LURASIDONE IN THE LONG-TERM TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH BIPOLAR DISORDER: A 24-WEEK OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION STUDY

Clinical efficacy and safety of vortioxetine as an adjuvant drug for patients with bipolar depression

OBJECTIVES

Whether vortioxetine has a utility as an adjuvant drug in the treatment of bipolar depression remains controversial. This study aimed to validate the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine in bipolar depression.

METHODS

Patients with bipolar Ⅱ depression were enrolled in this prospective, two-center, randomized, 12-week pilot trial. The main indicator for assessing treatment effectiveness was a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) of ≥50%. All eligible patients initially received four weeks of lurasidone monotherapy. Patients who responded well continued to receive this kind of monotherapy. However, no-response patients were randomly assigned to either valproate or vortioxetine treatment for eight weeks. By comprehensively comparing the results of MADRS over a period of 4‍‒‍12 weeks, a systematic analysis was conducted to determine whether vortioxetine could be used as an adjuvant drug for treating bipolar depression.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients responded to lurasidone monotherapy, and 60 patients were randomly assigned to the valproate or vortioxetine group for eight weeks. After two weeks of combined valproate or vortioxetine treatment, the MADRS score in the vortioxetine group was significantly lower than that in the valproate group. There was no difference in the MADRS scores between the two groups at 8 and 12 weeks. The incidence of side effects did not significantly differ between the valproate and vortioxetine groups. Importantly, three patients in the vortioxetine group appeared to switch to mania or hypomania.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that lurasidone combination with vortioxetine might have potential benefits to bipolar II depression in the early stage, while disease progression should be monitored closely for the risk of switching to mania.

Advances in Mood Disorder Pharmacotherapy: Evaluating New Antipsychotics and Mood Stabilizers for Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia

This article provides a narrative review of recent developments in mood-stabilizing drugs, considering their mechanism of action, efficacy, safety, and therapeutic potential in the treatment of mood disorders, particularly bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. The review focuses on the mechanism and clinical aspects of second-generation antipsychotic medications; aripiprazole, classified as a third-generation antipsychotic medication; lamotrigine, as a representative of antiepileptic drugs; and lurasidone, a novel second-generation antipsychotic medication. Moreover, the article refers to one of the newest and most highly effective normothymic drugs, cariprazine. The potential of new mood stabilizer candidates lumateperone and brexpiprazole is also presented. Covered topics include the clinical efficacy of new drugs in reducing manic and depressive symptoms during acute episodes, as well as their role in preventing relapse. In addition, we analyzed the incidence of adverse effects of each drug. Many of the new drugs have strong potential to be beneficial and safe in cases of many comorbidities, as they do not cause many adverse effects and do not require high doses of use. The results underscore the importance of ongoing and future research to better understand the action and efficacy of these mood stabilizers and their implications in the treatment of mood disorders, aiming to achieve euthymia and improve the quality of life of affected patients. In this article, we aim to review current drug treatments for the management of mood disorders, including bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

Lurasidone and risk of metabolic syndrome: results from short and long-term studies in patients with bipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

The elevated prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with depression has been associated with increased mortality. This post hoc analysis assessed the effect of treatment with lurasidone on risk of MetS in patients with bipolar depression.

METHODS

Data used in the current analyses consisted of 3 double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled, 6-week studies in adults with bipolar I depression (N = 1192), consisting of 1 monotherapy, and 2 adjunctive trials (lithium or valproate). Also analyzed was a 6-month open-label (OL) extension study (monotherapy, N = 316; adjunctive therapy, N = 497); and a 5-month, OL, stabilization phase followed by randomization to a 28-week DB, placebo-controlled, adjunctive therapy study with lurasidone (N = 490). MetS was defined based on NCEP ATP III criteria (2005 revision).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients with new-onset MetS was similar for lurasidone vs placebo in the short-term studies (monotherapy, 13.9% vs 15.3%; adjunctive therapy, 13.6% vs 11.0%); and remained stable during both the 6-month extension phase study (monotherapy, 15.2%; adjunctive therapy, 16.9%), and the 5-month stabilization study (adjunctive therapy, 12.2%). After 28 weeks of DB treatment (following 5-month treatment in the stabilization study), new onset MetS was observed at endpoint (OC) in 26.2% of the lurasidone group, and 30.8% of the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis found that both short and long-term treatment with lurasidone was associated with a relatively low risk for the development of MetS in patients with bipolar I disorder. These findings are consistent with similar analyses in patients with schizophrenia.

The efficacy and safety of lurasidone in bipolar I depression with and without rapid cycling: A pooled post-hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of lurasidone monotherapy in patients with bipolar I depression with or without rapid cycling has not been previously investigated.

METHODS

We performed subgroup analysis (rapid cycling/non-rapid cycling) of pooled data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of lurasidone monotherapy (20-60 mg/day or 80-120 mg/day). Analyses included mean change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Safety assessments included the number of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory assessments.

