Efficacy and safety of lurasidone 80 mg/day and 160 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial

Towards full recovery with lurasidone: effective doses in the treatment of agitation, affective, positive, and cognitive symptoms in schizophrenia and of dual psychosis

The management of schizophrenia necessitates a comprehensive treatment paradigm that considers individual patient nuances and the efficacy of lurasidone in addressing schizophrenia symptoms, particularly at elevated dosages. Numerous randomized trials have affirmed the efficacy of lurasidone across various dimensions of schizophrenia, demonstrating marked enhancements in positive, negative and cognitive symptoms compared to a placebo. In addition, lurasidone exhibits potential in ameliorating agitation amongst acutely ill patients, showcasing greater efficacy at higher doses. However, despite the favourable outcomes observed with higher lurasidone doses, routine clinical practice often opts for lower doses, potentially limiting its maximal therapeutic impact. Furthermore, lurasidone also shows efficacy in reducing post-psychotic depression in dual psychosis. Moreover, practical insights into lurasidone usage encompass swift dose escalation within a 1-5-day span and recommended combination strategies with other medications such as benzodiazepines for insomnia or agitation, beta-blockers for akathisia, and antihistamines or antimuscarinic drugs for patients transitioning rapidly from antipsychotics with substantial antihistamine and/or anticholinergic effects. Finally, a series of clinical cases is presented, highlighting benefits of lurasidone in terms of cognitive function, functional recovery and other therapeutic aspects for the management of schizophrenia.

The specific anti-hostility effect of lurasidone in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: results of pooled post hoc analyses in adolescents and adults

Symptoms of hostility in patients during acute exacerbations of schizophrenia have been associated with aggressive behavior. Data suggest that some second-generation antipsychotics have specific anti-hostility effects, independent of sedation and positive symptom improvement. Two post hoc analyses were performed to examine the efficacy of lurasidone for reducing hostility in patients with schizophrenia. One analysis pooled adults (N = 1168) from 5 placebo-controlled, 6-week trials of lurasidone (40-160 mg). Another analysis pooled younger patients (up to age 25 years, N = 427) from the adult studies and a similarly designed trial of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg) in adolescent patients (13-17 years old). The outcome measure was mean change in the hostility item (P7) of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). To address pseudospecificity, results were adjusted for positive symptom change and sedation. In adults with a baseline PANSS hostility score ≥2, significant improvement in hostility was observed for all doses with a dose-related increase in effect size (Cohen's d): lurasidone 40 mg = 0.18, 80 mg = 0.24, 120 mg = 0.36, and 160 mg = 0.53. The same dose-response pattern was observed for the more severe hostility subgroups (P7: ≥3, ≥4), and in the early-onset population. Results suggest that lurasidone has specific, dose-related anti-hostility effects.

Long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia: pooled post hoc analyses of two 12-month extension studies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia in adolescents and young adults (13-25).

METHODS

The 2 pooled studies used similar designs and outcome measures. Patients (13-25) with schizophrenia completed an initial double-blind 6-week trial of lurasidone (40 and 80 mg/day) in the adolescent trial and (80 and 160 mg/day) in the young adult trial. In open-label long-term trials, adolescent patients were treated with 20-80 mg/day lurasidone, and adults were treated with 40-160 mg/day lurasidone. Efficacy was evaluated based on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S).

RESULTS

The safety population consisted of 306 patients (mean age, 16.2 years; 208 patients (68.0%) who completed 12 months of treatment; 8.2% who discontinued treatment by 12 months due to an adverse event). The mean (SD) changes in the PANSS total score from the extension baseline to months 6 and 12 were - 11.8 (13.9) and - 15.3 (15.0), respectively (OC), and the mean (SD) changes in the CGI-S score were - 0.8 (1.0) and - 1.0 (1.1), respectively (OC). The most frequent adverse events were headache (17.6%), anxiety (11.4%), schizophrenia (9.8%), and nausea (9.8%). No clinically meaningful changes were observed in weight, metabolic parameters, or prolactin.

CONCLUSIONS

In adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia, treatment with lurasidone was generally well tolerated and effective. Long-term treatment was associated with a continued reduction in symptoms of schizophrenia. Long-term treatment was associated with minimal effects on weight, metabolic parameters, and prolactin.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov identifiers D1050234, D1050302.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone for schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta‑analysis of eight short‑term, randomized, double‑blind, placebo‑controlled clinical trials

Lurasidone is an atypical anti-psychotic approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. It is mainly used to treat schizophrenia in adults through its antagonistic action on dopamine and 5-hydroxytryptamine receptors. The present study systematically assessed the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. Clinical, double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia were retrieved from PubMed\Medline, EBSCO, Embase, Cochrane Library, OVID, Web of Science and related clinical trial registration websites up to May 2023. A total of two investigators independently screened the included references and evaluated their quality. RevMan 5.3 software was used for meta-analysis of each measure outcome. The present systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (ID=CRD42018108178). A total of eight RCTs were included in the present study, including a total of 2,456 patients with schizophrenia. All eight references were randomized, double-blind and parallel control trials. All eight references were evaluated as high quality. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that there were no significant change in total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score, Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) score and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) between the 40 mg lurasidone group and the placebo group (P>0.05). However, as the dosage increased, the 80, 120 and 160 mg lurasidone groups had significant changes in total PANSS score, CGI-S score and MADRS Compared with placebo (P<0.05), although changes in MADRS in the 120 mg lurasidone group were not statistically significant (P>0.05). In terms of safety, the changes in the incidence of agitation in the 40 mg lurasidone group (P<0.05), vomiting in the 80 mg group (P<0.05) and akathisia in the 160 mg group (P<0.05) were statistically significant and there were also statistically significant changes in the incidence of akathisia, nausea, somnolence and extrapyramidal disorder among the 40, 80 and 120 mg lurasidone groups (P<0.05); No statistically significant changes in the in the incidence of other adverse reactions (P>0.05). In conclusion, existing evidence suggests that the initial dose of lurasidone for schizophrenia can be adjusted to 80 mg. As the condition aggravates, the dose can be incrementally increased to 160 mg. A dose of 160 mg lurasidone is recommended as the most efficacious and safe dose for acute schizophrenia and the risk of occurrence of akathisia, nausea, somnolence and extrapyramidal disorder is still high when lurasidone is administered at a dose of 80-120 mg. The dose should be promptly adjusted or the drug should be withdrawn if the aforementioned adverse reactions worsen. Multi-center, high-quality and long-term clinical RCTs influenced by the included references are still necessary to support the aforementioned conclusions.

