Dataset Information

Efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics for acute bipolar depression: a network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

While clinical trial evidence has firmly established the efficacy of several atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for treating bipolar depression, no randomized controlled trials (RCT's) comparing AAPs have been conducted. This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy and tolerability of AAP monotherapy in adults with bipolar depression.

Methods

Efficacy measures included change in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Improvement - Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), response, and remission. Multiple tolerability outcomes were examined. Results from random effects models were reported as difference in change from baseline for continuous variables or odds ratios for dichotomous variables. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the curve cumulative ranking probabilities. Number needed to treat (NNT) and harm (NNH) were calculated.

Results

Eighteen RCT's met inclusion criteria of the systematic literature review. On change in MADRS, lurasidone (- 4.71 [95% Crl - 6.98, - 2.41]), quetiapine (- 4.80 [- 5.93, - 3.72]), olanzapine (- 4.57 [- 5.92, - 3.20]), and cariprazine (- 2.29 [- 3.47, - 1.09]) were more efficacious than placebo. Lurasidone was associated with a significantly greater odds of response (≥50% improvement in MADRS) compared to cariprazine (1.78 [95% Crl 1.08, 2.77]), aripiprazole (2.38 [1.38, 3.85]), and ziprasidone (2.47 [1.41, 3.98]), but was similar to olanzapine (1.68 [0.99,2.65]) and quetiapine (1.25 [0.78, 1.90]). For change in CGI-BP-S-overall score, lurasidone was significantly better than cariprazine (- 0.38 [95% Crl - 0.66,-0.10]) and ziprasidone (- 0.58 [- 0.91,-0.26]), but similar to quetiapine (- 0.08 [- 0.36, 0.19])and olanzapine (- 0.04 [- 1.41, 1.46]). Lurasidone (0.34 kg [95% Crl - 0.22, 0.89]) and aripiprazole (0.20 kg [- 0.59, 1.00]) had a similar weight change compared to placebo, but olanzapine (2.88 kg [2.40, 3.36]), quetiapine (1.17 kg [0.84, 1.49]), and cariprazine (0.65 kg [0.34, 0.96]) were associated with greater weight gain. The NNT for response was the lowest for lurasidone (NNT = 5) followed by quetiapine (NNT = 6), olanzapine (NNT = 10) and cariprazine (NNT = 12).

Conclusions

In this NMA in adults with bipolar depression, which evaluated change in depressive symptoms (assessed by MADRS) across short-term trials, the largest improvement versus placebo was observed for lurasidone, olanzapine and quetiapine with cariprazine, showing a smaller treatment effect. Aripiprazole and ziprasidone were ineffective for the treatment of bipolar depression. Improvement in CGI-BP-S score for lurasidone was larger than cariprazine and ziprasidone but similar to quetiapine and olanzapine. Based on short term studies lurasidone and aripiprazole had similar weight gain compared to placebo.

