 51 placebo group patients, 18 (35%) of the 52 risperidone group patients, and 28 (53%) of the 53 haloperidol group patients. Mean modal doses were 3.8 mg/day (SD=1.8) of risperidone and 6.2 mg/day (SD=2.9) of haloperidol. Significantly greater reductions in Young Mania Rating Scale scores at endpoint and over time were seen in the risperidone group and in the haloperidol group, compared with the placebo group. Young Mania Rating Scale total scores improved with risperidone and with haloperidol both in patients with psychotic features and in those without psychotic features at baseline. Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale total scores at endpoint were significantly higher in the haloperidol patients than in the placebo patients. Antiparkinsonian medications were received by 8%, 17%, and 38% of patients in the placebo, risperidone, and haloperidol groups, respectively.
                Risperidone plus a mood stabilizer was more efficacious than a mood stabilizer alone, and as efficacious as haloperidol plus a mood stabilizer, for the rapid control of manic symptoms and was well tolerated. While lithium is effective in treating the majority of bipolar patients during a manic episode, the addition of neuroleptic during the early phase of treatment has been common clinical practice in inpatient settings. In an earlier open study, we demonstrated the utility of the short-acting benzodiazepine lorazepam as an adjunct to lithium for the clinical management of manic agitation.
                We now present data from a randomized, double-blind clinical study of lorazepam versus haloperidol in 20 hospitalized patients with a DSM-III-R diagnosis of bipolar disorder who were being treated concomitantly with lithium. Patients were rated using the Mania Rating Scale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Physician Global Impression Scale, and side effects scales. Data were analyzed using standard group comparisons and survival analysis.
                There was no evidence for a significant difference between the two treatment groups in the magnitude of or time to response (5.0 +/- .82 days for haloperidol; 6.5 +/- .93 days for lorazepam). Of the patients who were terminated from the protocol early, nonresponse was the primary reason in the lorazepam group while side effects were the reason in the haloperidol group.
                Lorazepam may offer an efficacious and safe alternative to haloperidol as an adjunctive treatment to lithium in the clinical management of the early phase of manic agitation in a subgroup of bipolar patients. Lithium carbonate, haloperidol, and chlorpromazine hydrochloride were compared in a double-blind controlled study with severely ill hospitalized manics. Lithium carbonate and haloperidol produced a highly significant improvement of manic symptoms without sedation. Although producing considerable sedation, chlorpromazine did little to alter the underlying mania qualitatively. Qualitative differences between lithium carbonate and haloperidol indicate that, while haloperidol has a more dramatically rapid impact on behavior-motor activity, lithium carbonate acted more evenly on the entire manic picture, with total normalization realized during active treatment. The majority of lithium carbonate-treated patients met discharge criteria at study termination, but not the patients receiving either neuroleptic drug. The rating scales are not sensitive enough to monitor manic psychopathology; this accounts for the lack of statistically significant differences among drug groups at treatment termination, despite the widely disparate discharge rates. Zuclopenthixol acetate--a new injectable formulation with a duration of action of 2-3 days--was compared with conventional intramuscular and oral formulations of haloperidol and zuclopenthixol in the initial treatment of acutely disturbed, psychotic patients. The patients were stratified into 3 diagnostic categories: acute psychoses (48 patients), mania (22 patients), and exacerbation of chronic psychoses (73 patients). The patients were rated on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Bech-Rafaelsen Mania Rating Scale (BRMAS) (only manic patients) and globally on the Clinical Global Impression (CGI). The study was an open, randomized multicentre trial with a 6-day treatment period. The zuclopenthixol acetate patients received 1-4 doses, the haloperidol patients 1-26 and the zuclopenthixol patients 1-22 doses. The assessments on the CGI showed that all 3 treatments caused a clear reduction of the severity of illness scores in all 3 diagnostic categories, with no differences between treatments. The ratings of the acute and chronic psychotic patients on the BPRS also showed significant reductions in scores with no differences between treatments. All 3 treatments caused a rapid remission of symptoms on the BRMAS. Haloperidol induced hypokinesia in significantly more patients than zuclopenthixol acetate after 24 h. Later there were no significant differences between treatments. Zuclopenthixol acetate fulfils many desires for an amended neuroleptic formulation for the initial treatment of acutely disturbed psychotic patients. Hospitalized manic patients were withdrawn from psychoactive medications for 2 weeks after which they were randomized to double-blind treatment with carbamazepine plus lithium [CBZ-Li] or haloperidol plus lithium [HAL-Li] with benztropine. Unit dosages of Li 300 mg, CBZ 200 mg and HAL 2 mg were titrated to therapeutic plasma levels and maintained for 8 weeks. No rescue medications were permitted after 3 weeks. Standard ratings of psychopathology and side effects were accomplished weekly. Sixty patients entered the study but only 33 remained for randomization after drug washout. By 8 weeks both groups were improved from baseline without statistically reliable differences between them. However HAL-Li patients had more extrapyramidal side effects that were major reasons for dropout, whereas CBZ-Li patients were more often noncompliant and initially required more rescue medications. We conclude that either combination treatment can be beneficial but CBZ-Li has the advantage because of fewer neurologic side effects. This randomized controlled trial compares the efficacy and safety of olanzapine vs haloperidol, as well as the quality of life of patients taking these drugs, in patients with bipolar mania.
                The design consisted of 2 successive, 6-week, double-blind periods and compared flexible dosing of olanzapine (5-20 mg/d, n = 234) with haloperidol (3-15 mg/d, n = 219).