RESULTS

Of 1024 patients randomized, 85 were rapid cycling. Mean change in MADRS total score in patients with non-rapid cycling and rapid cycling, respectively, was -14.8 (effect size = 0.47) and - 12.8 (effect size = 0.04) in the lurasidone 20-60 mg/day group, -14.3 (effect size = 0.41) and - 13.0 (effect size = 0.02) in the lurasidone 80-120 mg/day group and -10.6 and -13.3 in the placebo group. The most common TEAE in each subgroup was akathisia in both lurasidone groups. Treatment-emergent mania was reported only in a small number of rapid cycling and non-rapid cycling patients.

LIMITATIONS

This was a post-hoc analysis of a short-term study that excluded patients with ≥8 cycles in the past year.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with non-rapid cycling bipolar depression, lurasidone monotherapy significantly improved depressive symptoms relative to placebo at both the 20-60 mg/day and 80-120 mg/day doses. In patients with rapid cycling, both doses of lurasidone displayed depressive symptom score reduction from baseline, but significant improvement was not observed likely due to high levels of improvement on placebo and small sample size.

Atypical antipsychotic-induced mania: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The possibility of atypical antipsychotics (AA) to induce manic symptoms has been raised by several articles. The objective of this study was to describe whether exposure to AA may induce mania in mood disorders.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. The systematic search encompassed all relevant studies published until April 4th, 2022. A meta-analysis testing whether treatment emergent mania (TEM) is more frequent with the use of AA compared with placebo was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 52 studies were included in the systematic review. We found 24 case reports or case series describing 40 manic/hypomanic episodes allegedly induced by AA. Twenty-one placebo-controlled trials were included in a meta-analysis including 4823 individuals treated with AA and 3252 individuals receiving placebo. Our meta-analysis showed that the use of AA protects against the development of TEM (OR: 0.68 [95 % CI: 0.52-0.89], p = 0.005).

LIMITATIONS

AA-induced mania/hypomania was not the primary outcome in any of the observational or interventional studies. TEM was not homogeneously defined across studies. In most case reports it was not possible to establish causality between the use of AA and the development of manic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is more frequent with placebo than with AA, which suggests that AA exposure does not represent a relevant risk for TEM. Mania/hypomania induced by an AA seems to be rare events, since anecdotal evidence from case reports and case series were not observed in observational prospective and interventional studies.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive therapy to lamotrigine, lithium, or valproate monotherapy in bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of adjunctive therapy are unclear in bipolar depression. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of second-generation antipsychotic, lamotrigine, lithium, or valproate therapy used in adjunction with lamotrigine, lithium, or valproate monotherapy in bipolar depression. A literature search of major electronic databases was conducted in February 2021, and all articles published until then were eligible. Two researchers independently screened relevant publications, extracted data, and evaluated methodological quality according to the Cochrane criteria.

RESULTS

Five studies met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis revealed significant differences in the following outcomes: (i) remission rates from depressive episodes (risk ratio [RR]: 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.50, p = 0.04), (ii) improvement in depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.21, 95% CI 0.09-0.34, p = 0.001), (iii) improvement in quality of life (SMD: 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.37, p = 0.005), and (iv) rate of adverse events during the study period (RR: 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.22, p = 0.008). There was no significant difference between adjunctive therapy and monotherapy in the emergence of suicide-related behaviors, dropout rate during the study period, or rate of manic switching.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that adjunctive second-generation antipsychotics, lamotrigine, lithium, or valproate increase both the benefits and risks in patients with bipolar depression, although there is no significant difference in severe adverse events. Adjunctive therapy should be provided through shared decision-making while considering the patients' condition in clinical settings.

Impact of lurasidone on health-related quality of life in adults with bipolar depression: a post-hoc analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this post-hoc analysis was to assess the impact of lurasidone monotherapy on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults with bipolar depression.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from a 6-week randomized, double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled trial of lurasidone monotherapy (NCT00868699) and a 6-month open label extension (OLE; NCT00868959). Patients who received lurasidone monotherapy or placebo during the DB trial were eligible to continue or switch to lurasidone monotherapy during the OLE. The 16-item Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF) was collected at DB baseline, DB week 6/OLE baseline, OLE month 3, and OLE month 6. Effect size (ES) and mean changes from baseline were reported for Q-LES-Q-SF total and item scores during the DB trial and OLE, respectively.

RESULTS

Of 485 patients in the DB trial (lurasidone monotherapy: n = 323; placebo: n = 162), 316 patients continued or switched to lurasidone monotherapy during the OLE. Significant improvements in Q-LES-Q-SF scores in lurasidone vs. placebo were reported for 13 of 16 items (all p < .05) at DB week 6. The greatest improvements were overall life satisfaction (ES = 0.57), social relationships (0.55), medication satisfaction (0.48), family relationships (0.46), and ability to function in daily life (0.45, all p < .001). Improvements in Q-LES-Q-SF total and item scores were sustained at OLE month 6.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with lurasidone provided a significant improvement across HRQoL items including overall life satisfaction, social and family relationships, medication satisfaction, and ability to function in daily life. Improvements were sustained during the 6-month OLE.

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.

The impact of lurasidone on functioning and indirect costs in adults with bipolar depression: a post-hoc analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to assess the impact of lurasidone monotherapy on functional impairment, productivity, and associated indirect costs in patients with bipolar depression.