SUBMITTER: Kadakia A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8112003 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are highly prevalent in people living with dementia. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are commonly used to treat BPSD, but their comparative efficacy and acceptability are unknown. The standard mean difference (SMD) was used to pool the fixed effects of continuous outcomes. We calculated ORs with corresponding 95% credible intervals (CI) for the categorical variable. Efficacy was defined as the scores improved on the standardised scales. Acceptability was defined as the all-cause dropout rate. Tolerability was defined as the discontinuation rate due to adverse effects (AEs). The relative treatment rankings were reported with the surface under the cumulative curve. The AE outcomes included mortality, cerebrovascular adverse events (CVAEs), falls, sedation, extrapyramidal symptoms and urinary symptoms. Twenty randomised controlled trials with a total of 6374 individuals containing 5 types of SGAs (quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone, brexpiprazole and aripiprazole) with intervention lengths ranging from 6 weeks to 36 weeks were included in this network meta-analysis. For the efficacy outcome, compared with the placebo, brexpiprazole (SMD=-1.77, 95% CI -2.80 to -0.74) was more efficacious, and brexpiprazole was better than quetiapine, olanzapine and aripiprazole. Regarding acceptability, only aripiprazole (OR=0.72, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.96) was better than the placebo, and aripiprazole was also better than brexpiprazole (OR=0.61, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.99). In terms of tolerability, olanzapine was worse than placebo (OR=6.02, 95% CI 2.87 to 12.66), risperidone (OR=3.67, 95% CI 1.66 to 8.11) and quetiapine (OR=3.71, 95% CI 1.46 to 9.42), while aripiprazole was better than olanzapine (OR=0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.78). Quetiapine presented good safety in CVAE. Brexpiprazole has better safety in terms of falls and showed related safety in sedation among included SGAs. Brexpiprazole showing great efficacy in the treatment of BPSD, with aripiprazole showing the highest acceptability and olanzapine showing the worst tolerability. The results of this study may be used to guide decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundAtypical antipsychotics are increasingly used for treatment of mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and considered to have fewer extrapyramidal effects than older antipsychotics.MethodsWe examined efficacy in randomised trials of bipolar disorder where the presenting episode was either depression, or manic/mixed, comparing atypical antipsychotic with placebo or active comparator, examined withdrawals for any cause, or due to lack of efficacy or adverse events, and combined all phases for adverse event analysis. Studies were found through systematic search (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library), and data combined for analysis where there was clinical homogeneity, with a special reference to trial duration.ResultsIn five trials (2,206 patients) participants presented with a depressive episode, and in 25 trials (6,174 patients) the presenting episode was manic or mixed. In 8-week studies presenting with depression, quetiapine and olanzapine produced significantly better rates of response and symptomatic remission than placebo, with NNTs of 5-6, but more adverse event withdrawals (NNH 12). With mania or mixed presentation atypical antipsychotics produced significantly better rates of response and symptomatic remission than placebo, with NNTs of about 5 up to six weeks, and 4 at 6-12 weeks, but more adverse event withdrawals (NNH of about 22) in studies of 6-12 weeks. In comparisons with established treatments, atypical antipsychotics had similar efficacy, but significantly fewer adverse event withdrawals (NNT to prevent one withdrawal about 10). In maintenance trials atypical antipsychotics had significantly fewer relapses to depression or mania than placebo or active comparator. In placebo-controlled trials, atypical antipsychotics were associated with higher rates of weight gain of >or=7% (mainly olanzapine trials), somnolence, and extrapyramidal symptoms. In active controlled trials, atypical antipsychotics were associated with lower rates of extrapyramidal symptoms, but higher rates of weight gain and somnolence.ConclusionAtypical antipsychotics are effective in treating both phases of bipolar disorder compared with placebo, and as effective as established drug therapies. Atypical antipsychotics produce fewer extrapyramidal symptoms, but weight gain is more common (with olanzapine). There is insufficient data confidently to distinguish between different atypical antipsychotics.

Project description:English-language literature cited in MEDLINE from January, 1980 to October 30, 2014 was searched by using terms of antipsychotic, generic and brand names of atypical antipsychotics, "bipolar depression/bipolar disorder", "placebo", and "trial". The parameters of response (≥50% improvement on MADRS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score), remission (either ≤12 or 8 on MADRS total score at endpoint), discontinuation due to adverse events (DAEs), somnolence, ≥7% weight gain, overall extrapyramidal side-effects (EPSs), and akathisia, were extracted from originally published primary outcome papers. The number needed to treat to benefit (NNT) for response and remission or harm (NNH) for DAEs or other side effects relative to placebo were estimated and presented with the estimate and 95% confidence interval. Olanzapine monotherapy, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC), quetiapine-IR monotherapy, quetiapine-XR monotherapy, lurasidone monotherapy, and lurasidone adjunctive therapy were superior to placebo with NNTs for responses of 11-12, 4, 7-8, 4, 4-5, and 7, and NNTs for remission of 11-12, 4, 5-11, 7, 6-7, and 6, respectively. There was no significant difference between OFC and lamotrigine, and between aripiprazole or ziprasidone and placebo in response and remission. Olanzapine monotherapy, quetiapine-IR, quetiapine-XR, aripiprazole, and ziprasidone 120-160 mg/day had significantly increased risk for DAEs with NNHs of 24, 8-14, 9, 12, and 10, respectively. For somnolence, quetiapine-XR had the smallest NNH of 4. For ≥7% weight gain, olanzapine monotherapy and OFC had the smallest NNHs with both of 5. For akathisia, aripiprazole had the smallest NNH of 5. These findings suggest that among the FDA-approved agents including OFC, quetiapine-IR and -XR, lurasidone monotherapy and adjunctive therapy to a mood stabilizer, the differences in the NNTs for response and remission are small, but the differences in NNHs for DAEs and common side-effects are large. Therefore, the selection of an FDA-approved atypical antipsychotic for bipolar depression should be based upon safety and tolerability.

