Typical antipsychotic drugs qualify for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) primarily for the following reasons: control of compliance and avoidance of extrapyramidal side effects by keeping chronic exposure to minimal effective blood levels. For the atypical antipsychotic clozapine, drug safety is another reason to use TDM. With regard to the new antipsychotics risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, amisulpride, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole, which have been introduced in the clinic during the last few years, the rationale to use TDM is a matter of debate. Positron emission tomography (PET), which enables measurement of the occupancy of dopamine D2 receptors, revealed that receptor occupancy correlated better with plasma concentrations than with doses of the antipsychotics. Regarding plasma levels related to therapeutic effects, optimal concentrations have been established for clozapine (350-600 ng/mL), risperidone (20-60 ng/mL), and olanzapine (20-80 ng/mL) but not for the other new antipsychotics. Studies that included analyses of drug levels in blood reported mean concentrations of 68 ng/mL for quetiapine and 317 ng/mL for amisulpride under therapeutic doses of the antipsychotic drugs. For ziprasidone or aripriprazole, data on therapeutic drug concentrations are so far lacking. In conclusion, evidence is growing that TDM may improve efficacy and safety in patients treated with the new antipsychotic drugs, especially when patients do not respond or develop side effects under therapeutic doses. The few reported investigations, however, need to be confirmed and extended.

Because of a unique pharmacodynamic profile, amisulpride seems appropriate for treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia. In a large-scale naturalistic therapeutic drug monitoring study, daily amisulpride dose, trough and dose-corrected amisulpride plasma levels, co-medication, clinical effectiveness (CGI) and side effects (UKU) were compared between age groups in 395 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (46% women; mean age 39.1 +/- 14.2 years, range 18-83 years) under amisulpride therapy. Mean amisulpride doses (574 +/- 269 mg/day), plasma levels (304 +/- 274 ng/mL), dose-corrected amisulpride plasma levels (C/D ratios, 0.52 +/- 0.41 ng/mL:mg), clinical response (at least moderate improvement, 71.6%), and side effects (any side effect, 32.2%; extrapyramidal symptoms, 14.9%) were comparable between age groups (P > 0.25). At higher age, significantly more benzodiazepines (P = 0.04), non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (P = 0.004) and non-psychotropic medications (P < 0.0001) were prescribed. The naturalistic study showed higher C/D ratios in women (P = 0.019) and a slight increase of C/D ratios with age (P = 0.026), but no substantial age-dependent effects on amisulpride doses or plasma levels. In patients above 60 years, clinical response was associated with lower amisulpride plasma levels (P = 0.016) at comparable doses. Neither the age-dependent decrease of amisulpride clearance nor the significantly higher prevalence of co-morbidity and co-medication seem to be the reasons for definite clinical concerns against amisulpride treatment of elderly if contraindications are seriously taken.

No abstract

Except for higher dose-related plasma amisulpride levels in women, the explorative study unveiled no clinically relevant gender-specific aspects regarding prescribed dose, effectiveness, and side effects.