Loxapine succinate: a controlled double-blind study in chronic schizophrenia. Loxapine succinate: a comparative study with chlorpromazine. A double-blind comparative trial of loxapine and trifluoperazine in acute and chronic schizophrenic patients. Treatment of acute schizophrenia with loxapine succinate (Loxitane) in a controlled study with chlorpromazine. A comparison of parenteral loxapine and haloperidol in hostile and aggressive acutely schizophrenic patients. Loxapine versus chlorpromazine in paranoid schizophrenia: a double-blind study. Evaluation of loxapine succinate in chronic schizophrenia. Is loxapine more effective than chlorpromazine in paranoid schizophrenia? A controlled double-blind comparison between loxapine succinate and chlorpromazine in acute newly hospitalized schizophrenic patients. Loxapine: a double-blind comparison with chlorpromazine in acute schizophrenic patients. A double-blind comparison of loxapine succinate and trifluoperazine in newly admitted schizophrenic patients. Loxapine succinate: a double-blind comparison with haloperidol and placebo in acute schizophrenics. Loxapine: a controlled evaluation in chronic schizophrenic patients. A controlled evaluation of loxitane in seventy-five adolescent schizophrenic patients. A double-blind comparison of loxitane--loxapine succinate and trifluoperazine hydrochloride in chronic schizophrenic patients. Loxapine in newly admitted chronic schizophrenic patients. Evaluation of two dose levels of loxapine succinate in chronic schizophrenia. Rapid tranquilization: a comparison of thiothixene with loxapine. Loxapine succinate: a controlled double-blind study in schizophrenia. Loxapine versus perphenazine in psychotic patients. A double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial. Effectiveness of loxapine succinate in acute schizophrenia: a comparative study with thiothixene. Loxapine versus haloperidol parenterally in acute psychosis with agitation. A double-blind study.
Loxapine succinate was compared to chlorpromazine in a 12-week double-blind study of 50 hospitalized chronic schizophrenic patients. Statistical analyses of BPRS scores showed significant improvemement for several items and factors in both groups of patients. Both drugs significantly decreased severity of illness on the CGI scale. On the NOSIE scale, "manifest psychosis" was improved significantly with chlorpromazine and "global severity" with loxapine succinate. There were no significant treatment differences in BPRS, CGI, or Nosie items or factors or in the reduction of overall psychopathology. The side effects associated with the study drugs differed little with respect to incidence, number, severity, and type. The most frequently reported symptoms in both groups were behavioral, extrapyramidal, and sedative. Analyses of vital signs and clinical laboratory data revealed no evidence of serious untoward effects. nan A double-blind comparative trial of loxapine and trifluoperazine was carried out in 57 acute and chronic schizophrenic patients. In both groups of patients loxapine proved to be equivalent in its effects to trifluoperazine and there were suggestions it might be rather more effective in chronic patients. Side-effects were similar with the two drugs but anticholinergic effects, excitement, dizziness and faintness occurred rather more commonly with loxapine. Laboratory tests, urine analysis, cardiovascular and ophthalmological investigations showed no significant abnormalities. nan In a parallel groups, double-blind study, 54 acutely psychotic schizophrenics were given loxapine or haloperidol parenterally for 24 to 72 hours, then orally for a total study period of up to 10 days. Dosage ratios of loxapine to haloperidol ranged from a minimum of 2.7:1 to a maximum of 4.4:1. Both groups showed significant and rapid improvement from baseline. Forty-eight percent of the loxapine patients and 33% of the haloperidol patients achieved and maintained a global severity of illness rating of mild or better. By the end of the study, 84% of the loxapine patients and 63% of the haloperidol patients had achieved an improvement rating of moderate or marked. This difference approached significance (p less than .10). The most frequently reported adverse experiences were dystonic reactions and akathisia. The number and severity of adverse experiences did not differ significantly between drug groups. Intramuscular loxapine was at least as effective as haloperidol in the initial management of hostile and aggressive schizophrenic patients. The maintenance of therapeutic response after conversion to oral concentrate was comparable with the two drugs. Newly admitted paranoid schizophrenic patients (N = 68) were treated with either loxapine or chlorpromazine for up to 4 weeks. Mean maximum dosages were 84 mg/day of loxapine and 820 mg/day of chlorpromazine. Loxapine showed efficacy superior to that of chlorpromazine, confirming earlier retrospective findings. Adverse reactions were also less troublesome with loxapine. nan The authors compared loxapine with chlorpromazine in inpatients with paranoid schizophrenia and found no difference in clinical efficacy. Thus a previous finding, based on retrospective analyses, that loxapine was superior to other neuroleptics in the treatment of paranoid schizophrenia was not verified in this prospective study. nan nan A study