METHODS

Data were analyzed from a 6-week randomized, double-blind (DB; NCT00868699), placebo-controlled trial of lurasidone monotherapy and a 6-month open label extension (OLE; NCT00868959) study. Patients with bipolar depression who completed the 6-week DB trial were subsequently enrolled in the OLE. Analysis of the OLE was limited to patients who either continued lurasidone (LUR-LUR) or switched from placebo to lurasidone monotherapy (PBO-LUR). The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), which measures functional impairment and productivity, was collected at DB baseline, DB week 6/OLE baseline, OLE month 3, and OLE month 6. Annual indirect costs were calculated based on days lost or unproductive from work/school due to symptoms. Effect sizes (ES) in functioning and days lost/unproductive were reported for the DB trial and mean changes for the OLE.

RESULTS

A total of 485 patients were enrolled in the DB trial (lurasidone: n = 323; placebo: n = 162) and 316 were in the lurasidone monotherapy group during the OLE (LUR-LUR: n = 210; PBO-LUR: n = 106). In the DB trial, improvements in functioning (work: ES = 0.36, p = .0071; social: ES = 0.55, p < .0001; family: ES = 0.50, p < .0001) were significantly greater for lurasidone compared to placebo. Reductions in days lost (ES = 0.33, p = .0050) and unproductive (ES = 0.45, p = .0001) were significantly higher for lurasidone vs. placebo. This resulted in a greater reduction in indirect costs for lurasidone vs. placebo (least squares mean (standard error) = -$32,322 ($2,100) vs. -$20,091 ($2,838)). Improvements in functioning and productivity were sustained during the 6-month OLE for both LUR-LUR and PBO-LUR.

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone monotherapy for the treatment of bipolar depression significantly improved functioning and reduced indirect costs vs. placebo at week 6. Significant improvements in functioning and productivity were sustained for 6 months for both LUR-LUR and PBO-LUR.

Lurasidone in Therapy of Treatment-resistant Ultra-rapid Cycling Bipolar Disorder: Case Report

Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar depression. It seems to have a favorable metabolic profile and low risk of causing adverse interactions. Here we present a case of a 25-year old female patient with treatment-resistant ultra-rapid cycling bipolar disorder, obesity, hypothyroidism, and epilepsy. Because of predominant depressive symptoms, occasional occurrence of brief psychotic symptoms and patient’s somatic comorbidities, treatment with lurasidone was initiated. Clinical improvement was observed 3 weeks and cessation of ultra-rapid cycling course of the disease 8 weeks after the beginning of lurasidone treatment. The patient’s level of functioning improved and body mass significantly decreased, with good tolerance of the pharmacotherapy. Lurasidone seems to be a promising treatment option in patients with treatment-resistant rapid cycling bipolar disorder.

Lurasidone in the long-term treatment of Japanese patients with bipolar I disorder: a 52 week open label study

BACKGROUND

The current study evaluated the long-term (52 week) safety and impact on symptom measures of lurasidone (with or without lithium or valproate) for the treatment of bipolar I disorder in Japanese patients.

METHODS

Bipolar patients for this open-label flexibly dosed lurasidone (20-120 mg/day) study were recruited from those with a recent/current depressive episode who completed an initial 6 week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, lurasidone study (depressed group), and those with a recent/current manic, hypomanic, or mixed episode (non-depressed group) who agreed to enroll directly into the long-term study. Measures of adverse events and safety included treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, body weight, ECG, laboratory tests, and measures of suicidality and extrapyramidal symptoms. Symptom measures included Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS).

RESULTS

The most common adverse events associated with lurasidone were akathisia (30.7%), nasopharyngitis (26.6%), nausea (12.1%), and somnolence (12.1%). Minimal changes in lipids and measures of glycemic control occurred. Mean change in body weight was + 1.0 kg in the non-depressed group and - 0.8 kg in the depressed group. MADRS total scores declined by a mean (SD) of 2.0 (14.7) points from long-term baseline to endpoint in the depressed group who had received placebo in the prior 6 week trial. The depressed group that had received lurasidone during the prior 6 week study maintained their depressive symptom improvements. For the non-depressed group, YMRS total scores decreased over time.

LIMITATIONS

No control group was included, treatment was open-label, and 49.7% of patients completed the 52 week study.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with lurasidone 20-120 mg/day for Japanese patients with bipolar disorder maintained improvements in depressive symptoms for depressed patients who were treated in a prior 6 week trial and led to improvements in manic symptoms among a newly recruited subgroup of patients with a recent/current manic, hypomanic, or mixed episode. Few changes in weight or metabolic parameters were evident.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

JapicCTI-132319, clinicaltrials.gov-NCT01986114.

Lurasidone in the Long-Term Treatment of Bipolar I Depression: A 28-week Open Label Extension Study

BACKGROUND

Lurasidone has demonstrated efficacy for short-term treatment of bipolar depression in a diverse ethnic population including Japanese. This study evaluated the long-term safety and effectiveness of open-label lurasidone treatment in these patients.