Estimating heterogeneity of treatment effect in psychiatric clinical trials

Currently, placebo-controlled clinical trials report mean change and effect sizes, which masks information about heterogeneity of treatment effects (HTE). Here, we present a method to estimate HTE and evaluate the null hypothesis (H0) that a drug has equal benefit for all participants (HTE=0). We developed measure termed 'estimated heterogeneity of treatment effect' or eHTE, which estimates variability in drug response by comparing distributions between study arms. This approach was tested across numerous large placebo-controlled clinical trials. In contrast with variance-based methods which have not identified heterogeneity in psychiatric trials, reproducible instances of treatment heterogeneity were found. For example, heterogeneous response was found in a trial of venlafaxine for depression (peHTE=0.034), and two trials of dasotraline for binge eating disorder (Phase 2, peHTE=0.002; Phase 3, 4mg peHTE=0.011; Phase 3, 6mg peHTE=0.003). Significant response heterogeneity was detected in other datasets as well, often despite no difference in variance between placebo and drug arms. The implications of eHTE as a clinical trial outcomes independent from central tendency of the group is considered and the important of the eHTE method and results for drug developers, providers, and patients is discussed.

A Novel Method for Deriving Adverse Event Prevalence in Randomized Controlled Trials: Potential for Improved Understanding of Benefit-Risk Ratio and Application to Drug Labels

INTRODUCTION

Adverse event (AE) data in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) allow quantification of a drug's safety risk relative to placebo and comparison across medications. The standard US label for Food and Drug Administration-approved drugs typically lists AEs by MedDRA Preferred Term that occur at ≥ 2% in drug and with greater incidence than in placebo. We suggest that the drug label can be more informative for both patients and physicians if it includes, in addition to AE incidence (percent of subjects who reported the AE out of the total subjects in treatment), the absolute prevalence (percent of subject-days spent with an AE out of the total subject-days spent in treatment) and expected duration (days required for AE incidence to be reduced by half). We also propose a new method to analyze AEs in RCTs using drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence to improve safety signal detection.

METHODS

AE data from six RCTs in schizophrenia were analyzed (five RCTs of the dopamine D2 receptor-based antipsychotic lurasidone and one RCT of the novel trace amine-associated receptor 1 [TAAR1] agonist ulotaront). We determined incidence, absolute prevalence, and expected duration of AEs for lurasidone and ulotaront vs respective placebo. We also calculated areas under the curve of drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence and mean percent contribution of each AE to this difference.

RESULTS

A number of AEs with the same incidence had different absolute prevalence and expected duration. When accounting for these two parameters, AEs that did not appear in the 2% incidence tables of the drug label turned out to contribute substantially to drug tolerability. The percent contribution of a drug-related AE to the overall side effect burden increased the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, whereas the percent contribution of a placebo-related AE decreased such difference, revealing a continuum of risk between drug and placebo. AE prevalence curves for drug were generally greater than those for placebo. Ulotaront exhibited a small drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence curves due to a relatively low incidence and short duration of AEs in the ulotaront treatment arm as well as the emergence of disease-related AEs in the placebo arm.

CONCLUSION

Reporting AE absolute prevalence and expected duration for each RCT and incorporating them in the drug label is possible, is clinically relevant, and allows standardized comparison of medications. Our new metric, the drug-placebo difference in AE prevalence, facilitates signal detection in RCTs. We piloted this metric in RCTs of several neuropsychiatric indications and drugs, offering a new way to compare AE burden and tolerability among treatments using existing clinical trial information.

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.

Safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the treatment of Chinese schizophrenia patients: An interim analysis of post-marketing surveillance

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a psychiatric disorder characterized by chronic or recurrent symptoms. Lurasidone was licensed in China in 2019 for the treatment of adult schizophrenia in adults with a maximum dose of 80 mg/d. However, post-market surveillance (PMS) with an adequate sample size is required for further validation of the drug’s safety profile and effectiveness.

AIM

To conduct PMS in real-world clinical settings and evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the Chinese population.

METHODS

A prospective, multicenter, open-label, 12-wk surveillance was conducted in mainland China. All patients with schizophrenia from 10 sites who had begun medication with lurasidone between September 2019 and August 2022 were eligible for enrollment. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), adverse drug reactions (ADRs), extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), akathisia, use of EPS drugs, weight gain, and laboratory values as metabolic parameters and the QTc interval. The effectiveness was assessed using the brief psychiatric rating scale (BPRS) from baseline to the end of treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 965 patients were enrolled in the full analysis set and 894 in the safety set in this interim analysis. The average daily dose was 61.7 ± 19.08 mg (mean ± SD) during the treatment. AEs and ADRs were experienced by 101 patients (11.3%) and 78 patients (8.7%), respectively, which were mostly mild. EPS occurred in 25 individuals with a 2.8% incidence, including akathisia in 20 individuals (2.2%). Moreover, 59 patients received drugs for treating EPS during the treatment, with an incidence of 6.6% which dropped to 5.4% at the end of the treatment. The average weight change was 0.20 ± 2.36 kg (P = 0.01687) with 0.8% of patients showing a weight gain of ≥ 7% at week 12 compared with that at the baseline. The mean values of metabolic parameters and the QTc interval at baseline and week 12 were within normal ranges. The mean changes in total BPRS scores were -8.9 ± 9.76 (n = 959), -13.5 ± 12.29 (n = 959), and -16.8 ± 13.97 (n = 959) after 2/4, 6/8, and 12 wk, respectively (P < 0.001 for each visit compared with the baseline) using the last-observation-carried-forward method.

CONCLUSION

The interim analysis of the PMS of adult patients with schizophrenia demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the Chinese population. No new safety or efficacy concerns were identified.

Factors associated with increased risk of lurasidone-induced somnolence: Two case-control studies based on one bioequivalence trial in healthy volunteers

Somnolence is a common adverse effect of antipsychotic drugs used to treat psychotic disorders. It causes problems in many areas of life, such as gainful employment, driving, childcare, and social interactions. Somnolence is a major problem for a relatively new antipsychotic drug, lurasidone, whose dose-effect relationship remains unclear. Based on data from a bioequivalence study of two 40 mg lurasidone hydrochloride tablets, we designed two case-control studies to explore the correlation between somnolence and exposure to lurasidone and determine the factors associated with lurasidone-induced somnolence. In the first case-control study, lurasidone was administered to healthy volunteers; 30 experienced somnolence (as pre-defined) but 29 did not. Moreover, plasma concentration at 1 h was significantly associated with somnolence (OR = 1.124; p = 0.001). In the second case-control study, 48 volunteers administered lurasidone were classified into somnolence and no-somnolence groups based on different time-related criteria. We observed a positive association between plasma concentration at 0.75 h and somnolence (OR = 1.024; p = 0.002). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that a plasma lurasidone concentration >21.65 ng/mL 1 h after administration strongly predicted somnolence. Our findings in healthy volunteers need to be further validated in patients in clinical settings to determine the optimal dose and duration of lurasidone administration.

