Practical Guidance on the Use of Lurasidone for the Treatment of Adults with Schizophrenia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic that was approved in Europe in 2014 for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults aged ≥ 18 years. Clinical experience with lurasidone in Europe is currently limited, and there is therefore a need to provide practical guidance on using lurasidone for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia.Methods
A panel of European psychiatrists with extensive experience of prescribing lurasidone was convened to provide recommendations on using lurasidone to treat adults with schizophrenia.Results
Extensive evidence from clinical trials and the panel's clinical experience suggest that lurasidone is as effective as other atypical agents, with the possible exception of clozapine. Lurasidone is associated with a lower propensity for metabolic side effects (in particular, weight gain) and hyperprolactinaemia than most other atypical antipsychotics and has a relatively benign neurocognitive side effect profile. Patients switching to lurasidone from another antipsychotic may experience weight reduction and/or improvements in the ability to focus/concentrate. Most side effects with lurasidone (such as somnolence) are transitory, easily managed and/or ameliorated by dose adjustment. Akathisia and extrapyramidal symptoms may occur in a minority of patients, but these can be managed effectively with dose adjustment, adjunctive therapy and/or psychosocial intervention.Conclusions
Given the crucial importance of addressing the physical as well as mental healthcare needs of patients, lurasidone is a rational therapeutic choice for adults with schizophrenia, both in the acute setting and over the long term.Funding
Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd.
SUBMITTER: Javed A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6858892 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PURPOSE/BACKGROUND:In addition to clozapine, other atypical antipsychotic drugs pharmacologically similar to clozapine, for example, olanzapine, risperidone, and melperone, are also effective in a similar proportion of treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) patients, ~40%. The major goal of this study was to compare 2 doses of lurasidone, another atypical antipsychotic drug, and time to improvement in psychopathology and cognition during a 6-month trial in TRS patients. METHODS/PROCEDURES:The diagnosis of TRS was based on clinical history and lack of improvement in psychopathology during a 6-week open trial of lurasidone 80 mg/d (phase 1). This was followed by a randomized, double-blind, 24-week trial of lurasidone, comparing 80- and 240-mg/d doses (phase 2). FINDINGS/RESULTS:Significant non-dose-related improvement in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Total and subscales and in 2 of 7 cognitive domains, speed of processing and executive function, were noted. Twenty-eight (41.8%) of 67 patients in the combined sample improved ?20% in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Total. Of the 28 responders, 19 (67.9%) first reached ?20% improvement between weeks 6 and 24 during phase 2, including some who had previously failed to respond to clozapine. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS:Improvement with lurasidone is comparable with those previously reported for clozapine, melperone, olanzapine, and risperidone in TRS patients. In addition, this study demonstrated that 80 mg/d lurasidone, an effective and tolerable dose for non-TRS patients, was also effective in TRS patients but required longer duration of treatment. Direct comparison of lurasidone with clozapine in TRS patients is indicated.
| S-EPMC7188269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn 2014, lurasidone, an atypical antipsychotic, was approved for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults. It is an alternative treatment option to aripiprazole, and when compared with aripiprazole, lurasidone was associated with improved symptom reduction and reduced risk of weight gain and relapse. We conducted a cost-utility analysis of lurasidone versus aripiprazole from the perspective of healthcare services, using Scotland and Wales as specific case studies.MethodsA 10-year Markov model, incorporating a 6-week acute phase and a maintenance phase across three health states (discontinuation, relapse, death) was constructed. Six-week probabilities of discontinuation and adverse events were based on a published independent mixed-treatment comparison; long-term risks of relapse and discontinuation were from an indirect comparison. Costs included drug therapy, relapse, and outpatient, primary and residential care. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5 %. Utility estimates were taken from published literature, and cost effectiveness was expressed as total 10-year incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).ResultsLurasidone yielded a cost saving of £3383 and an improvement of 0.005 QALYs versus aripiprazole, in Scotland. Deterministic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that results were sensitive to relapse rates, while probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested that lurasidone had the highest expected net benefit at willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20,000-30,000 per QALY. The probability that lurasidone was a cost-effective treatment strategy was approximately 75 % at all willingness-to-pay thresholds, with similar results being obtained for the Welsh analysis.ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that lurasidone would provide an effective, cost-saving alternative for the healthcare service in the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia.