METHODS

Patients for this 28-week extension study were recruited from those who completed a 6-week double-blind study of lurasidone, 20-60 mg/day, lurasidone 80-120 mg/day, and placebo. In the extension study, lurasidone was flexibly dosed (20 to 120 mg/day). Safety was evaluated in terms of change from extension-phase baseline to endpoint including adverse events, vital signs, body weight, ECG, laboratory tests, and measures of suicidality and extrapyramidal symptoms. Effectiveness was determined by Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and other measures.

RESULTS

303 of 413 (73.3%) subjects completed the extension study. Discontinuation due to a treatment-emergent adverse event occurred for 11.4% of those who received placebo, and 8.9% of those who received lurasidone, in the prior 6-week trial. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was akathisia. Minimal changes were evident on body weight and metabolic parameters. Long-term treatment with lurasidone further reduced mean MADRS total scores from long-term baseline to week 28 (or endpoint) for both those who had received prior placebo (-11.3), and those who had receive prior lurasidone (-8.9), in the 6-week double-blind trial.

LIMITATIONS

There was no placebo control and treatment was not double-blind.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term treatment with lurasidone (20-120 mg/day) was well-tolerated with no new safety concerns and associated with continued improvement in depressive symptoms in this international sample of patients with bipolar depression.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

JapicCTI-132319, clinicaltrials.gov - NCT01986114.

Extra-synaptic modulation of GABAA and efficacy in bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder type I is a severe psychiatric condition that leads to significant morbidity and mortality and whose treatment remains suboptimal. Its pathophysiology involves disturbance in the control of ionic fluxes so that when patients are either manic or depressed, the resting membrane potential of neurons is more depolarized than normal. Available mood stabilizers have a shared mechanism of normalizing ion flux by compensating for ionic abnormalities, and normalizing membrane potential.

HYPOTHESIS

Agents that significantly potentiate extrasynaptic GABA_A receptors are expected to be particularly effective in hyperpolarizing resting membrane potential in bipolar patients, thereby normalizing their membrane potential.

DISCUSSION

New neuroactive steroid-like agents are being tested in humans for depression and insomnia. These agents include brexanolone, ganaxolone, and gaboxadol. Brexanolone has been approved for the treatment of postpartum depression, ganaxolone is being studied for treatment-resistant depression, and gaboxadol development for the treatment of insomnia has been abandoned due to narrow therapeutic index. In addition to the current studies, these agents are expected to have particular efficacy in acute and prophylactic management of bipolar I disorder by hyperpolarizing the resting potential of neurons and antagonizing one of the most reproducible demonstrated biologic abnormalities of this illness.

Second Generation Antipsychotics Monotherapy as Maintenance Treatment for Bipolar Disorder: a Systematic Review of Long-Term Studies

Atypical or so called second generation antipsychotics (SGA) are playing a role of increasing importance in treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This study is aimed towards a systematic review of their efficacy when used as monotherapy in order to prevent relapses in the long term treatment. Publications about this subject were identified after a thorough bibliographic research in Medline, The Cochrane Library and Web of Science, employing the PICO method for the creation of a database search strategy and carrying out a critical read and analysis of the found evidence. 14 studies were found which informed about the results of randomized and controlled clinical trials (RCT) about the efficacy of these SGA in monotherapy for BD, when it comes to prevention of relapse, in adult patients diagnosed with either type I or II BD, with a minimum follow-up time of 6 months. Evidence of the use of SGAs for maintenance treatment in BD is limited. Amongst all antipsychotics assessed only aripiprazole, olanzapine, lurasidone, risperidone and quetiapine have been found to be competent for their use in monotherapy, according to RCT.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled study of lurasidone monotherapy for the treatment of bipolar I depression

AIM

Previous studies conducted primarily in the USA and Europe have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone 20-120 mg/day for the treatment of bipolar I depression. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone monotherapy for the treatment of bipolar I depression among patients from diverse ethnic backgrounds, including those from Japan.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment for 6 weeks with lurasidone, 20-60 mg/day (n = 184) or 80-120 mg/day (n = 169), or placebo (n = 172). The primary end-point was change from baseline to Week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).

RESULTS

Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores from baseline to Week 6 for the 20-60-mg/day group (-13.6; adjusted P = 0.007; effect size = 0.33), but not for the 80-120-mg/day group (-12.6; adjusted P = 0.057; effect size = 0.22) compared with placebo (-10.6). Treatment with lurasidone 20-60 mg/day also improved MADRS response rates, functional impairment, and anxiety symptoms. The most common adverse events associated with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Lurasidone treatments were associated with minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

Monotherapy with once daily doses of lurasidone 20-60 mg, but not 80-120 mg, significantly reduced depressive symptoms and improved functioning in patients with bipolar I depression. Results overall were consistent with previous studies, suggesting that lurasidone 20-60 mg/day is effective and safe in diverse ethnic populations, including Japanese.