Project description:BackgroundAcute mania is a psychiatric emergency requiring rapid management. However, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have shown considerable individual differences in treatment effects on manic symptoms with antimanic drugs.MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify RCTs without language restrictions from inception to April 19, 2022. We included double-blind RCTs of oral antimanic monotherapy versus placebo in adult patients. The primary outcome was variability in improvement of manic symptoms (assessed using the coefficient of variation ratio [CVR]). The secondary outcomes were overall improvement of manic symptoms and acceptability (i.e., discontinuation for any reason). The pooled effects of outcomes were calculated by random-effects meta-analyses using restricted maximum likelihood methods. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias (ROB) Assessment Tool. This study was registered with OSF (DOI:10.17605/OSF.IO/G4JNY).FindingsWe included 39 RCTs (N=12150; mean age=39·9 years, interquartile range [IQR]=38·7-41·1; mean proportion of female=48·6%, IQR=42·3%-52·3%) and investigated 14 antimanic drugs. We found that eight antimanic drugs compared to placebo were associated with lower CVRs (95% confidence interval [CI]; I2), including risperidone (0·51; 0·37-0·70; 0%), haloperidol (0·54; 0·44-0·67; 4%), olanzapine (0·59; 0·44-0·79; 47%), ziprasidone (0·61; 0·53-0·71; 0%), lithium (0·63; 0·52-0·76; 0%), quetiapine (0·65; 0·48-0·87; 2%), aripiprazole (0·68; 0·56-0·84; 25%), and cariprazine (0·70; 0·49-0·99; 28%). There were nine antimanic drugs associated with greater efficacy than placebo, including risperidone (reported as standardised mean difference; 95% CI; I2: 0·64; 0·31-0·97; 15%), haloperidol (0·57; 0·29-0·85; 64%), cariprazine (0·51; 0·24-0·78; 0%), olanzapine (0·44; 0·30-0·58; 0%), lithium (0·42; 0·29-0·55; 0%), ziprasidone (0·42; 0·26-0·58; 0%), quetiapine (0·40; 0·13-0·67; 0%), asenapine (0·40; 0·13-0·67; 0%), and aripiprazole (0·32; 0·14-0·49; 53%). Ziprasidone (reported as risk ratio; 95% CI; I2: 0·83; 0·79-0·89; 0%) and olanzapine (0·63; 0·49-0·80; 35%) were associated with better acceptability relative to placebo. Among the 39 RCTs, none had a high ROB.InterpretationWe demonstrated that eight antimanic drugs were associated with lower variability and better efficacy than placebo, suggesting that these antimanic drugs were associated with more homogenous and predictable improvements of manic symptoms in patients with acute mania.FundingThe study was supported by from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST-110-2314-B-016-035, MOST-111-2314-B-016-054), Medical Affairs Bureau (MND-MAB-D-111102), and Tri-service General Hospital (TSGH-E-111229).

Project description:Parkinson disease (PD) was considered as the 2nd most prevalent neurodegenerative disorder after Alzheimer disease, while depression is a prevailing nonmotor symptom of PD. Typically used antidepression medication includes tricyclic antidepressants (TCA), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI), monoamine-oxidase inhibitors (MAOI), and dopamine agonists (DA). Our study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of antidepressive medications for depression of PD.Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched for related articles. Traditional meta-analysis and network meta-analysis (NMA) were performed with outcomes including depression score, UPDRS-II, UPDRS-III, and adverse effects. Surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was also performed to illustrate the rank probabilities of different medications on various outcomes. The consistency of direct and indirect evidence was also assessed by node-splitting method.Results of traditional pairwise meta-analysis were performed. Concerning depression score, significant improvement was observed in AD, MAOI, SSRI, and SNRI compared with placebo. NMA was performed and more information could be obtained. DA was illustrated to be effective over placebo concerning UPDRS-III, MAOI, and SNRI. DA demonstrated a better prognosis in UPDRS-II scores compared with placebo and MAOI. However, DA and SSRI demonstrated a significant increase in adverse effects compared with placebo. The SUCRA value was calculated to evaluate the ranking probabilities of all medications on investigated outcomes, and the consistency between direct and indirect evidences was assessed by node-splitting method.SSRI had a satisfying efficacy for the depression of PD patients and could improve activities of daily living and motor function of patient but the adverse effects are unneglectable. SNRI are the safest medication with high efficacy for depression as well while other outcomes are relatively poor.