| S-EPMC4901121 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSchizophrenia is a serious mental health condition characterised by distortions in thought processes, perception, mood, sense of self, and behaviour. Lurasidone, a second-generation atypical antipsychotic, represents an additional treatment option alongside existing antipsychotics for adolescents and adults with schizophrenia. An economic model was developed to evaluate the incremental costs of lurasidone as a first-line treatment option compared to existing antipsychotics.MethodsA Markov model was developed to estimate the cost impact of lurasidone as a first-line treatment option for both adolescents and adults. The sequence-based model incorporated the following health states: stable (no relapse or discontinuation), discontinuation (due to adverse events or other reasons), and relapse. Data used to determine the movement of patients between health states were obtained from network meta-analyses (NMAs). The time horizon ranged from three to five years (depending on the patient population) and a six-weekly cycle length was used. Unit costs and resource use were reflective of the UK NHS and Personal Social Services and consisted of the following categories: outpatient, adverse events, primary and residential care. Extensive deterministic sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess the level of uncertainty associated with the base case results.ResultsLurasidone is demonstrated to be cost-saving as a first-line treatment within the adolescent and adult populations when compared to second-line and third-line respectively. Lurasidone is more expensive in terms of treatment costs, resource use (in the stable health state) and the treatment of adverse events. However, these costs are outweighed by the savings associated with the relapse health state. Lurasidone remains cost-saving when inputs are varied in sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis.ConclusionsLurasidone is a cost-saving first-line treatment for schizophrenia for both adolescents and adults.
| S-EPMC9404623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract Background: Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic agent that has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of adults with schizophrenia in the dose range of 40–160?mg/d. The objective of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to evaluate the acute efficacy and safety of lurasidone in adolescent patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Adolescents (13–17 years old) diagnosed with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with fixed-dose lurasidone 40?mg/d, 80?mg/d, or placebo. Changes from baseline to Week 6 in PANSS total and subscale (positive, negative, general psychopathology, excitability) scores were evaluated using mixed-model, repeated-measures analysis. Treatment response was defined as ?20% reduction from baseline in PANSS total score at Week 6 and was analyzed using a logistic regression model with last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach. Results: A total of 326 patients (mean age, 15.4 years) were randomized and received lurasidone 40?mg/d (N = 108), 80?mg/d (N = 106), or placebo (N = 112). The PANSS total score at Week 6 demonstrated a placebo-adjusted, least-squares (LS) mean improvement of ?8.0 (P < .001; effect size [ES] = 0.51) for the 40?mg/d group and ?7.7 (P < .001; ES = 0.48) for the 80?mg/d group. Placebo-adjusted LS mean change for lurasidone 40?mg/d and 80?mg/d, respectively, was ?3.2 (P < .001; ES = 0.62) and ?3.2 (P < .001; ES = 0.60) on the PANSS positive subscale, ?1.7 (P = .011; ES = 0.41) and ?1.6 (P = .022; ES = 0.35) on the PANSS negative subscale, ?2.8 (P = .012; ES = 0.38) and ?2.8 (P = 0.011; ES = 0.37) on the PANSS general psychopathology subscale, and ?1.1 (P = .016; ES = 0.36) and ?1.8 (P < .001; ES = 0.53) on the PANSS excitability subscale. The proportion of treatment responders at Week 6 (LOCF) was 42.0% in the placebo group, 63.9% in the lurasidone 40?mg/d group (P < .001; NNT = 5), and 65.1% in the lurasidone 80?mg/d group (P < .001; NNT = 5). The most common adverse events (incidence ?5% in either lurasidone group and at least twice the rate of placebo) for lurasidone 40?mg/d, 80?mg/d, and placebo, respectively, were nausea (12.7%, 14.4%, and 2.7%), somnolence (9.1%, 11.5%, and 5.4%), akathisia (9.1%, 8.7%, and 1.8%), vomiting (8.2%, 6.7%, and 1.8%), and sedation (5.5%, 1.9%, and 1.8%). The rate of study discontinuation due to adverse events was higher in placebo-treated versus lurasidone-treated patients (8.0% vs. 3.7%, respectively). Conclusion: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study of adolescent patients with schizophrenia, lurasidone (40?mg/d and 80?mg/d) demonstrated statistically significant efficacy and clinically meaningful improvement across a range of symptoms associated with this disorder. Lurasidone treatment was generally safe and well tolerated in this study. Sponsored by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01911429