Novel antipsychotics specificity profile: A clinically oriented review of lurasidone, brexpiprazole, cariprazine and lumateperone

Second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are effective options in the treatment of schizophrenia and mood disorders, each with characteristic efficacy and safety features. In order to optimize the balance between efficacy and side effects, it is of upmost importance to match compound specificity against patient clinical profile. As the number of SGAs increased, this review can assist physicians in the prescription of three novel SGAs already on the market, namely lurasidone, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, and lumateperone, which is in the approval phase for schizophrenia treatment at the FDA. Besides schizophrenia, EMA and/or FDA approved lurasidone for bipolar depression, brexpiprazole as augmentation in major depressive disorder and cariprazine for the acute treatment of manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. These new antipsychotics were developed with the aim of improving efficacy on negative and depressive symptoms and reducing metabolic and cardiovascular side effects compared to prior SGAs, while keeping the risk of extrapyramidal symptoms low. They succeeded quite well in containing these side effects, despite weight gain during acute treatment remains a possible concern for brexpiprazole, while cariprazine and lurasidone show higher risk of akathisia compared to placebo and other SGAs such as olanzapine. The available studies support the expected benefits on negative symptoms, cognitive dysfunction and depressive symptoms, while the overall effect on acute psychotic symptoms may be similar to other SGAs such as quetiapine, aripiprazole and ziprasidone. The discussed new antipsychotics represent useful therapeutic options but their efficacy and side effect profiles should be considered to personalize prescription.

Controversies in bipolar disorder; role of second-generation antipsychotic for maintenance therapy

In this narrative review, we discuss use of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. We compare their use to historically more established treatments (particularly lithium, the gold standard). To compare we review evidence on efficacy, effectiveness and tolerability across illness poles, possible mechanisms of treatment response, guidance given by guideline groups and pragmatic clinical considerations. We then illustrate the controversies in maintenance antipsychotic use, with the example of first episode mania and its treatment within first episode psychosis services. Finally, we make suggestions for future studies to unpick these differences.

Efficacy of Celecoxib Adjunct Treatment on Bipolar Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Bipolar Disorder (BD) is a psychiatric disorder characterized by mood disturbances. The pathophysiology of BD is still poorly understood. In the last years, research studies focused on the role of inflammation in BD.

OBJECTIVE

Performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the potential effect of the cyclo- oxygenases (Cox)-2 inhibitor Celecoxib adjunct treatment in BD through randomized controlled trials (RCT).

METHODS

A search on the electronic databases was proceeded, on MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Biomed Central, Web of Science, IBECS, LILACS, PsycINFO, Congress Abstracts, and Grey literature (Google Scholar and the British Library) for studies published from January 1990 to February 2018. A search strategy was developed using the terms: "Bipolar disorder" or "Bipolar mania" or "Bipolar depression" or "Bipolar mixed" or "Bipolar euthymic" and "Celecoxib" or "Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors" or "Cox-2 inhibitors" as text words and Medical Subject Headings (i.e., MeSH and EMTREE) and searched. The therapeutic effects of adjunctive treatment with Celecoxib were analyzed. The meta-analysis was performed including the results of the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) at the end of RCT.

RESULTS

Three primary studies were included in the systematic review, with a total of 121 patients. The meta-analysis showed a significant effect on the YMRS scores from patients with BD who used Celecoxib adjuvant treatment in comparison to placebo.

CONCLUSION

The systematic review suggests that adjuvant treatment with Celecoxib improves the response of major treatments in patients with BD when compared with adjuvant placebo treatment. Systematic Review Registration Number: The review protocol was registered at PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42017067635); in June 06 2017.

Mixed states in bipolar and major depressive disorders: systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review provided a critical synthesis and a comprehensive overview of guidelines on the treatment of mixed states.

METHOD

The MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception to March 21st, 2018. International guidelines covering the treatment of mixed episodes, manic/hypomanic, or depressive episodes with mixed features were considered for inclusion. A methodological quality assessment was conducted with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-AGREE II.

RESULTS

The final selection yielded six articles. Despite their heterogeneity, all guidelines agreed in interrupting an antidepressant monotherapy or adding mood-stabilizing medications. Olanzapine seemed to have the best evidence for acute mixed hypo/manic/depressive states and maintenance treatment. Aripiprazole and paliperidone were possible alternatives for acute hypo/manic mixed states. Lurasidone and ziprasidone were useful in acute mixed depression. Valproate was recommended for the prevention of new mixed episodes while lithium and quetiapine in preventing affective episodes of all polarities. Clozapine and electroconvulsive therapy were effective in refractory mixed episodes. The AGREE II overall assessment rate ranged between 42% and 92%, indicating different quality level of included guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The unmet needs for the mixed symptoms treatment were associated with diagnostic issues and limitations of previous research, particularly for maintenance treatment.

Longer-Term Effectiveness and Tolerability of Adjunctive Open Lurasidone in Patients With Bipolar Disorder

PURPOSE

To retrospectively assess lurasidone effectiveness/efficacy/tolerability in bipolar disorder (BD) patients.

