Dataset Information

Switching to Lurasidone following 12?months of treatment with Risperidone: results of a 6-month, open-label study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia are at an increased risk for developing metabolic syndrome, which is associated with greater cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Treatment with some commonly used antipsychotic medications may increase the risk of developing metabolic syndrome. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of lurasidone in patients who continued lurasidone or switched from risperidone to lurasidone. A secondary aim was assessment of the effect of long-term lurasidone on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). METHODS:The treatment sample in the current study consisted of clinically stable patients with schizophrenia (N?=?223) who had completed a 12-month, double-blind study of lurasidone vs. risperidone. In the current extension study, all patients received 6?months of open-label treatment with lurasidone, either continuing lurasidone assigned during the preceding double-blind trial, or switching from double-blind risperidone to lurasidone. Safety and tolerability parameters included body weight, prolactin, and metabolic laboratory tests. RESULTS:Six months of OL treatment with lurasidone was generally well-tolerated, with a low incidence of parkinsonism (4.5%) and akathisia (3.1%). Overall, few adverse events were rated as severe (4.9%), and discontinuation due to an adverse event was low in the lurasidone continuation vs. risperidone switch groups (3.7% vs. 6.9%). In the lurasidone continuation versus risperidone switch groups, change from OL baseline to 6-month endpoint (observed case) was observed in mean body weight (-?0.6 vs. -2.6?kg), median total cholesterol (-?4.0 vs. +?4.5?mg/dL), triglycerides (-?4.5 vs. -5.5?mg/dL), glucose (0.0 vs. -3.0?mg/dL) and prolactin (males, +?0.15 vs. -11.2?ng/mL; females, +?1.3 vs. -30.8?ng/mL). Improvement in PANSS total score was maintained, from OL baseline to endpoint in the continuation vs. switch groups (+?1.0 vs. -1.0; OC). CONCLUSIONS:In this 6-month extension study, lurasidone treatment was generally well-tolerated and associated with minimal effects on weight, metabolic parameters, and prolactin levels. Patients who switched from risperidone to lurasidone experienced reductions in weight, metabolic parameters and prolactin levels commensurate with increases in these safety parameters experienced during the previous 12?months of treatment with risperidone. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00641745 (Date of Registration: March 24, 2008).

SUBMITTER: Mattingly GW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7201608 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Switching to Lurasidone following 12 months of treatment with Risperidone: results of a 6-month, open-label study.

Mattingly Greg W GW Haddad Peter M PM Tocco Michael M Xu Jane J Phillips Debra D Pikalov Andrei A Loebel Antony A

BMC psychiatry 20200505 1

<h4>Background</h4>Patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia are at an increased risk for developing metabolic syndrome, which is associated with greater cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Treatment with some commonly used antipsychotic medications may increase the risk of developing metabolic syndrome. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of lurasidone in patients who continued lurasidone or switched from risperidone to lurasidone. A secondary aim was assessment of the effect o ...[more]

PMID: 32370778

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionA post hoc analysis of a double-blind (DB) active control trial and an open-label extension (OLE) study was conducted to evaluate the long-term effects of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia.MethodsIn the DB trial, patients were randomised to receive lurasidone or risperidone for 12 months. In OLE, all patients received lurasidone for an additional 6 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated. Efficacy assessments included relapse rate (DB trial only), and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale.ResultsIn the DB trial, patients with schizophrenia were randomised to lurasidone (n = 399) and risperidone (n = 190), of whom 129 and 84 continued into OLE, respectively. During the DB trial, incidence of TEAEs was similar for lurasidone (84.1%) and risperidone (84.2%). Lurasidone was associated with minimal changes in metabolic variables and prolactin levels, whereas risperidone was associated with clinically significant increases in prolactin and fasting glucose levels. The proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome was significantly lower in patients treated with lurasidone versus risperidone at the end of the DB trial (25.5% vs 40.4%; p = 0.0177). During OLE, patients switching from risperidone to lurasidone experienced a reduction in weight and prolactin levels; those continuing treatment with lurasidone experienced minimal changes in metabolic variables and prolactin. At the end of OLE, the proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome was no longer significantly different between groups (23.5% vs 31.5%; p = not significant). Efficacy outcomes were generally similar between groups during the DB trial, and were maintained during OLE.ConclusionLurasidone was generally well tolerated and effective in clinically stable schizophrenia patients over the long term. Lurasidone was also generally well tolerated and maintained effectiveness over 6 months in patients switching from risperidone. Patients switching from risperidone experienced improvements in metabolic parameters and prolactin levels. These findings confirm lurasidone's long-term effectiveness and favourable metabolic profile in patients with schizophrenia.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00641745.