| S-EPMC5476011 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lurasidone is a novel benzisothiazole antipsychotic drug for the treatment of schizophrenia. Of the antipsychotic drugs, lurasidone has the highest affinity for the 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)(7) receptor. Lurasidone also has high affinities for the dopamine D(2), 5HT(2A), 5-HT(1A) and α(2C) adrenergic receptors. Moreover, lurasidone has low affinities for the α(1) adrenergic, histamine H(1) and muscarinic M(1) receptors. The involvement of 5-HT(7) receptors in cognitive processes has been suggested by both pharmacological and molecular investigations. Chronic treatment with lurasidone increases neurotrophin BDNF mRNA levels in both the hippocampus (ventral and dorsal) and prefrontal cortex under basal conditions or in response to an acute swim stress. Lurasidone may potentiate N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor (NMDAR) function through antagonistic action on 5-HT(7) receptors without a direct affinity for NMDARs. These results suggest that lurasidone treatment may be a novel approach for the prevention of the development of cognitive impairment in individuals who are at risk for schizophrenia or related disorders involving cognitive impairment. In clinical trials, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significantly greater endpoint improvement versus placebo on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score after 6 weeks among subjects receiving 80 or 160 mg. The most frequent side effects of lurasidone were akathisia, nausea, parkinsonism, dizziness and somnolence. Once-daily treatment with lurasidone at 160 mg was superior to placebo based on the composite cognitive functioning measure. Lurasidone treatment produced improvements in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores at 6 weeks that were significantly greater than placebo. A limitation of this review is that the majority of the data were obtained from abstracts and posters. These sources have not been subjected to the peer review processes of medical journals; thus, the results presented in these forums may require further quality review and subsequent revision prior to final publication.
| S-EPMC3367402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Negative symptoms of schizophrenia remain a major therapeutic challenge. The progress in the conceptualization and assessment is not yet fully reflected by treatment research. Nevertheless, there is a growing evidence base regarding the effects of biological and psychosocial interventions on negative symptoms. The importance of the distinction between primary and secondary negative symptoms for treatment selection might seem evident, but the currently available evidence remains limited. Good clinical practice is recommended for the treatment of secondary negative symptoms. Antipsychotic treatment should be optimized to avoid secondary negative symptoms due to side effects and due to positive symptoms. For most available interventions, further evidence is needed to formulate sound recommendations for primary, persistent, or predominant negative symptoms.However, based on currently available evidence recommendations for the treatment of undifferentiated negative symptoms (including both primary and secondary negative symptoms) are provided. Although it has proven difficult to formulate an evidence-based recommendation for the choice of an antipsychotic, a switch to a second-generation antipsychotic should be considered for patients who are treated with a first-generation antipsychotic. Antidepressant add-on to antipsychotic treatment is an option. Social skills training is recommended as well as cognitive remediation for patients who also show cognitive impairment. Exercise interventions also have shown promise. Finally, access to treatment and to psychosocial rehabilitation should be ensured for patients with negative symptoms. Overall, there is definitive progress in the field, but further research is clearly needed to develop specific treatments for negative symptoms.
| S-EPMC8057437 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the effect of 12 months of treatment with lurasidone on weight in patients with schizophrenia. Post-hoc, observed-case analysis included pooled data from six studies on 40-160 mg/day lurasidone; two studies included active comparators (2-6 mg/day risperidone or 200-800 mg/day quetiapine XR). Overall, 593 patients completed 12 months of treatment (N=471 lurasidone, N = 89 risperidone, N = 33 quetiapine XR). The mean baseline weight was 72.8, 80.8, and 72.4 kg in the lurasidone, risperidone, and quetiapine XR groups, respectively. The mean weight change at month 12 was -0.4 kg with lurasidone, +2.6 kg with risperidone, and +1.2 kg with quetiapine XR. Weight gain of at least 7% from study baseline was observed in 16.0, 25.8, and 15.2% of patients, and weight loss of at least 7% was seen in 18.5, 6.7, and 9.1% of patients treated with lurasidone, risperidone, and quetiapine XR, respectively. A shift from normal/underweight baseline BMI status to overweight/obese at month 12 occurred in 10.2, 27.6, and 15.0% of patients in the lurasidone, risperidone, and quetiapine XR groups, respectively. Conversely, 14.3, 1.7, and 7.7% of patients, respectively, shifted from overweight/obese to normal/underweight. In summary, a low potential for clinically significant weight gain was observed in patients with schizophrenia treated continuously with lurasidone for 12 months.
| S-EPMC4593468 | biostudies-literature
Project description:When treating persons with schizophrenia, delaying time to relapse is a main goal. Antipsychotic medication has been the primary treatment approach, and there are a variety of different choices available. Lurasidone is a second-generation (atypical) antipsychotic agent that is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar depression. Three long-term studies of lurasidone have examined time to relapse in persons with schizophrenia, including a classic placebo-controlled randomized withdrawal study and two 12-month active comparator studies (vs risperidone and vs quetiapine extended-release). Lurasidone 40-80 mg/d evidenced superiority over placebo (number needed to treat [NNT] vs placebo for relapse, 9). Lurasidone 40-160 mg/d was noninferior to quetiapine extended-release 200-800 mg/d on the outcome of relapse, and was superior on the outcome of avoidance of hospitalization (NNT 8) and the outcome of remission (NNT 7). Lurasidone demonstrated a lower risk for long-term weight gain than the active comparators. Demonstrated differences in tolerability profiles among the different choices of antipsychotics make it possible to attempt to match up an individual patient to the best choice for such patient based on past history of tolerability, comorbidities, and personal preferences, potentially improving adherence.
| S-EPMC4984824 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lurasidone augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (SZ) in a retrospective chart review. From the medical records of 916 SZ patients, we identified 16 individuals treated with a combination of clozapine and lurasidone. The detailed clinical data are described separately for each patient. We compared the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores between three points of observation: before the treatment and one month and two months after its initiation. CGI Improvement (CGI-I) scores were used to evaluate the treatment response between the first and last points of observation. The vast majority of patients (14/16, 87.5%) responded to lurasidone augmentation of clozapine (CGI-I scores 1 or 2). Therapeutic effects were observable after 3-12 weeks of treatment (median 6 (4-6)). A reduction in CGI-S scores was observed after the first month of observation. There was an observable reduction in positive, depressive and anxiety symptoms, as well as an improvement in psychosocial functioning. Two patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Our study suggests that lurasidone augmentation of clozapine may lead to improvements in a broad range of SZ symptom dimensions.
| S-EPMC10046327 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone for the treatment of Chinese schizophrenic patients.MethodsHospitalized schizophrenia patients aged 18-65 were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind, double-dummy, flexible-dose treatment with lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day) or risperidone (2, 4 or 6 mg/day). Efficacy was evaluated using a non-inferiority comparison of lurasidone relative to risperidone based on week 6 change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Safety assessments included adverse events, clinical laboratory measures, and electrocardiograms.ResultsFour hundred and forty-four patients were screened to obtain an intent-to-treat sample of 384 patients, of whom 54 patients discontinued treatment prior to 6 weeks. Lurasidone met the criteria for non-inferiority versus risperidone on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean (SE) change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -31.2 (1.0) and -34.9 (1.0) in the lurasidone and risperidone group, respectively. The mean difference score was 3.7, and the upper boundary of the 95%-confidence interval (1.0-6.3) was less than the prespecified margin of 7.0. No clinically meaningful between-treatment group differences were evident on secondary efficacy measures, including PANSS positive, PANSS negative, Clinical Global Impression scale - Severity, and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia scales. The incidence of adverse events was lower for lurasidone vs risperidone for extrapyramidal symptoms (17.0% vs 38.2%), akathisia (7.2% vs 13.6%), prolactin increase (3.1% vs 14.1%), and weight increase (0.5% vs 5.2%).ConclusionLurasidone was found to be non-inferior to risperidone on the primary endpoint with minimal effects on weight, metabolic parameters, or prolactin levels.
| S-EPMC7317929 | biostudies-literature