METHODS

Outpatients assessed with Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD Affective Disorders Evaluation received naturalistically administered (primarily adjunctive) open lurasidone while monitored at visits with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD Clinical Monitoring Form.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients (32 type I, 26 type II, 3 type not otherwise specified; mean ± SD age, 45.1 ± 14.0 years; 63.9% were female) received lurasidone with 3.1 ± 1.4 (≥2 in 88.5%, monotherapy in only 3.3%) other nonanxiolytic/hypnotic prescription psychotropics, started during syndromal depression in 57.4%, subsyndromal depression in 23.0%, and euthymia in 19.7%. Lurasidone was taken for median 126 days, with final dose 55.6 ± 30.8 mg/d. By final visit taking lurasidone, syndromal depression rate decreased by nearly one-half to 31.1%, and euthymia rate more than doubled to 42.6%, whereas subsyndromal depression rate was unchanged at 23.0%. Clinical Global Impressions-BD-Overall Severity improved significantly only in patients with baseline syndromal depression. Seventy-seven percent of patients discontinued lurasidone after median 103 days, because of adverse events in 54.1% (most often akathisia, sedation/somnolence, nausea, and weight gain), inefficacy in 16.4%, and other reasons in 6.6%; 12.1% had equal to or greater than 7% weight gain, and 3.3% developed hypomania. Limitations to this study were the open design and demographically homogeneous (relatively affluent, predominantly white female) small sample taking complex pharmacotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In American specialty clinic BD outpatients, adjunctive longer-term lurasidone commonly relieved syndromal depression and maintained euthymia, suggesting possible effectiveness/efficacy. However, lurasidone was discontinued in 54.1% because of adverse events, suggesting tolerability limitations in these challenging patients, nearly 90% of whom were already taking at least 2 other nonanxiolytic/hypnotic prescription psychotropics.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for the Biological Treatment of Bipolar Disorders: Acute and long-term treatment of mixed states in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Although clinically highly relevant, the recognition and treatment of bipolar mixed states has played only an underpart in recent guidelines. This WFSBP guideline has been developed to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence pertaining to the acute and long-term treatment of bipolar mixed states in adults.

METHODS

Material used for these guidelines is based on a systematic literature search using various data bases. Their scientific rigour was categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F), and different grades of recommendation to ensure practicability were assigned. We examined data pertaining to the acute treatment of manic and depressive symptoms in bipolar mixed patients, as well as data pertaining to the prevention of mixed recurrences after an index episode of any type, or recurrence of any type after a mixed index episode.

RESULTS

Manic symptoms in bipolar mixed states appeared responsive to treatment with several atypical antipsychotics, the best evidence resting with olanzapine. For depressive symptoms, addition of ziprasidone to treatment as usual may be beneficial; however, the evidence base is much more limited than for the treatment of manic symptoms. Besides olanzapine and quetiapine, valproate and lithium should also be considered for recurrence prevention.

LIMITATIONS

The concept of mixed states changed over time, and recently became much more comprehensive with the release of DSM-5. As a consequence, studies in bipolar mixed patients targeted slightly different bipolar subpopulations. In addition, trial designs in acute and maintenance treatment also advanced in recent years in response to regulatory demands.

CONCLUSIONS

Current treatment recommendations are still based on limited evidence, and there is a clear demand for confirmative studies adopting the DSM-5 specifier with mixed features concept.

Safety and Effectiveness of Long-Term Treatment with Lurasidone in Older Adults with Bipolar Depression: Post-Hoc Analysis of a 6-Month, Open-Label Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 6 months of treatment with lurasidone in older adults with a diagnosis of bipolar I depression.

DESIGN

Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, 6-month, open-label extension study.

SETTING

Outpatient.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 55 to 75 years with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of bipolar I depression who had completed 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (1 study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (2 studies).

INTERVENTION

Flexible doses of lurasidone, 20 to 120 mg/day, either as monotherapy, or adjunctive with lithium or valproate.

MEASUREMENTS

Effectiveness was assessed using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; change from open-label-baseline to month-6, observed case analysis).

RESULTS

A total of 141 older adults entered the extension study (monotherapy, N = 55; 39%; adjunctive therapy, N = 86; 61%). At the end of 6 months of open-label treatment with lurasidone, as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, minimal changes were observed in the older adult sample in mean weight (-1.0 kg and -0.4 kg, respectively); and median total cholesterol (-2.0 mg/dL and +6.0 md/dL, respectively), triglycerides (+2.5 mg/dL and +6.0 mg/dL, respectively), and HbA1c (0.0% and -0.1%, respectively). Patients treated with 6 months of lurasidone showed a mean improvement on the MADRS in both the monotherapy (-6.2) and adjunctive therapy (-6.7) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of these post-hoc analyses found that up to 7.5 months of lurasidone treatment for bipolar depression in older adults was associated with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters, with low rates of switching to hypomania or mania, and was well tolerated. The antidepressant effectiveness of lurasidone in this age group was maintained over the 6-month treatment period.

The safety and tolerability of cariprazine in patients with manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder: A 16-week open-label study

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the safety/tolerability of longer-term open-label treatment with cariprazine in patients who had responded to cariprazine for acute bipolar mania.

METHODS

In this multinational, multicenter study, open-label, flexible-dose, cariprazine 3-12mg/d was administered for up to 16 weeks to patients (18-65 years) with bipolar mania. Safety evaluations included adverse events (AEs), laboratory values, vital signs, and extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) scales. Symptom change was evaluated by Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score change from baseline using the last observation carried forward approach.

