Risperidone (depot) for schizophrenia

Risk of Drug-induced Movement Disorders with Newer Antipsychotic Agents

Background:

The last decade has seen development of numerous novel antipsychotic drugs with unique mechanisms including long-acting formulations for clinical use. A comparative assessment of these new drugs with each other and previous antipsychotics have not been performed with regards to risk for drug-induced movement disorders (DIMD).

Methods:

Medline was searched from January 2010 to February 2022 for primary research articles and review articles in English using the search terms “extrapyramidal” and “tardive” with individual drug names of novel antipsychotics.

Results:

We identified articles describing the risk of DIMD with 6 novel antipsychotics, 4 novel formulations, and 3 experimental antipsychotics. Both short- and long-term data generally showed comparable to lower risk of DIMD with novel antipsychotics and recent long-acting formulations compared to previously marketed antipsychotics.

Discussion:

Several novel antipsychotics, particularly lumateperone and pimavanserin, show promise in being able to treat psychosis while reducing the risk of DIMD. Long-acting paliperidone may reduce risk of DIMD while other long-acting injectable formulations of SGA have similar risk of DIMD compared to oral formulations. New drug targets for treating psychosis without dopamine blockade also show promise.

A meta-analysis of effectiveness of real-world studies of antipsychotics in schizophrenia: Are the results consistent with the findings of randomized controlled trials?

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been considered as gold standard for establishing the efficacy and safety of investigational new drugs; nonetheless, the generalizability of their findings has been questioned. To address this issue, an increasing number of naturalistic studies and real-world database analyses have been conducted. The question of how much information from these two approaches is congruent or discrepant with each other is of great importance for the clinical practice. To answer this question, we focused on data from the antipsychotic (AP) treatment of schizophrenia. Our aim was two-fold: to conduct a meta-analysis of real-world studies (RWS), and to compare the results of RWS meta-analysis with previously published meta-analyses of RCTs. The principal measure of effectiveness was all-cause treatment discontinuation for both RWS and RCTs (when not available, then drop out for RCTs). We included publications for 8 selected APs (oral formulations of amisulpride, aripiprazole, clozapine, haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and long-acting injectable (LAI) risperidone). We identified 11 RWS and 7 RCT meta-analyses for inclusion. Our results indicated that the RWS yielded statistically conclusive and consistent findings across individual investigations. For the overwhelming majority of the comparisons where both RWS and RCT meta-analyses were available, there was good congruency between the RWS and the RCT results. Our results support that RCTs, despite their limitations, provide evidence which is generalizable to real-world settings. This is an important finding for both regulators and clinicians. RWS can provide guidance for situations where no evidence is available from double-blind clinical trials.

Pharmacogenomic Biomarkers and Their Applications in Psychiatry

Realizing the promise of precision medicine in psychiatry is a laudable and beneficial endeavor, since it should markedly reduce morbidity and mortality and, in effect, alleviate the economic and social burden of psychiatric disorders. This review aims to summarize important issues on pharmacogenomics in psychiatry that have laid the foundation towards personalized pharmacotherapy and, in a broader sense, precision medicine. We present major pharmacogenomic biomarkers and their applications in a variety of psychiatric disorders, such as depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), narcolepsy, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder. In addition, we extend the scope into epilepsy, since antiepileptic drugs are widely used to treat psychiatric disorders, although epilepsy is conventionally considered to be a neurological disorder.

A Review of Clinical and Economic Evaluations Applied to Psychotropic Therapies Used in the Treatment of Schizophrenia in Argentina

Schizophrenia is considered a serious mental disorder that affects over 21 million people worldwide, and is associated with disability that frequently affects the patient's educational and working performance. In Argentina, two of the most widely used antipsychotics in the treatment of this disorder are haloperidol and risperidone. Both are provided free to patients without health coverage in public healthcare facilities. In this paper we seek to review the clinical and economic benefits of prescribing psychotropic therapies based on haloperidol (a first-generation antipsychotic that is part of the butyrophenone group of drugs) versus risperidone [an atypical or second-generation antipsychotic (neuroleptic) drug] in adult patients who have been diagnosed with schizophrenia. To achieve this objective, an exhaustive search of relevant articles published between 2006 and April 2017 was conducted. This literature search showed that intermittent treatment usually fails to prevent relapses due to irregular protection, therefore continuous treatment is more effective. Although the injectable formats of both drugs [haloperidol depot and long-acting injectable risperidone (LAIR)] have not proven to have significant differences with regard to clinical effectiveness vis-à-vis the tablet formats, they showed a lower cost-effectiveness ratio by reducing patients' relapses. Moreover, LAIR exhibits superior cost effectiveness compared with haloperidol depot. Haloperidol is less expensive than risperidone but is less cost effective; in comparison with haloperidol, treatment with risperidone produces (1) an improvement in quality-adjusted life-years, and (2) a significant reduction in negative symptoms. In most cases, antipsychotic treatments are effective in controlling the positive and negative symptoms associated with schizophrenia, allowing patients to live in their communities without any impairments. However, it is extremely important to combine pharmacological treatment with other measures that constitute psychosocial therapy.

Risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a widely accessible antipsychotic that can be used to manage psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether oral risperidone alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 2017); this register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid use of risperidone and other drugs, combinations of drugs or placebo for people exhibiting aggression or agitation (or both) thought to be due to psychosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now contains data from nine trials (total n = 582) reporting on five comparisons. Due to risk of bias, small size of trials, indirectness of outcome measures and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was graded as very-low quality. None of the included studies provided useable data on our primary outcome 'tranquillisation or asleep' by 30 minutes, repeated need for tranquillisation or any economic outcomes. Data were available for our other main outcomes of agitation or aggression, needing restraint, and incidence of adverse effects.Risperidone versus haloperidol (up to 24 hours follow-up)For the outcome, specific behaviour - agitation, no clear difference was found between risperidone and haloperidol in terms of efficacy, measured as at least 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Psychotic Agitation Sub-score (PANSS-PAS) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) and no effect was observed for need to use restraints (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.21; participants = 28; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Incidence of adverse effects was similar between treatment groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus olanzapineOne small trial (n = 29) reported useable data for the comparison risperidone versus olanzapine. No effect was observed for agitation measured as PANSS-PAS endpoint score at two hours (MD 2.50, 95% CI -2.46 to 7.46; very low-quality evidence); need to use restraints at four days (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.39 to 5.28; very-low quality evidence); specific movement disorders measured as Behavioural Activity Rating Scale (BARS) endpoint score at four days (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.83; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus quetiapineOne trial reported (n = 40) useable data for the comparison risperidone versus quetiapine. Aggression was measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) endpoint score at two weeks. A clear difference, favouring quetiapine was observed (MD 1.80, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.40; very-low quality evidence). No evidence of a difference between treatment groups could be observed for incidence of akathisia after 24 hours (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.06; very low-quality evidence). Two participants allocated to risperidone and one allocated to quetiapine experienced myocardial ischaemia during the trial.Risperidone versus risperidone + oxcarbazepineOne trial (n = 68) measured agitation using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component.(PANSS-EC) endpoint score and found a clear difference, favouring the combination treatment at one week (MD 2.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.98; very low-quality evidence), but no effect was observed for global state using Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) endpoint score at one week (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.21; very-low quality evidence). Incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms after 24 hours was similar between treatment groups (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14; very-low quality evidence).Risperidone versus risperidone + valproic acidTwo trials compared risperidone with a combination of risperidone plus valproic acid. No clear differences between the treatment groups were observed for aggression (MOAS endpoint score at three days: MD 1.07, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.34; participants = 54; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or incidence of akathisia after 24 hours: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.03; participants = 122; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, results for the main outcomes show no real effect for risperidone. The only data available for use in this review are from nine under-sampled trials and the evidence available is of very low quality. This casts uncertainty on the role of risperidone in rapid tranquillisation for people with psychosis-induced aggression. High-quality pragmatic RCTs are feasible and are needed before clear recommendations can be drawn on the use of risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

Direct healthcare cost of schizophrenia - European overview

PURPOSE

To provide an overview on the magnitude of the impact of schizophrenia on the healthcare system in Europe and to gain a better understanding on the most important factors influencing the variation of costs.

METHODS

Studies reporting costs and healthcare utilization among patients with schizophrenia were searched in MEDLINE (via Scopus), EMBASE (via Scopus) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 19th January 2017.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies, from the 1075 references initially identified, were included in this review. The annual cost per patient ranged from €533 in Ukraine to €13,704 in the Netherlands. Notably drug costs contributed to less than 25% of the direct healthcare cost per patient in every country, which might be explained by similar pharmaceutical prices among countries due to the reference pricing system applied in Europe. Inpatient costs were the largest component of health service costs in the majority of the countries. Despite methodological heterogeneity across studies, four major themes could be identified (age, severity of symptoms, continuation of treatment/persistence, hospitalization) that have substantial impact on the costs of schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Schizophrenia represents a substantial cost for the healthcare system in Europe driven by the high cost per patient. Substantial savings could potentially be achieved by increasing investment in the following areas: (1) reducing the number of hospitalizations e.g. by increasing the efficiency of outpatient care; (2) working out interventions targeted at specific symptoms; (3) improving patient persistence and adherence in antipsychotic therapy.