was conducted evaluating the efficacy of loxapine succinate in newly admitted schizophrenic patients through a four-week double-blind comparison with trifluoperazine. Twenty-four patients received between 40 and 80 mg loxapine succinate daily and 19 patients received between 20 and 50 mg trifluoperazine daily. The two groups showed comparable significant improvement on the BPRS and CGI. The discharge and termination rates of the two groups were not significantly different and the incidence and severity of side effects, most frequently extrapyramidal signs, were similar in both groups. Loxapine succinate was judged to be an effective treatment for newly admitted schizophrenic patients. nan nan nan Therapeutic efficacy and safety of loxapine succinate (LOX) and trifluoperazine hydrochloride were compared by means of a controlled, double-blind study involving 49 chronic schizophrenic inpatients. The data indicated that LOX in dosages ranging from 40 - 65 mg/day, (usually administered on a b.i.d. schedule) had demonstrable anti-psychotic activity in 14 of 25 chronic schizophrenic patients (56%), while TFP treatment in appropriate dosage showed a similar activity in 9 of 23 patients (39%). Both LOX and TFP displayed essentially the same profile and incidence of side effects. Clinical laboratory abnormalities were minor. On the basis of this study, and in comparison with trifluoperazine, it appears that loxapine is an efficacious and essentially safe medication, suitable for the treatment of chronic schizophrenia. The standard drug Stelazine (STEL), at a dose of 50 mg/day, exhibited therapeutic activity significantly different from placebo (PL) activity on several variables, most notably BPRS, attesting to the sensitivity of the experiment. On the other hand, the investigational drug, loxapine (LOX), in doses of 100 mg/day for four weeks, could be differentiated from PL as treatment in the described population on only one variable (NGI-Imp.) and one item of the BPRS. On several variables, positive trends were noted, but the differences from PL did not attain the critical values necessary for statistical significance at P smaller than 0.05. One might speculate that the relatively short duration of treatment in this study might account for the difference between these disappointing results and the more gratifying results of a previous loxapine study in chronic long-term institutionalized schizophrenics with the same oral dose. In a double-blind, placebo controlled design in chronic schizophrenic inpatients using 50 mg. and 100 mg. LOX, an attempt was made to replicate the findings of a previous study and to establish the dose-level and duration of treatment optimal for this kind of patient. Multiple regression analysis adjusting for dose, age, duration of illness, and baseline values indicated that 100 mg. LOX was an effective dose as previously shown. In contrast to the previous study, significant response effects were found by the 4th week. In addition, the dose was linearly related to response on nearly all the variables. The principal side effects were drowsiness and extrapyramidal signs. This 6-day study evaluated the efficacy of equivalent doses of loxapine and thiothixene for rapid tranquilization of acutely disturbed, psychotic patients. After initial tranquilization with intramuscular injections for 24 hours, 58 patients were treated for 5 days with oral medication. With both drugs, intramuscular treatment demonstrated clinically significant improvement from baseline on Clinical Global Impressions and Brief Psychiatric Rating scales; this improvement continued during the oral phase. Median time to tranquilization was significantly less with loxapine (60 minutes) than with thiothixene (95 minutes); during the oral phase, there were no significant differences between the two treatment groups. Side effects were minimal during the intramuscular phase; dystonia was most common during the oral phase. nan A double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial was carried out in 47 psychotic patients to evaluate the efficacy of oral treatment with loxapine compared with perphenazine. In total, 22 patients were included in diagnostic Group I (cases of acute schizophrenia and psychogenic (reactive) psychoses). The average maximum daily dose was 60.0 mg in the loxapine group and 36.8 mg in the perphenazine group. After 3-weeks' treatment, no significant differences were found between the two treatment groups according to the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale or side-effect records. Twenty-five patients were included in diagnostic Group II (cases of chronic schizophrenia). The average daily dosage was 81.1 mg in the loxapine group and 90.1 mg in the perphenazine group. After 10 to 12-weeks' treatment, no significant differences between the two treatment groups could be found according to BPRS, CGI scale, Nurses' Observation Scale for In-patient Evaluation (NOSIE) or side-effect records. The diastolic blood pressure (lying and standing) tended to increase slightly in both treatment groups. In conclusion, it was found that loxapine and perphenazine seemed to be equally effective and, based on experience with parenteral loxapine treatment, it is suggested that further investigation of oral loxapine should be carried out in psychotic patients in whom agitation is a feature. nan nan