RESULTS

Of the 402 patients taking cariprazine, 33% completed the trial; the most frequent reasons for discontinuation were withdrawal of consent (20%), AEs (16%), and protocol violation (14%). Most common AEs leading to discontinuation were akathisia (4.7%) and depression (1.5%). Mean treatment duration was 57.7 days; mean cariprazine dose was 6.2mg/d. The incidence of serious AEs was 7.5% (most common: mania [2.2%], depression [1.2%]); 83.3% had treatment-emergent AEs, including akathisia (32.6%), headache (16.7%), constipation (10.7%), and nausea (10.4%). Mean body weight increased <1kg; 9.3% had ≥7% weight gain; 5.7% had sedation; 3% had somnolence. Mean changes in laboratory values, vital signs, ECGs, and ophthalmology parameters were not clinically significant. Mean YMRS total score decreased by -15.2 at week 16.

LIMITATIONS

Uncontrolled, open-label design.

CONCLUSIONS

Open-label cariprazine 3-12 (mean 6.2) mg/d for up to 16 weeks was generally well tolerated, with low (<10%) rates of sedation and ≥7% weight gain. Although akathisia occurred in 33%, it yielded discontinuation in <5%.

Efficacy and Safety of Lurasidone in Children and Adolescents With Bipolar I Depression: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in children and adolescents with bipolar depression.

METHOD

Patients 10 to 17 years old with a DSM-5 diagnosis of bipolar I depression were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with flexible doses of lurasidone 20 to 80 mg/day. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 6 in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score, evaluated by a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 347 patients were randomized and received at least 1 dose of lurasidone (n = 175; mean age 14.2 years; mean dose 33.6 mg/day) or placebo (n = 172; mean age 14.3 years). At week 6, treatment with lurasidone was associated with statistically significant improvement compared with placebo in CDRS-R total score (-21.0 versus -15.3; p < .0001; effect size 0.45). Lurasidone also was associated with statistically significant improvement in the Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Severity depression score (key secondary measure) and in measures of anxiety, quality of life, and global functioning. Study completion rates were 92.0% in the lurasidone group and 89.7% in the placebo group; discontinuation rates due to adverse events were the same for the 2 groups (1.7%). The 2 most common adverse events on lurasidone were nausea and somnolence. Treatment with lurasidone was associated with few effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

CONCLUSION

In this placebo-controlled study, monotherapy with lurasidone, in the dose range of 20 to 80 mg/day, significantly decreased depressive symptoms in children and adolescents with bipolar depression. Lurasidone was well tolerated, with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters. Clinical trial registration information-Lurasidone Pediatric Bipolar Study; http://Clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02046369.

The metabolic side effects of 12 antipsychotic drugs used for the treatment of schizophrenia on glucose: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics have serious metabolic side effects on blood glucose. However, the comparative influence of these drugs on blood glucose levels has not been comprehensively evaluated. We conducted a network meta-analysis to create a hierarchy of the side effects of 12 antipsychotic drugs on changes in blood glucose levels.

METHODS

A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases (last search June 2016) was conducted to identify studies that reported randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing changes in blood glucose levels between patients receiving one of 12 antipsychotic drugs or a placebo for the treatment of schizophrenia or related disorders. The studies we searched were limited to those published in English. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The primary outcome of interest was changes in fasting glucose levels.

RESULTS

We included 47 studies with 114 relevant arms. Of the antipsychotic drugs, only olanzapine was associated with significantly increased glucose levels compared to a placebo (mean difference (MD) = 3.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.14 to 7.76). Moreover, olanzapine was associated with a significantly greater change in the glucose levels than ziprasidone (MD = 5.51, 95% CI = 1.62 to 9.39), lurasidone (MD = 5.58, 95% CI = 0.53 to 10.64) or risperidone (MD = 3.05, 95% CI = 0.87 to 5.22). Ziprasidone and lurasidone were associated with minimal glucose changes compared to the other antipsychotics.

CONCLUSIONS

Olanzapine was associated with a significantly greater change in blood glucose levels than ziprasidone, lurasidone, risperidone or placebo treatment. The application of a hierarchy of glucose metabolism-related side effects may help clinicians tailor the choice of antipsychotic drug to meet the needs of individual patients.

Lurasidone: efficacy and safety in the treatment of psychotic and mood disorders

INTRODUCTION

Lurasidone ([3aR,4S,7R,7aS]-2-[(1R,2R)-2-[4-(1,2-benzisothiazol-3-yl)piperazin-1yl-methyl] cyclohexylmethyl]-hexahydro-4,7-methano-2H-isoindole-1,3-dione hydrochloride; Latuda®) is a novel benzisothiazole, second-generation antipsychotic drug developed by Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma Corporation in Japan. Similar to other atypical antipsychotics it has a distinctive pharmacodynamic profile, Areas covered: This review updates reported research findings on the efficacy, safety and tolerability of LRSD for treatment of psychotic and major affective disorders, with meta-analyses. Short-term efficacy of LRSD in schizophrenia is supported by several randomized, controlled trials with daily doses of 40-160 mg, yielding relatively modest symptomatic improvements. Lurasidone has regulatory approval for treatment of undefined duration in schizophrenia. Long-term benefits and effects in schizophrenia, and both short- and long-term use for other psychotic disorders and mania have not been tested. LRSD shows unusual efficacy in acute bipolar depression even without psychotic features. However, trials of adding LRSD to lithium or valproate for bipolar disorder have yielded inconsistent findings. Expert opinion: Available research findings indicate that LRSD is effective and well-tolerated for short-term treatment of schizophrenia, and for acute bipolar depression. It has low risk of inducing weight-gain, metabolic, or cardiac abnormalities, but its risk of akathisia may exceed that of other modern antipsychotics. Needed is adequate long-term testing in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder and testing for other indications, including against alternative treatments.

Lurasidone in combination with lithium or valproate for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder

Lurasidone (DS-RAn) has demonstrated efficacy in the acute treatment of bipolar depression, both as monotherapy, and as combination therapy with lithium or valproate. To evaluate the recurrence prevention efficacy of lurasidone for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder, patients received up to 20 weeks of open-label lurasidone (20-80mg/d) combined with lithium or valproate during an initial stabilization phase. A total of 496 patients met stabilization criteria and were randomized to 28 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-80mg/d) or placebo, in combination with lithium or valproate. Based on a Cox proportional hazard model, treatment with lurasidone reduced the probability of recurrence of any mood episode by 29% (primary endpoint), however, the reduction did not achieve statistical significance. Probability of recurrence on lurasidone was significantly lower in patients with an index episode of depression (HR, 0.57; P=0.039), in patients with any index episode who were not rapid-cycling (HR, 0.69; P=0.046), and when recurrence was based on MADRS, YMRS, or CGI-BP-S severity criteria (HR, 0.53; P=0.025; sensitivity analysis). Long-term treatment with lurasidone combined with lithium or valproate was found to be safe and well-tolerated, with minimal effects on weight or metabolic parameters.

Lurasidone in the Treatment of Bipolar Depression: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

INTRODUCTION

A burgeoning number of systematic reviews considering lurasidone in the treatment of bipolar depression have occurred since its Food and Drug Administration extended approval in 2013. While a paucity of available quantitative evidence still precludes preliminary meta-analysis on the matter, the present quality assessment of systematic review of systematic reviews, nonetheless, aims at highlighting current essential information on the topic.

METHODS

Both published and unpublished systematic reviews about lurasidone mono- or adjunctive therapy in the treatment of bipolar depression were searched by two independent authors inquiring PubMed/Cochrane/Embase/Scopus from inception until October 2016.

RESULTS

Twelve included systematic reviews were of moderate-to-high quality and consistent in covering the handful of RCTs available to date, suggesting the promising efficacy, safety, and tolerability profile of lurasidone. Concordance on the drug profile seems to be corroborated by a steadily increasing number of convergent qualitative reports on the matter.

LIMITATIONS

Publication, sponsorship, language, citation, and measurement biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being preliminary in nature, this overview stipulates the effectiveness of lurasidone in the acute treatment of Type I bipolar depression overall. As outlined by most of the reviewed evidence, recommendations for future research should include further controlled trials of extended duration.

Long-term use of lurasidone in patients with bipolar disorder: safety and effectiveness over 2 years of treatment

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a chronic illness with a 2-year recurrence rate of approximately 50% among individuals receiving treatment in the community. The aim of this 18-month, open-label, continuation study was to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in patients who initially presented with a major depressive episode associated with bipolar disorder, and who had completed at least 6 months of initial treatment with lurasidone.

METHODS

Patients with bipolar I depression were enrolled in one of three 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (monotherapy with lurasidone, 1 study; adjunctive therapy with lurasidone; and lithium or valproate, 2 studies). Study completers were eligible for a 6-month, open-label extension study of lurasidone utilizing flexible daily doses of 20-120 mg; extension completers were then eligible for an additional 18 months of continuation treatment with flexible, once-daily doses of lurasidone in the range of 20-80 mg. Concomitant therapy with mood stabilizers was permitted throughout the open-label extension and continuation studies.

RESULTS

A total of 1199 patients entered, and 941 (78.5%) completed initial, double-blind, acute treatment, of whom 817/941 (86.8%) entered, and 559 (68.4%) completed the 6-month extension study; 122/559 patients (21.8%) entered the 18-month continuation study, of whom 19.7% of discontinued, including 6.6% due to adverse events and 1.6% due to insufficient efficacy. The mean dose of lurasidone during the 18-month continuation study was 61.8 mg/day, and the modal dose was 60 mg/day. Mean change in weight, from acute baseline to 18-month continuation endpoint was +0.8 kg (completers, n = 55); median changes in cholesterol and triglycerides were -3.0 mg/dL and +26.0 mg/dL, respectively. Based on a Kaplan-Meier analysis, the probability of relapse during 18 months of continuation treatment with lurasidone was estimated to be 18.3% in the monotherapy group and 29.1% in the adjunctive therapy group. Improvement in global illness severity was also maintained during 18 months of continuation therapy (CGI-S at continuation baseline, 2.1; 18-month completers, 1.7; LOCF-endpoint, 1.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 2 years of treatment with lurasidone was safe and well tolerated in this bipolar disorder population presenting with an index episode of depression. Improvement in depressive symptoms was maintained in the majority of patients treated with lurasidone, with relatively low rates of relapse, and with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

Schizophrenia relapse, patient considerations, and potential role of lurasidone

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.