Movement Disorders Associated With Antipsychotic Medication in People With Schizophrenia: An Overview of Cochrane Reviews and Meta-Analysis

Movement disorders associated with antipsychotic medications are relatively common, stigmatising, and potentially disabling. Their prevalence in people with psychosis who are prescribed second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) is uncertain, as is their level of recognition by clinicinas. We conducted meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials included in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses to estimate the prevalence of new-onset dystonia, akathisia, parkinsonism, and tremor with SGAs (amisulpride, asenapine, aripiprazole, clozapine, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, L-sulpiride, and ziprasidone) approved in Canada and the UK, comparing them with haloperidol and chlorpromazine. We used a random effects model because of the heterogeneity between-studies in drug dosage and method of ascertainment of movement disorders. Our systematic search yielded 37 Cochrane systematic reviews (28 for SGAs), which generated 316 informative randomised controlled trials (243 for SGAs). With respect to SGAs, prevalence estimates ranged from 1.4% (quetiapine) to 15.3% (L-sulpiride) for dystonia, 3.3% (paliperidone) to 16.4% (L-sulpiride) for akathisia, 2.4% (asenapine) to 29.3% (L-sulpiride) for parkinsonism, and 0.2% (clozapine) to 28.2% (L-sulpiride) for tremor. Prevalence estimates were not influenced by treatment duration, the use of a flexible or fixed dosing scheme, or whether studies used validated instruments for the screening/rating of movement disorders. Overall, we found high overlap on the prevalence of new-onset movement disorders across different SGAs precribed for established psychoses. Variations in prevalence figures across antipsychotic medications were observed for the different movement disorders. Differences in pharmacological properties, such as for the dopamine D2 R association rate and serotonin 5-HT2A antagonism, could contribute to this variation.

The effectiveness and safety of amisulpride in Chinese patients with schizophrenia who switch from risperidone or olanzapine: a subgroup analysis of the ESCAPE study

INTRODUCTION

Second-generation antipsychotics show significant interpatient variability in treatment response and side-effect profiles, and the majority of patients with schizophrenia require multiple treatment changes. This subgroup analysis of the ESCAPE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of amisulpride in Chinese patients with schizophrenia who switched from risperidone or olanzapine.

METHODS

ESCAPE was a prospective, open-label, multicenter, single-arm Phase IV study in which Chinese patients with an ICD-10 diagnosis of schizophrenia received amisulpride for 8 weeks. This analysis included 109 patients who switched to amisulpride from risperidone (n=68) or olanzapine (n=41) and 59 treatment-naïve patients for reference. The primary effectiveness outcome was a ≥50% decrease in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total score from Baseline to Week 8. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01795183).

RESULTS

Of the patients who switched from risperidone and olanzapine, 77.9% and 56.1% achieved ≥50% reduction in PANSS Total score from Baseline to Week 8 and 57.4% and 46.3% achieved ≥20% reduction in PANSS score from Baseline to Week 2, respectively; these end points were achieved by 66.1% and 61.0% of treatment-naïve patients, respectively. No unexpected adverse events (AEs) were reported. Of the most common AEs, extrapyramidal side effects occurred in 32.4% and 14.6%, blood prolactin increase in 32.4% and 39.0%, and ≥7% increase in body weight in 4.4% and 12% of patients switching from risperidone and olanzapine, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The results of this subgroup analysis suggest that switching to amisulpride from risperidone and olanzapine is effective and generally well tolerated in Chinese patients with schizophrenia.

Potential link between genetic polymorphisms of catechol-O-methyltransferase and dopamine receptors and treatment efficacy of risperidone on schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

The current study aimed to explore the association of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) within catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) and dopamine receptors with schizophrenia and genetic association with risperidone treatment response.

METHODS

A total of 690 schizophrenic patients (case group) were selected and 430 healthy people were included as the controls. All patients received risperidone treatment continuously for 8 weeks. Next, peripheral venous blood samples were collected and were subjected to polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism to amplify and genotype the SNPs within COMT and dopamine receptors. Then, correlation analysis was conducted between Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale improvement rates and SNPs within COMT and the dopamine receptor gene.

RESULTS

The allele of DRD1 rs11749676 (A) emerged as a key element in reducing schizophrenia risk with statistical significance (P<0.001). Remarkably, alleles of COMT rs165774 (G), DRD2 rs6277 (T), and DRD3 rs6280 (C) were associated with raised predisposition to schizophrenia (all P<0.001). Regarding DRD1 rs11746641, DRD1 rs11749676, DRD2 rs6277, and DRD3 rs6280, the case group exhibited a lesser frequency of heterozygotes in comparison with wild homozygotes genotype (all P<0.001). SNPs (COMT rs4680, DRD2 rs6275, DRD2 rs1801028, and DRD2 rs6277) were remarkably associated with improvement rates of PANSS total scores (P<0.05). SNPs (COMT rs165599 and DRD2 rs1801028) were significantly associated with risperidone efficacy on negative symptoms (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

COMT SNPs and dopamine receptor SNPs were correlated with prevalence of schizophrenia and risperidone treatment efficacy of schizophrenia.