Project description:Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics in long-acting injection formulation. Due to the absence of head-to-head studies comparing olanzapine long-acting injection and risperidone long-acting injection, this study was intended to make exploratory, indirect, cross-study comparisons between the long-acting formulations of these two atypical antipsychotics in their effectiveness in treating patients with schizophrenia.Indirect, cross-study comparisons between olanzapine long-acting injection and risperidone long-acting injection used 12-month treatment-completion rates, because discontinuation of an antipsychotic for any cause is a recognized proxy measure of the medication's effectiveness in treating schizophrenia. Following a systematic review of the literature, two indirect comparisons were conducted using open-label, single-cohort studies in which subjects were stabilized on an antipsychotic medication before depot initiation. The first analysis compared olanzapine long-acting injection (one study) with pooled data from nine identified risperidone long-acting injection studies. The second analysis was a "sensitivity analysis," using only the most similar studies, one for olanzapine long-acting injection and one for risperidone long-acting injection, which shared near-identical study designs and involved study cohorts with near-identical patient characteristics. Pearson Chi-square tests assessed group differences on treatment-completion rates.Comparison of olanzapine long-acting injection data (931 patients) with the pooled data from the nine risperidone long-acting injection studies (3950 patients) provided almost identical 12-month treatment-completion rates (72.7% versus 72.4%; P = 0.87). When the two most similar studies were compared, the 12-month completion rate for olanzapine long-acting injection was significantly higher than for risperidone long-acting injection (81.3% versus 47.0%; P < 0.001). However, any conclusions drawn from this comparison may be limited by differences in the studies' geographic catchment areas.Using treatment-completion rates as a proxy measure of medication effectiveness, olanzapine long-acting injection did not differ significantly from risperidone long-acting injection when including all eligible studies. However, the findings of this exploratory analysis should be interpreted with caution, considering the methodological limitations of these indirect, cross-study comparisons.

Project description:BackgroundIn clinical practice, physicians often need to change the antipsychotic medications they give to patients because of an inadequate response or the presence of unacceptable or unsafe side effects. However, there is a lack of consensus in the field as to the optimal switching strategy for antipsychotics, especially with regards to the speed at which the dose of the previous antipsychotic should be reduced. This paper assesses the short-term results of strategies for the discontinuation of olanzapine when initiating risperidone.MethodsIn a 6-week, randomized, open-label, rater-blinded study, patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, on a stable drug dose for more than 30 days at entry, who were intolerant of or exhibiting a suboptimal symptom response to more than 30 days of olanzapine treatment, were randomly assigned to the following switch strategies (common risperidone initiation scheme; varying olanzapine discontinuation): (i) abrupt strategy, where olanzapine was discontinued at risperidone initiation; (ii) gradual 1 strategy, where olanzapine was given at 50% entry dose for 1 week after risperidone initiation and then discontinued; or (iii) gradual 2 strategy, where olanzapine was given at 100% entry dose for 1 week, then at 50% in the second week, and then discontinued.ResultsThe study enrolled 123 patients on stable doses of olanzapine. Their mean age was 40.3 years and mean (+/- standard deviation (SD)) baseline Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score of 75.6 +/- 11.5. All-cause treatment discontinuation was lowest (12%) in the group with the slowest olanzapine dose reduction (gradual 2) and occurred at half the discontinuation rate in the other two groups (25% in abrupt and 28% in gradual 1). The relative risk of early discontinuation was 0.77 (confidence interval 0.61-0.99) for the slowest dose reduction compared with the other two strategies. After the medication was changed, improvements at endpoint were seen in PANSS total score (-7.3; p < 0.0001) and in PANSS positive (-3.0; p < 0.0001), negative (-0.9; p = 0.171) and anxiety/depression (-1.4; p = 0.0005) subscale scores. Severity of movement disorders and weight changes were minimal.ConclusionWhen switching patients from olanzapine to risperidone, a gradual reduction in the dose of olanzapine over 2 weeks was associated with higher rates of retention compared with abrupt or less gradual discontinuation. Switching via any strategy was associated with significant improvements in positive and anxiety symptoms and was generally well tolerated.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00378183.