Adverse effects of antipsychotics on sleep in patients with schizophrenia. Systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Our objective was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse effects on sleep in patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic treatment.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Central, Embase, Toxline, Ebsco, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, SpringerLink, and in Database of abstracts of Reviews of Effects of Randomized Clinical Trials to identify eligible studies published from January 1990 to October 2021. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the CONSORT list, and the Cochrane bias tool. Network meta-analysis was performed using the Bayesian random-effects model, with multivariate meta-regression to assess the association of interest.

Results

87 randomized clinical trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria, and 70 articles were included in the network meta-analysis. Regarding the methodological quality of the studies, 47 had a low or moderate bias risk. The most common adverse effects on sleep reported in the studies were insomnia, somnolence, and sedation. The results of the network meta-analysis showed that ziprasidone was associated with an increased risk of insomnia (OR, 1.56; 95% credible interval CrI, 1.18-2.06). Several of the included antipsychotics were associated with a significantly increased risk of somnolence; haloperidol (OR, 1.90; 95% CrI, 1.12-3.22), lurasidone (OR, 2.25; 95% CrI, 1.28-3.97) and ziprasidone (OR, 1.79; 95% CrI, 1.06-3.02) had the narrowest confidence intervals. In addition, perphenazine (OR, 5.33; 95% CrI, 1.92-14.83), haloperidol (OR, 2.61; 95% CrI, 1.14-5.99), and risperidone (OR, 2.41; 95% CrI, 1.21-4.80) were associated with an increased risk of sedation compared with placebo, and other antipsychotics did not differ. According to the SUCRAs for insomnia, chlorpromazine was ranked as the lowest risk of insomnia (57%), followed by clozapine (20%), while flupentixol (26 %) and perospirone (22.5%) were associated with a lower risk of somnolence. On the other hand, amisulpride (89.9%) was the safest option to reduce the risk of sedation.

Discussion

Insomnia, sedation, and somnolence were the most frequent adverse effects on sleep among the different antipsychotics administered. The evidence shows that chlorpromazine, clozapine, flupentixol, perospirone, and amisulpride had favorable safety profiles. In contrast, ziprasidone, perphenazine, haloperidol, and risperidone were the least safe for sleep.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42017078052, identifier: PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017078052.

Lurasidone for Treating Schizophrenia and Bipolar Depression: A Review of Its Efficacy

Lurasidone is an antipsychotic medication that blocks dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-hydroxy-tryptamine (5-HT)_2A receptors and affects other serotoninergic and noradrenergic receptors. It has rapid absorption and linear pharmacokinetics. The rates of metabolic syndrome for patients taking lurasidone are comparable to placebo groups. Lurasidone is a safe and effective treatment for patients with acute schizophrenia and bipolar depression. It has been found to improve the brief psychiatric rating scale and other secondary measures in schizophrenic patients and reduce depressive symptoms in bipolar I depression. The once-daily administration of lurasidone is generally well-tolerated and does not cause clinically significant differences in extrapyramidal symptoms, adverse effects, or weight gain compared to a placebo. However, lurasidone's effectiveness in combination with lithium or valproate has been mixed. Further research is needed to determine optimal dosing, treatment duration, and combination with other mood stabilizers. Long-term safety and effectiveness and its use in different subpopulations should also be evaluated.

Lurasidone Augmentation of Clozapine in Schizophrenia—Retrospective Chart Review

The aim of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lurasidone augmentation of clozapine in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (SZ) in a retrospective chart review. From the medical records of 916 SZ patients, we identified 16 individuals treated with a combination of clozapine and lurasidone. The detailed clinical data are described separately for each patient. We compared the Clinical Global Impression—Severity (CGI-S) scores between three points of observation: before the treatment and one month and two months after its initiation. CGI Improvement (CGI-I) scores were used to evaluate the treatment response between the first and last points of observation. The vast majority of patients (14/16, 87.5%) responded to lurasidone augmentation of clozapine (CGI-I scores 1 or 2). Therapeutic effects were observable after 3–12 weeks of treatment (median 6 (4–6)). A reduction in CGI-S scores was observed after the first month of observation. There was an observable reduction in positive, depressive and anxiety symptoms, as well as an improvement in psychosocial functioning. Two patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Our study suggests that lurasidone augmentation of clozapine may lead to improvements in a broad range of SZ symptom dimensions.

Lurasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia in adult and paediatric populations

Schizophrenia is a common debilitating disorder characterized by significant impairments in how reality is perceived, combined with behavioural changes. In this review, we describe the lurasidone development programme for adult and paediatric patients. Both the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of lurasidone are revisited. In addition, pivotal clinical studies conducted on both adults and children are summarized. Several clinical cases, which demonstrate the role of lurasidone in real-world practice, are also presented. Current clinical guidelines recommend lurasidone as the first-line treatment in the acute and long-term management of schizophrenia in both adult and paediatric populations.

Does short-term antipsychotic discontinuation of up to 3 weeks worsen symptoms in acute schizophrenia? A pooled analysis of placebo washout data

AIM

This study aimed to examine symptom changes during short-term discontinuation of antipsychotics up to 3 weeks including the placebo washout phase in acute schizophrenia.

METHODS

The data from three double-blind, randomized, controlled trials comparing lurasidone versus placebo in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia were analyzed. Symptom severity was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale (CGI-S) scores. The scores before and after the antipsychotic discontinuation phase were compared, and factors associated with score changes were explored.

RESULTS

Among 2154 patients participating in the trials, 600 who received antipsychotic monotherapy and completed the antipsychotic discontinuation phase were included in the analysis. No patients received clozapine. The mean duration of the discontinuation phase was 5.9 ± 2.5 days. The PANSS total and CGI-S scores significantly changed from 94.0 ± 9.5 to 95.4 ± 10.5 (P < 0.001) and from 4.9 ± 0.6 to 4.9 ± 0.7 (P = 0.041), respectively, during this phase; however, the absolute difference was minimal. The score changes were not associated with the type or dose of prior antipsychotics, or the duration or strategy (abrupt vs gradual) of antipsychotic discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms may not worsen to a clinically meaningful degree after short-term discontinuation of non-clozapine antipsychotics up to 3 weeks in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia, suggesting that antipsychotic efficacy persists at least several days after discontinuation. This finding supports once-daily dosing regimen of antipsychotics and abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation when switching to another antipsychotic.