                Rates of remission (Young-Mania Rating Scale score of < or =12 and 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score of < or =8 at week 6) were similar for olanzapine- and haloperidol-treated patients (52.1% vs 46.1%, respectively; P =.15). For the subgroup of patients whose index episode did not include psychotic features, rates of remission were significantly greater for the olanzapine group compared with the haloperidol group (56.7% vs 41.6%, P =.04). Relapse into an affective episode (mania and/or depression) occurred in 13.1% and 14.8% of olanzapine- and haloperidol-treated patients, respectively (P =.56). Switch to depression occurred significantly more rapidly with haloperidol than with olanzapine when using survival analysis techniques (P =.04), and significantly more haloperidol-treated patients experienced worsening of extrapyramidal symptoms, as indicated by several measures. Weight gain was significantly greater in the olanzapine group compared with the haloperidol group (2.82 vs 0.02 kg, P<.001). The olanzapine group had significant improvement in quality of life on several dimensions compared with the haloperidol group.
                These data suggest that olanzapine does not differ from haloperidol in achieving overall remission of bipolar mania. However, haloperidol carries a higher rate of extrapyramidal symptoms, whereas olanzapine is associated with weight gain. In a double-blind, between-patient clinical trial carbamazepine (CBZ) (n = 8) was compared to haloperidol (HP) (n = 9) in patients presenting with mania (DSM III). Seven patients on HP and 2 on CBZ failed to complete 4 weeks treatment. In 4 of the HP group this was because of extrapyramidal side-effects (EPS). Two patients on CBZ and 2 on HP were withdrawn because of lack of efficacy. Statistically significant clinical improvement was seen in both groups within the first 2 weeks of treatment with HP acting more quickly. In addition to EPS which occurred in HP patients, drowsiness was experienced in 4 on CBZ and 3 on HP, and gastrointestinal symptoms in 3 on CBZ. No serious haematological changes, nor abnormalities in clinical chemistry occurred in either group. We conclude that CBZ appears to be a potentially useful drug in the treatment of acute mania. In a randomized, double-blind trial, patients with acute bipolar mania received 1-6 mg/day of risperidone, 2-12 mg/day of haloperidol, or placebo for 3 weeks, followed by double-blind risperidone or haloperidol for 9 weeks. Of 438 patients, 154 were randomized to risperidone, 144 to haloperidol, and 140 to placebo. The mean+/-S.D. modal doses were 4.2+/-1.7 mg/day of risperidone and 8.0+/-3.6 mg/day of haloperidol during the initial 3-week phase and 4.1+/-1.8 and 7.4+/-3.7 mg/day during the 12-week period. At week 3, mean Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score reductions from baseline were significantly greater in patients receiving risperidone than placebo (p<0.001). Differences between risperidone and haloperidol on this efficacy measure were not significant. Further reductions in YMRS scores were seen in patients receiving risperidone or haloperidol during the subsequent 9 weeks. No unexpected adverse events were reported. Extrapyramidal disorder and hyperkinesias, the most commonly reported adverse events with antipsychotic use, occurred less frequently with risperidone than haloperidol. We conclude that risperidone monotherapy was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for bipolar mania and that efficacy was maintained over the long term. Uncontrolled evidence suggests that divalproex administered via the oral loading strategy of 20 mg/kg/day may produce clinically significant antimanic response within 3 days of treatment in some patients. We conducted a prospective study to compare the antimanic response of divalproex oral loading with that of haloperidol in the initial treatment of acute psychotic mania.
                After a < or = 1-day screening period, 36 consecutive hospitalized patients with bipolar disorder, manic or mixed phase and with psychotic features, were randomly assigned to receive either divalproex 20 mg/kg/day or haloperidol 0.2 mg/kg/day for 6 full days, without other psychotropic agents except lorazepam up to 4 mg/day for management of agitation. Serum valproate concentrations were measured after 1 day of treatment. Response was measured daily by a blind rater using the Young Mania Rating Scale and the Scale for Assessment of Positive Symptoms.
                Divalproex oral loading and haloperidol were equally effective in acutely reducing manic and psychotic symptoms. The greatest rate of improvement for both drug regimens occurred over the first 3 full days of treatment. Side effects were infrequent and minor for both treatments, except for extrapyramidal side effects which were significantly more common with haloperidol.
                Divalproex oral loading may produce rapid onset of antimanic and antipsychotic response comparable to that of haloperidol and with minimal side effects in the initial treatment of acute psychotic mania in a subset of bipolar patients. Previous investigations of the treatment of mania have resulted in uncertainty about the efficacy of lithium versus a neuroleptic. In addition there have been reports of toxicity with a haloperidol--lithium combination. In order to determine the comparative efficacy of lithium vs haloperidol vs a combination of haloperidol--lithium, we studied 21 severely ill manic patients who all met rigorous criteria for bipolar illness and who required in hospital treatment. Subjects were randomly assigned to 3 groups: (A) Lithium plus placebo (B) Placebo plus haloperidol and (C) Lithium plus haloperidol. The study was conducted in double blind fashion for 3 weeks with the dosages of the medications varied according to clinical response or untoward effects. Subjects on haloperidol and placebo or the haloperidol--lithium combination were significantly improved after 7 days in comparison to the lithium-treated group. Groups B and C did not differ from each other, either in degree of improvement or in side effects. Inspite of the relatively small sample size the results suggest (1) that haloperidol is superior to lithium for treating severely ill acute mania and (2) that while a haloperidol--lithium combination does not result in a significant increase in side effects, it is not superior to haloperidol alone.