Project description:To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of lurasidone in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder patients switched to lurasidone.Patients in this multicenter, 6-month open-label, flexible-dose, extension study had completed a core 6-week randomized trial in which clinically stable, but symptomatic, outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were switched to lurasidone. Patients started the extension study on treatment with the same dose of lurasidone taken at study endpoint of the 6-week core study; following this, lurasidone was flexibly dosed (40-120 mg/day), if clinically indicated, starting on Day 7 of the extension study. The primary safety endpoints were the proportion of patients with treatment emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, or who discontinued due to AEs. Secondary endpoints included metabolic variables and measures of extrapyramidal symptoms and akathisia, as well as the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S), and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). The study was conducted from August 2010 to November 2011.Of the 198 patients who completed the 6-week core study, 149 (75.3%) entered the extension study and 148 received study medication. A total of 98 patients (65.8%) completed the 6-month extension study. Lurasidone 40, 80, and 120 mg were the modal daily doses for 19 (12.8%), 65 (43.9%), and 64 (43.2%) of patients, respectively. Overall mean (SD) daily lurasidone dose was 102.0 mg (77.1). The most commonly reported AEs were insomnia (13 patients [8.8%]), nausea (13 patients [8.8%]), akathisia (12 patients [8.1%]), and anxiety (9 patients [6.1%]). A total of 16 patients (10.8%) had at least one AE leading to discontinuation from the study. Consistent with prior studies of lurasidone, there was no signal for clinically relevant adverse changes in body weight, lipids, glucose, insulin, or prolactin. Movement disorder rating scales did not demonstrate meaningful changes. Treatment failure (defined as any occurrence of discontinuation due to insufficient clinical response, exacerbation of underlying disease, or AE) was observed for 19 patients (12.8% of patients entering) and median time to treatment failure was 58 days (95% CI 22-86). The discontinuation rate due to any cause was 50/148 (33.8%), and median time to discontinuation was 62 days (95% CI 30-75). The mean PANSS total score, mean CGI-S score, and mean CDSS score decreased consistently from core study baseline across extension visits, indicating an improvement in overall condition.In this 6-month, open-label extension study, treatment with lurasidone was generally well-tolerated with sustained improvement in efficacy measures observed in outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had switched to lurasidone from a broad range of antipsychotic agents.

Project description:Antipsychotic choice for the acute phase of a first episode of psychosis (FEP) is of the utmost importance since it may influence long-term outcome. However, head-to-head comparisons between second-generation antipsychotics remain scarce. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness in the short term of aripiprazole and risperidone after FEP outbreak. From February 2011 to October 2018, a prospective, randomized, open-label study was undertaken. Two hundred-sixty-six first-episode drug-naïve patients were randomly assigned to aripiprazole (n = 136) or risperidone (n = 130) and followed-up for 12 weeks. The primary effectiveness measure was all-cause treatment discontinuation. In addition, an analysis based on intention-to-treat principle was conducted to assess clinical efficacy. The overall dropout rate at 12 weeks was small (6.39%). Effectiveness measures were similar between treatment arms as treatment discontinuation rates (χ 2 = 0,409; P = .522), and mean time to all-cause discontinuation (log rank χ 2 = -1.009; P = .316) showed no statistically significant differences. Despite no statistically significant differences between groups regarding clinical efficacy, aripiprazole required higher chlorpromazine equivalent dosage (χ 2 = 2.160; P = .032) and extended mean time (W = 8183.5; P = .008) to reach clinical response. Sex-related adverse events and rigidity were more frequent in the risperidone group, whereas sialorrhea was on the aripiprazole group. No differences regarding effectiveness were found between aripiprazole and risperidone for the short-phase treatment of FEP. Despite the importance of efficacy during this phase, differences in side effect profiles and patient's preferences are essential factors that may lead clinical decisions for these patients. NCT02532491. Effectiveness of Second-Generation Antipsychotics in First Episode Psychosis Patients: 1-year Follow-up (PAFIP3_1Y).

Project description:This multisite randomized trial addressed risks and benefits of staying on long-acting injectable haloperidol or fluphenazine versus switching to long-acting injectable risperidone microspheres.From December 2004 through March 2008, adult outpatients with a Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders-Patient Edition diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were taking haloperidol decanoate (n = 40) or fluphenazine decanoate (n = 22) were randomly assigned to stay on current long-acting injectable medication or switch to risperidone microspheres and followed for 6 months under study protocol and an additional 6 months naturalistic follow-up. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used to examine the primary outcome (time to treatment discontinuation), and random regression models were used to examine secondary outcomes.Groups did not differ significantly in time to treatment discontinuation through 6 months of protocol-driven treatment. When the 6-month naturalistic follow-up period was included, time to treatment discontinuation was significantly shorter for individuals assigned to switch than for individuals assigned to stay (10% of stayers discontinued versus 31% of switchers; P = .01). Groups did not differ with respect to psychopathology, hospitalizations, sexual side effects, new-onset tardive dyskinesia, or new-onset extrapyramidal symptoms. However, those randomized to switch to long-acting injectable risperidone microspheres had greater increases in body mass (increase of 1.0 body mass index [BMI] versus decrease of -0.3 BMI; P = .00) and prolactin (maximum increase to 23.4 ng/mL versus decrease to 15.2 ng/mL, P = .01) compared to those randomized to stay.Switching from haloperidol decanoate or fluphenazine decanoate to risperidone microspheres resulted in more frequent treatment discontinuation as well as significant weight gain and increases in prolactin.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00044655.

Dataset Information

Switching to Lurasidone following 12?months of treatment with Risperidone: results of a 6-month, open-label study.

Publications

Switching to Lurasidone following 12 months of treatment with Risperidone: results of a 6-month, open-label study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets