Evidence mapPaperPMID 30185173Full record

SynthesisBMC psychiatry2018

Comparative efficacy and safety between amisulpride and olanzapine in schizophrenia treatment and a cost analysis in China: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and cost-minimization analysis.

Peng Men, Zhanmiao Yi, Chaoyun Li, Shuli Qu, Tengbin Xiong, Xin Yu, Suodi Zhai

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Peng MenDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, N. Huayuan Rd, Beijing, China.
Zhanmiao YiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, N. Huayuan Rd, Beijing, China.
Chaoyun LiHealth Economics & Outcome Research, Sanofi, Yanan Rd, Shanghai, China.
Shuli QuReal-World Insights, IQVIA, W. Beijing Rd, Shanghai, China.
Tengbin XiongDepartment of Psychiatry, Peking University Sixth Hospital, N. Huayuan Rd, Beijing, China.
Xin YuDepartment of Psychiatry, Peking University Sixth Hospital, N. Huayuan Rd, Beijing, China.
Suodi ZhaiDepartment of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, N. Huayuan Rd, Beijing, China. zhaisuodi@163.com.
Peking University · CNPeking University Sixth Hospital · CNPeking University Third Hospital · CNSanofi (China) · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmisulpride was introduced into China in 2010 as a second-generation atypical antipsychotic, while olanzapine has been on the market since 1999 as one of the leading treatments for schizophrenia in China. Since more Chinese patients are gaining access to amisulpride, the study aims to compare the efficacy, safety, and costs between amisulpride and olanzapine for schizophrenia treatment in China.

methodsPubMed, Embase, the Cochrane library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and WanFang database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to July 2018. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was utilized to assess the quality of included studies. A meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of amisulpride and olanzapine, followed by a cost-minimization analysis using local drug and medical costs reported in China.

resultsTwenty RCTs with 2000 patients were included in the systematic review. There were no significant differences between amisulpride and olanzapine on efficacy measures based on scores from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity or Improvement. For safety outcomes, amisulpride was associated with lower fasting blood glucose and less abnormal liver functions as well as significantly lower risks of weight gain, constipation, and somnolence; olanzapine was associated with significantly lower risks of insomnia and lactation/amenorrhea/sexual hormone disorder. No significant differences were found in risks of extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), tremor, akathisia, abnormal corrected QT interval. Cost-minimization analysis showed that amisulpride was likely to be a cost-saving alternative in China, with potential savings of 1358 Chinese Yuan (CNY) per patient for a three-month schizophrenia treatment compared with olanzapine.

conclusionAs the first meta-analysis and cost-minimization analysis comparing the efficacy, safety and cost of amisulpride and olanzapine within a Chinese setting, the study suggests that amisulpride may be an effective, well-tolerated, and cost-saving antipsychotic drug alternative in China.

Indexed as

AmisulprideAntipsychotic AgentsBrief Psychiatric Rating ScaleChinaCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleOlanzapineSchizophreniaTreatment OutcomeAmisulprideAntipsychotic AgentsOlanzapineAmisulprideChinaCost-minimization analysisMeta-analysisOlanzapineSchizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID30185173
PMCPMC6125952
OpenAlexW2889709208

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.