Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ph5wq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T05:04:39.131Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

List of atypical drugs?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Clive E. Adams*
Affiliation:
Cochrane Schizophrenia Group, 15 Hyde Terrace, Leeds LS2 9LT
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Columns
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © 2002. The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Sir: I realise that classifying antipsychotic drugs into typical and atypical is simplistic — but, understandably, everybody does it. Few, however, define it. In a previous issue of the Bulletin, Paton et al do by stipulating the drugs thought to be atypical for their work but they do not explain why these and not others were considered (Paton et al, Psychiatric Bulletin, May 2002, 26, 172-174). As far as I understood, ‘atypicality’ was something to do with catalepsy in rats (Reference KerwinKerwin, 1994) or speed of dissociation from the dopamine d2 receptor (Reference Kapur and SeemanKapur & Seeman, 2001), or both. In the same issue of the Bulletin, Taylor et al neither define atypicality, nor list the drugs under consideration (Taylor et al, pp. 170-172). To further confuse matters, they describe a study supplementing clozapine with sulpiride as evaluating the effects of the combination of atypical and typical drugs. Turning to the Maudsley Guidelines (Reference Taylor, McConnell and McconnellTaylor et al 2001) for help I found none. Atypical antipsychotics are recommended for use for everyone with psychosis, yet a defined list is not provided. Using terms like new and old generation drugs is no better. It seems to be avoiding the key issue, which is the neuropharmacology/neurophysiology, not the age or cost of the compound.

This is a genuine plea to authors; if the classification of typical—atypical is being used, please list what is being considered as atypical, and why are some drugs being considered and not others.

References

Kapur, S. & Seeman, P. (2001) Does fast dissociation from the dopamine d(2) receptor explain the action of atypical antipsychotics? A new hypothesis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 360369.Google Scholar
Kerwin, R.W. (1994) The new atypical antipsychotics. A lack of extrapryamidal side-effects and new routes in schizophrenia research. British Journal of Psychiatry, 164, 141148.Google Scholar
Taylor, D., McConnell, D., Mcconnell, H., et al (2001) The South London Maudsley NHS Trust 2001 Prescribing Guidelines. London: Martin Dunitz.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.