Systematic literature review and network meta-analysis of lurasidone, brexpiprazole and cariprazine for schizophrenia

A systematic review was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of lurasidone, brexpiprazole and cariprazine (selected because of a shared safety profile) with each other or placebo in adult patients with schizophrenia. Key outcomes included: Positive and Negative Syndrome Scales (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scores and cardiovascular and metabolic parameters. A feasibility assessment evaluated the trials' suitability for inclusion in a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA). Random effects models were used. In total, 1138 records were identified and 19 RCTs contributed to the NMA. Lurasidone doses of 160 mg performed best in terms of change in PANSS and CGI-S scores at 6 weeks, with stronger evidence when compared with brexpiprazole than cariprazine. The safety outcomes were variable; for all treatments, the 95% credible intervals usually contained 'no difference'. Active treatments were associated with lower odds of discontinuation due to any cause, and higher odds of experiencing any adverse event. Lurasidone was comparable to brexpiprazole and cariprazine for efficacy and safety outcomes assessed at 6 weeks, with the 160 mg dose being superior for the change in PANSS and CGI-S outcomes. The lurasidone results were relatively consistent across doses compared with brexpiprazole and cariprazine.

Onset of Action of Selected Second-Generation Antipsychotics (Pines)-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

Recommendations for duration of treatment with antipsychotics before considering a switch vary from 2 to 8 weeks, although several studies suggest a rapid onset of action. The objective of this review was to estimate time to onset of action and time to maximum antipsychotic effect of asenapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and zotepine (pines). We searched bibliographic databases for randomized, placebo-controlled trials in adults with schizophrenia estimating the antipsychotic effect of pines over time. Thirty-five studies including 6331 patients diagnosed with chronic schizophrenia were included. We estimated the standardized mean differences (SMD) of changes in symptom score from baseline to follow-up between intervention and placebo groups across studies using meta-analysis techniques. The summarized effect across all included pines administered as immediate-release formulations showed a statistically significant effect at week 1 (SMD, -0.20 [CI95% -0.28, -0.13]), which increased until week 3 (SMD, -0.42 [CI95% -0.50, -0.34]), after which the effect leveled off (week 6: SMD, -0.53 [CI95% -0.62, -0.44]). The sensitivity analyses of the individual pines confirm this finding, although data sparsity increases variability and limits conclusiveness of these analyses.

Lurasidone use in Cannabis-Induced Psychosis: A Novel Therapeutic Strategy and Clinical Considerations in Four Cases Report

BACKGROUND

Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic approved for the acute and maintenance treatment of schizophrenia. Recently, lurasidone was also extended FDA approval for adults with major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder (bipolar depression), as either a monotherapy or as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate. The use of low doses of atypical antipsychotics is an essential component of early intervention in psychosis, but little has yet been studied on first episode cannabis-induced psychosis. For its particular performance and tolerability, lurasidone is becoming an important option for the treatment of first-episode psychosis in youth. Case presentation four patients experiencing first cannabis-induced psychotic episode were treated with lurasidone. In all patients, there was an improvement in the clinical picture of psychosis. The recovery was positive, not only with the remission of positive and negative symptoms, but also regarding disruptive behaviour, with the return of functioning. All the patients were treated with lurasidone, with a target dose of 74-128 mg/day. No significant side effects were reported.

CONCLUSION

There are non-controlled studies for the use of lurasidone in first episode psychosis cannabis induced. These findings suggest that lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic beneficial in this clinical picture. Treatment with medium-high doses of lurasidone could be effective and tolerable in this phase of the disorder. Randomized control trials with longer follow-up are recommended to confirm these positive results.

Cost-utility analysis of lurasidone for the first-line treatment of schizophrenia in China

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of lurasidone compared with olanzapine and risperidone in the first-line treatment of patients with schizophrenia from a Chinese healthcare system perspective.

Methods

A Markov model with 6-week cycle was constructed to reflect the disease progression of schizophrenia patients in the acute and maintenance phase. Probabilities of treatment discontinuation and adverse events in the acute phase were derived from the 6-week lurasidone clinical trial and a published network meta-analysis; long-term risks of relapse and discontinuation were estimated based on the 12-month lurasidone clinical trial and other treatment comparison studies. Cost inputs were derived from published literature and Chinese official documents, supplemented by expert opinions when necessary. Utility values were taken from published literature. Costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were assessed over 15 years with a discount rate of 5% per year.

Results

Over a 15-year time horizon, lurasidone yielded an improvement of 0.197 QALYs with a cost saving of CN¥12,093 (US$1,753) vs. olanzapine and an improvement of 0.116 QALYs with a cost saving of CN¥6,781 (US$983) vs. risperidone. One-way sensitivity analyses demonstrated robust base-case results since all analyses yielded net monetary benefits >0 at a willingness-to-pay threshold of CN¥72,447.00 (US$10,499.57)/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggested that lurasidone had 99.7, 99.9, and 100% probability of being cost-effective vs. olanzapine and risperidone at the conventional decision thresholds of 1, 2, and 3 times the Chinese per capita gross domestic product [namely CN¥72,447.00 (US$10,499.57)/QALY, CN¥1,44,894.00 (US$20,999.13)/QALY, and CN¥2,17,341.00 (US$31,498.70)/QALY in 2020], respectively.

Conclusion

Treatment with lurasidone was predicted to improve health outcomes and be a dominant strategy for patients with schizophrenia, compared with olanzapine and risperidone, in China.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone in schizophrenia: pooled analysis of European results from double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week studies

The objective of this study is to confirm the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the acute treatment of schizophrenia in European patients. Data were pooled from three studies of patients randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose (40/80 mg and 120/160 mg) lurasidone. The primary efficacy endpoint was a week 6 change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and secondary endpoints included the Clinical Global Impression, Severity scale (CGI-S). In total 328 safety patients were enrolled; 72.6% were completers. Endpoint change was significantly greater in patients treated with 40-80 mg/d and 120-160 mg/d compared to placebo on the PANSS total score ( P  < 0.001) and the CGI-Severity score ( P  < 0.001) for all comparisons. For PANSS total scores, endpoint effect sizes for lurasidone 40-80 mg/d and 120-160 mg/d were 0.68 to 0.77, respectively. Adverse events with a frequency ≥5% (and were greater than for combined lurasidone) were insomnia (11.7%), akathisia (11.3%), headache (7.4%), Parkinsonism (6.5%) and nausea (5.7%). Median changes (in mg/dL) at endpoint were minimal for total cholesterol (-8.0); triglycerides (-8.5) and glucose (-2.0) and in mean weight (-0.2 kg). In European patients with schizophrenia, short-term treatment with lurasidone in doses of 40-160 mg/d was generally safe, well-tolerated and effective with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

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.

Short-term Efficacy and Safety of Lurasidone Versus Placebo in Antipsychotic-Naïve vs. Previously Treated Adolescents with an Acute Exacerbation of Schizophrenia

Background

To evaluate the efficacy of short-term lurasidone in antipsychotic treatment-naïve (TN) adolescents with schizophrenia versus those treated previously (TP) with antipsychotics.

Methods

Patients aged 13–17 with schizophrenia, and a Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) score ≥ 70 and < 120, were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day) or placebo. In a post-hoc, pooled-dose analysis, efficacy was evaluated for TN (criteria: never received antipsychotic treatment) versus TP at the time of the study. Treatment response criteria: ≥20% reduction in PANSS total score.

Results

Altogether, 57 TN and 269 TP patients enrolled in the 6-week DB study. Mean endpoint change in PANSS total score was significantly greater for lurasidone versus placebo in both the TN group (−25.0 vs. -14.4; p < 0.02; effect size = 0.75), and in the TP group (−17.3 vs. -10.0; p < 0.001; effect size = 0.45); and responder rates were higher for lurasidone versus placebo in both the TN group 84.6% versus 38.9%; number needed to treat [NNT] = 3 and in the TP group (60% vs. 42%; NNT = 6). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, and mean changes in body weight and metabolic parameters were similar for the TN and TP groups.

Conclusions

In a 6-week, placebo-controlled trial, lurasidone demonstrated significant efficacy in adolescents with schizophrenia regardless of previous antipsychotic therapy status; however, the effect size was notably larger in the TN patient group. In both the TN and TP groups, minimal effects were noted on weight, metabolic parameters, or prolactin.

Antipsychotic-Induced Weight Gain: Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Weight gain is among the most important side-effects of antipsychotics. It is, however, unclear whether it is associated with antipsychotic doses. We aimed to fill this gap with a dose-response meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched multiple electronic databases (last update search June 2021) for all fixed-dose studies that investigated 16 second-generation antipsychotics and haloperidol in adults with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or with negative symptoms. We estimated the dose-response curves by conducting random-effects dose-response meta-analyses. We used the restricted cubic spline to model the dose-response relationship. The primary outcome was mean weight gain in kg from baseline to endpoint, the secondary outcome was the number of patients with clinically important weight gain.

FINDINGS

Ninety-seven studies with 333 dose arms (36 326 participants) provided data for meta-analyses. Most studies were short-term with median duration of 6 weeks (range 4 to 26 weeks). In patients with acute exacerbation, amisulpride, aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, haloperidol, lumateperone, and lurasidone produced mild weight gain in comparison to placebo (mean difference at any dose≤1 kg), while more significant weight gain was observed by all other drugs. For most drugs, dose-response curves showed an initial dose-related increase in weight which plateaued at higher doses, while for others there was no plateau and some even had bell-shaped curves, meaning less weight gain to be associated with higher doses.

INTERPRETATION

Second-generation antipsychotics do not only differ in their propensity to produce weight gain, but also in the shapes of their dose-response curves. This information is important for dosing decisions in clinical practice.

Safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia: results of a 2-year, open-label extension study

BACKGROUND

Minimal long-term benefit: Risk data are available regarding antipsychotic treatments for schizophrenia in pediatric populations. This study evaluated the long-term safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Patients aged from 13 to 17 who completed 6 weeks of double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone were enrolled in a 2-year, open-label (OL), flexible dose (20-80 mg/day) lurasidone treatment study. Safety was assessed via spontaneous reporting, rating scales, body weight measurement, metabolic, and prolactin testing. Effectiveness measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score.

RESULTS

About 271 patients completed 6 weeks of DB treatment and entered the 2-year OL extension study. Altogether, 42.4% discontinued prematurely, 10.7% due to adverse events. During OL treatment, the most common adverse events were headache (24.0%); anxiety (12.9%), schizophrenia, and nausea (12.5%); sedation/somnolence (12.2%); and nasopharyngitis (8.9%). Minimal changes were observed on metabolic parameters and prolactin. Mean change from DB baseline in weight at week 52 and week 104 was +3.3 kg and + 4.9 kg, respectively, compared to an expected weight gain of +3.4 kg and + 5.7 kg, respectively, based on the sex- and age-matched US Center for Disease Control normative data. Continued improvement was observed in PANSS total score, with mean change from OL baseline of -15.6 at week 52 and -18.4 at week 104.

CONCLUSION

In adolescents with schizophrenia, long-term lurasidone treatment was associated with minimal effects on body weight, lipids, glycemic indices, and prolactin. Continued improvement in symptoms of schizophrenia was observed over 2 years of lurasidone treatment.

Long-term safety and effectiveness of open-label lurasidone in antipsychotic-Naïve versus previously treated adolescents with Schizophrenia: A post-hoc analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a relative lack of long-term, prospective data evaluating the safety and effectiveness of treatment in early-onset adolescent patients with schizophrenia who are treatment-naïve. The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to examine the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia who were antipsychotic treatment-naïve (TN; at the time of enrolment in the initial study) compared to adolescents treated previously (TP) with an antipsychotic.

METHODS

Patients aged 13-17 who completed 6 weeks of double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone were enrolled in a 2-year, open-label (OL), flexible-dose (20-80 mg/day) lurasidone study.

RESULTS

The long-term analysis sample consisted of 50 TN and 221 TP patients, of whom 40% and 43%, respectively, discontinued prematurely. The three most common adverse events for TN and TP patients, respectively, were headache (26.0%, 23.5%); schizophrenia (14.0%, 12.2%), dizziness (16.0%, 4.1%), and nausea (16.0%, 11.8%). At endpoint, mean increase in weight was similar to expected weight gain based on growth charts for both TN (+4.5 kg vs. + 5.7 kg) and TP (+4.6 kg vs. + 6.6 kg) patients. Minimal changes were observed for each group in metabolic parameters and prolactin. Mean improvement was consistently greater in the TN vs. TP group (-19.2 vs. -15.9; effect size of 0.33) for between-group change in PANSS total score at Week 104.

CONCLUSIONS

In both TN and TP adolescents with schizophrenia, long-term treatment with lurasidone was associated with minimal effects on body weight, lipids, glycemic indices, and prolactin, with generally small differences noted in rates of reported AEs. Continued improvement in symptoms of schizophrenia was evident for both the TN and TP groups. These data indicate that lurasidone is a safe and efficacious treatment option for treatment-naïve youth with schizophrenia, who are generally most sensitive to antipsychotic adverse effects.

Effectiveness of Lurasidone 80 mg in Patients with Schizophrenia: Results of an Open-Label, 12-Week Extension Study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of lurasidone 80 mg/day (versus the 40 mg/day dose) during a 12-week, open-label extension study in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia who had completed a 6-week double-blind study of lurasidone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 289 adult patients with schizophrenia completed the double-blind study and enrolled in the 12-week extension study. Lurasidone was flexibly dosed at 40 or 80 mg/day. Effectiveness measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) subscale scores, Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S), and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), analyzed based on last observation carried forward (LOCF-endpoint). Safety/tolerability assessments included adverse events, body weight, laboratory tests, and discontinuation due to adverse events.

RESULTS

Mean endpoint change was greater for lurasidone in modal doses of 80 mg/d (N=136) vs 40 mg/d (N=153) on the PANSS positive subscale (-3.0 vs -2.3), PANSS negative subscale (-1.9 vs -1.7), PANSS General Psychopathology subscale (-5.1 vs -3.8), the CGI-S score (-0.5 vs -0.4), and the CDSS score (-0.7 vs -0.1). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events on lurasidone modal 80 mg/d vs 40 mg/d were 4.4% vs 7.2%; and the most common adverse events in the modal 80 mg/d group were nasopharyngitis, 7.4% (vs 4.6% on modal 40 mg/d), constipation, 5.9% (vs 2.0%), and headache, 5.9% (vs 2.0%).

CONCLUSION

In patients with acute schizophrenia treated with lurasidone 40 mg/d, increasing the dose to 80 mg/d was well tolerated, and was associated with greater improvement in PANSS subscale scores compared to continued treatment with a dose of 40 mg/d.

Differences in the incidence of lurasidone adverse events between depressive disorders and schizophrenia in double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials: a meta-analysis

RATIONALE

We conducted a meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials of lurasidone (LUR) to examine the difference in the risk ratios (RRs) for adverse events (AEs) between depressive disorders (bipolar depression and major depressive disorders) and schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVES

Three trials for depressive disorders (n = 1,239) were used for flexible-dose LUR 20-60 (LUR20-60) and/or 80-120 (LUR80-120) mg/day. Nine schizophrenia trials (n = 2,684) were used for fixed-dose LUR. The RRs of LUR20-60 and LUR80-120 for depressive disorders were compared with those of LUR 40 (LUR40) and LUR 80 (LUR80) mg/day for schizophrenia, respectively, to match LUR dose.

RESULTS

LUR20-60 caused a higher incidence of akathisia (RR = 2.28; p = 0.003) and weight gain (RR = 4.11; p = 0.05) than placebo in patients with depressive disorders, and LUR40 caused a higher incidence of akathisia (RR = 2.39; p = 0.0001), extrapyramidal symptoms (RR = 1.88; p = 0.02), anticholinergic drug use (RR = 1.58; p = 0.005), somnolence (RR = 2.19; p = 0.002), and dizziness (RR = 2.06; p = 0.05) than placebo in patients with schizophrenia. However, no significant differences in the RRs for all outcomes were found between depressive disorders and schizophrenia. LUR80-120 caused a higher incidence of akathisia (RR = 3.90; p < 0.0001), extrapyramidal symptoms (RR = 2.26; p = 0.04), anticholinergic use (RR = 4.70; p < 0.0001), and nausea (RR = 2.15; p = 0.001) than placebo in patients with depressive disorders. LUR80 caused a higher incidence of akathisia (RR = 2.99; p < 0.0001), extrapyramidal symptoms (RR = 2.55; p = 0.01), anticholinergic use (RR = 1.86; p = 0.01), somnolence (RR = 2.46; p = 0.001), and nausea (RR = 1.64; p = 0.04) than placebo in patients with schizophrenia. Depressive disorders had a higher RR for anticholinergic use than schizophrenia (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of AEs did not differ between schizophrenia and depressive disorders.

Depicting Safety Profile of TAAR1 Agonist Ulotaront Relative to Reactions Anticipated for a Dopamine D2-Based Pharmacological Class in FAERS

Background and Objectives

In clinical trials, the safety of drugs is summarized by the incidence of adverse events, while post-marketing reporting systems use disproportionate reporting of adverse drug reactions. Here, we propose a method to evaluate the novelty of a safety profile of a drug in a new class (in clinical trials), against that of those already on the market (using pharmacovigilance data).

Methods

Through Bayesian disproportionality analyses of the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) data, we identified and ranked Preferred Terms for a pool of 30 antipsychotics. Adverse event rates in randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled schizophrenia clinical trials were summarized by their class specificity. One study (N = 245) of the trace amine-associated receptor 1 (TAAR1) agonist ulotaront (SEP-363856) was compared with five studies of dopamine D2 receptor-based antipsychotics lurasidone (N = 1041), quetiapine (N = 119), olanzapine (N = 122), and placebo (N = 504).

Results

In clinical trials of antipsychotics, cumulative rates for adverse events at and above a threshold of disproportional reporting (Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean 50 > 3 in FAERS) were 52%, 42%, and 60% for lurasidone, quetiapine, and olanzapine, respectively, indicating that over half of the adverse events reported in clinical trials of an atypical antipsychotic are class-specific risks. In contrast, in the clinical trial of ulotaront, the cumulative rate was 23%, indicating a lower rate of antipsychotic class-specific risk.

Conclusions

These results demonstrate a novel approach to summarize adverse events in clinical trials, where the cumulative burden of class-specific risks describes the emerging safety profile of a new drug in clinical development, relative to reactions anticipated for drugs in an established pharmacological class.

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers

NCT0296938, NCT00088634, NCT00549718, NCT00615433, NCT00790192.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40261-021-01094-7.

Antipsychotics for negative and positive symptoms of schizophrenia: dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled acute phase trials

Determining the optimal antipsychotic target dose in acute phase treatment is of high clinical relevance. The effect of antipsychotics on negative symptoms should be taken into account because patients will often continue on the treatment received in the acute phase. Therefore, we conducted a formal dose-response meta-analysis of negative symptoms and positive symptoms based on a systematic review of fixed-dose randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of antipsychotics for the acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Forty RCTs included a total of 15,689 patients. The 95% effective doses per day for the 13 antipsychotics included and 3 long acting were mostly different for negative and positive symptoms: amisulpride (481 mg, 690.6 mg); aripiprazole (11.9 mg, 11 mg); asenapine (7.61 mg, 5.66 mg); brexpiprazole (2.1 mg, 4 mg); cariprazine (4 mg, 6.51 mg); haloperidol (6.34 mg, 7.36 mg); lurasidone (58.2 mg, 86.3 mg); olanzapine (15.5 mg, 9.52 mg); olanzapine long-acting injection (15.7 mg, 13.5 mg); paliperidone (7.2 mg, 7 mg); paliperidone long-acting injection (7.5 mg, 5.9 mg); quetiapine instant-release (264.2 mg, 316.5 mg); quetiapine extended-release (774 mg, 707.2 mg); risperidone (7.5 mg, 7.7 mg); risperidone long-acting injection (5.13 mg, 6.7 mg); sertindole (13.5 mg, 16.3 mg); and ziprasidone (71.6 mg, 152.6 mg). The shape of the dose-response curves varied across different drugs with most drugs showing a plateau at higher doses. Most dose-response curves suggested that the near-maximum effective doses could be in the lower-to-medium range of the licensed dose. Additional RCTs are necessary to establish the optimal dose.

Safety and Effectiveness of Lurasidone in Patients with Schizophrenia: A 12-Week, Open-Label Extension Study

PURPOSE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lurasidone among patients with schizophrenia in a 12-week open-label extension study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who completed a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study were enrolled in a 12-week open-label extension study with flexible dosing of lurasidone at 40 or 80 mg/day. Safety assessments included adverse events, vital signs, laboratory tests, and electrocardiogram (ECG) parameters. Effectiveness measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score, Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S), Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) and quality of life measure.

RESULTS

A total of 289 patients were enrolled in the open-label extension study. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were low; akathisia was the most common TEAE with an incidence of 6.6%. There were 54 patients (18.7%) who discontinued the extension study, with 17 (5.9%) discontinuing due to adverse events. Minimal or no effects of lurasidone on weight, body mass index, metabolic parameters, prolactin, and ECG parameters were evident. There was continued improvement to week 12 in PANSS and CGI-S scores beyond the initial gains made during the prior 6-week double-blind study. Non-responders to lurasidone 40 mg/day in the prior 6-week study showed a mean (standard deviation) improvement from open-label baseline of 10.7 (13.8) points on the PANSS total score after lurasidone dose was increased to a modal dose of 80 mg/day during the extension study. Changes from double-blind baseline in CDSS and quality of life were maintained in the extension study.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with lurasidone 40 or 80 mg once daily (flexibly dosed) continued to be well tolerated with patients demonstrating further improvement in symptoms over the course of a 12-week open-label extension study in patients with schizophrenia.

Impact of Lurasidone and Other Antipsychotics on Body Weight: Real-World, Retrospective, Comparative Study of 15,323 Adults with Schizophrenia

Purpose

The primary objectives were to describe weight changes following initiation of lurasidone versus other antipsychotics and estimate the risk of clinically relevant (≥7%) weight changes.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective, longitudinal comparative cohort study was based on electronic medical records (EMRs) of United States (US) adult patients with schizophrenia who were prescribed lurasidone or other antipsychotics as monotherapy between 1 April 2013 and 30 June 2019.

Results

Overall, the study included 15,323 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia; 6.1% of patients received lurasidone, 60.4% received antipsychotics associated with a medium-high risk of weight gain (clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, paliperidone) and 33.5% received antipsychotics with a low risk of weight gain (aripiprazole, first-generation antipsychotics, ziprasidone). Lurasidone was associated with the smallest proportion of patients experiencing clinically relevant weight gain and the greatest proportion of patients with clinically relevant weight loss. The risk of clinically relevant weight gain was numerically higher with all antipsychotics versus lurasidone and was statistically significant for olanzapine (hazard ratio [HR]=1.541; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.121; 2.119; p=0.0078) versus lurasidone. The likelihood of ≥7% weight loss was significantly greater with lurasidone versus all antipsychotics (p<0.05), except ziprasidone.

Conclusion

This real-world study suggests that lurasidone has a lower risk of clinically relevant weight gain and a higher likelihood of clinically relevant weight loss than other commonly used antipsychotics.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone in adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia: A pooled post hoc analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week studies

BACKGROUND

The aim of this pooled analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia in adolescents and young adults.

METHODS

The six pooled studies in this analysis used similar study designs and outcome measures. Patients (aged 13-25 years) were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone in fixed doses of 40, 80, 120, or 160 mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was Week 6 change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score; secondary efficacy endpoints included Week 6 change in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale.

RESULTS

The safety population consisted of 537 patients (mean age: 18.1 years); 82.6% of patients completed the studies. Treatment with lurasidone was significantly better than placebo at all doses (p < 0.001) for change in the PANSS total score at Week 6. Placebo-adjusted PANSS scores ranged from -9.4 to -16.1 (effect sizes: 0.53-0.90), with effect sizes increasing at higher doses. For lurasidone (combined doses), three adverse events occurred with a frequency of ≥5% (nausea: 13.5%; somnolence: 12.1%; akathisia: 10.1%). At last observation carried forward (LOCF)-endpoint weight gain of ≥7% was similar for lurasidone versus placebo (3.6 vs. 4.7%). Minimal median changes were observed at endpoint in cholesterol, -2.0 mg/dL; triglycerides, 0.0 mg/dL; and glucose, 0.0 mg/dL.

CONCLUSIONS

In adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia, treatment with lurasidone in doses of 40-160 mg/d was a safe, well-tolerated, and effective treatment. Short-term treatment with lurasidone was associated with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone in acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia: A 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in acute schizophrenia in Japan and other countries.

METHODS

Subjects (aged 18-74 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia were randomized to lurasidone 40 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at Week 6. Secondary efficacy assessments included the Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S). Safety endpoints included adverse events, and laboratory and electrocardiogram parameters.

RESULTS

A total of 483 subjects were randomized to lurasidone or placebo; 107 subjects were from Japan. Mean changes from baseline at Week 6 endpoint in PANSS total scores were -19.3 in the lurasidone group and -12.7 in the placebo group (treatment difference: P < 0.001, effect size = 0.41). Changes from baseline for Week 6 CGI-S scores were -1.0 for lurasidone and -0.7 for placebo (treatment difference: P < 0.001, effect size = 0.41). All-cause discontinuation during the 6-week, double-blind period was 19.4% for lurasidone and 25.4% for placebo, and discontinuation rates due to adverse event were 5.7% for lurasidone and 6.4% for placebo. The following common treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in more than 2% on lurasidone and at a rate at least twice that of the placebo group: akathisia (4.0%), dizziness (2.8%), somnolence (2.8%), abdominal discomfort (2.0%) and asthenia (2.0%). No significant changes in bodyweight or metabolic parameters were observed.

CONCLUSION

Lurasidone 40 mg once daily dosing demonstrated efficacy in a patient population with acute schizophrenia, including subjects from Japan, and was generally safe and well-tolerated.

Second-Generation Antipsychotic Drugs for Patients with Schizophrenia: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Side Effects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for schizophrenia show different risk profiles, whose evidence has been evaluated through comparative reviews on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of weight gains, metabolic and cardiovascular side effects of SGAs, relying on both RCTs and observational studies, by comparing variations between the start of treatment and the end of follow-up. The systematic review refers to papers published from June 2009 to November 2020. PRISMA criteria were followed. No restrictions on heterogeneity level have been considered for meta-analysis. A test for the summary effect measure and heterogeneity (I2 metric) was used.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine papers were selected from 3076 studies (61% RCTs, 39% observational studies). Olanzapine and risperidone reported the greatest weight gain and olanzapine the largest BMI increase. Paliperidone showed the highest increase in total cholesterol, but is the only drug reporting an increase in the HDL cholesterol. Quetiapine XR showed the highest decrease in fasting glucose. Lurasidone showed the lowest increase in body weight and a reduction in BMI and was also the only treatment reporting a decrease in total cholesterol and triglycerides. The highest increase in systolic and diastolic blood pressure was reported by quetiapine XR.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite some limitations (differences in the mean dosages per patient and other side effects not included) this paper provides the first complete meta-analysis on SGAs in variations on metabolic risk profile between start of treatment and end of follow-up, with useful results for clinical practice and possibly for future economic evaluation studies.

A network meta-analysis of the dose-response effects of lurasidone on acute schizophrenia

We compared the efficacy, safety, and acceptability of lurasidone at different doses to establish the dose-response relationships of lurasidone therapeutic and adverse effects in acute schizophrenia. Included trials were 4- to 16-week, fixed-dose, randomized controlled trials of lurasidone in adults with acute schizophrenia. Different doses of lurasidone, other antipsychotics, and placebo were considered as independent treatments. Apart from all-cause dropout rates, four therapeutic and four adverse outcomes were included in the frequentist network meta-analysis (NMA). Lurasidone 160, 120, 80, 40, and 20 mg/day were studied in ten trials of 3,366 adults with schizophrenia exacerbation. Lurasidone 160 mg/day reduced Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores significantly more than lurasidone 120, 80, 40, and 20 mg/day (mean differences = - 7.63, - 7.04, - 8.83, and - 12.25, respectively). All-cause dropout rates were significantly lower in participants receiving lurasidone 160 mg/day and 80 mg/day compared with those taking placebo. The half-maximal effective doses of lurasidone for PANSS total, PANSS positive, and MADRS score reductions were higher than 80 mg/day. The confidence of all NMA estimates was low or very low. Lurasidone 160 mg/day is currently the most efficacious and acceptable dose for acute schizophrenia. Its maximal effective doses may be higher than 160 mg/day.

Specific Anti-hostility Effects of Atypical Antipsychotics in Persons with Schizophrenia: From Clozapine to Cariprazine

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Evaluate the anti-hostility effects of available atypical antipsychotic agents.

ABSTRACT

In addition to hallucinations and delusions, persons with schizophrenia may exhibit hostility. In clinical trials of antipsychotics, hostility is routinely measured as part of rating scales such as the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale or Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The availability of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in 1989 led to the observation that it is possible to have a treatment effect on hostility that is independent of the treatment effect on hallucinations or delusions, and independent of general sedative effects. The data supporting this notion of a specific anti-hostility effect are the most robust for clozapine as the data include specifically designed randomized, controlled clinical trials. A specific anti-hostility effect is also observable to various degrees with most of the other atypical antipsychotics, as evidenced in post hoc analyses of clinical trials originally conducted for regulatory purposes, supplemented by post hoc analyses of large effectiveness trials. The generalizability of these studies, however, may be limited. Participants in these trials were not selected for aggressive and hostile behavior. Some of the studies also excluded patients with substance use disorders. The latter is particularly important because alcohol and substance use are well known to increase risk for hostility and aggression. Nevertheless, the repeated demonstrations of the specificity of an anti-hostility effect (in terms of statistical independence of effects on other positive symptoms and of sedation) are of potential clinical importance.

TULIP study: Trail of Lurasidone in bipolar disorder in Pakistan

BACKGROUND

This study examined usefulness and efficiency of Lurasidone in appraisal with the placebo as for the treatment of Bipolar Disorders.

METHODS

Seven treatment centers in Pakistan were selected for the purpose of starting a six week-long control trial (randomized and double-blind placebo). 76 subjects, already diagnosed with Bipolar I or II based on DSM 5 diagnosis, were selected after randomization. Patients were allocated in one of the two groups. Primary efficacy of the drug was measured using Young Mania Rating Scale. Positive response of the drug was defined as 50% reduction in symptoms from the baseline/13 point less than the baseline score on Young Mania Rating Scale. Efficacy and safety of the drug was assessed using variety of markers such as administering extra-pyramidal symptoms rating scale, adverse side effects reported, electrocardiograms, body weight, vital signs changes, and laboratory investigations.

RESULTS

Patients treated with Lurasidone showed enhanced improvement in their overall health and symptoms manifestation in comparison to patients who were given placebo. Lurasidone treated patients showed a better response to the drug (66%), in comparison with the placebo treated patients (42%).

LIMITATIONS

Study was conducted on small scale due to complexity.

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with Lurasidone showed reduction in bipolar symptoms and tolerate the drug well.

Identification of clinical phenotypes in schizophrenia: the role of lurasidone

The treatment of schizophrenia includes the control of symptoms, the prevention of relapses, and amelioration of adaptive skills for patient re-integration into society. Antipsychotic drugs are the agents of choice for the treatment of schizophrenia, as they reduce the positive symptoms of psychosis. Lurasidone is a second-generation antipsychotic drug representing a novel and useful clinical tool for the management of schizophrenia. A board consisting of a panel of Italian expert psychiatrists was organized with the following aims: (a) defining the current modalities of use of lurasidone, highlighted through 17 specific questions; (b) defining and agreeing the main features of the drug and the principal reasons to suggest its administration. We established that lurasidone is suggested at any age, with no gender difference, at all stages of the disease. The switch from previous treatments is done primarily because of lack of efficacy as well as poor adherence/tolerability. Lurasidone is among the best-tolerated antipsychotics, and its use is indicated in the presence of different comorbidities. A wide range of dosages is available, allowing safe titration in particular cases, with the highest dose (148 mg) generally used for the treatment of the acute phase. The discontinuation rate due to poor tolerability, low compliance, and interactions with other drugs is very low. Akathisia is the most reported adverse event, but it may be controlled by dose reduction. Lurasidone does not possess a marked sedative action but, in agitated patients, can be associated with sedative drugs, such as benzodiazepines. The most frequent reason for switching to other therapies is the need for long-acting formulations, as in patients at risk of very low adherence or suicide. Lurasidone does not strongly impact metabolism or the cardiovascular system (QT interval), and does not influence the metabolism of other drugs, showing good efficacy and tolerability.

Association of C-reactive protein and metabolic risk with cognitive effects of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Accumulating evidence has implicated insulin resistance and inflammation in the pathophysiology of cognitive impairments associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. This post-hoc analysis based on a placebo-controlled trial investigated the effect of inflammation (indexed by CRP) and metabolic risk factors on cognitive performance in patients with schizophrenia treated with lurasidone.

METHODS

Acutely exacerbated patients with schizophrenia were randomized to lurasidone (80 or 160 mg/day), quetiapine XR 600 mg/day, or placebo. A wide range CRP test and a cognitive assessment using the CogState computerized battery were performed at baseline and week 6 study endpoint. Associations between log-transformed CRP, high density lipoprotein (HDL), homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and treatment response were evaluated.

RESULTS

CRP combined with HDL, triglyceride-to-HDL (TG/HDL) ratio, or HOMA-IR at study baseline were significant moderators of the improvement in cognitive performance associated with lurasidone 160 mg/day (vs. placebo) treatment (p < .05). Greater placebo-corrected treatment effect size on the CogState composite score was observed for patients in the lurasidone 160 mg/day treatment group who had either low CRP and high HDL (d = 0.43), or low CRP and low HOMA-IR (d = 0.46). Interactive relationships between CRP, HDL, TG/HDL, HOMA-IR and the antipsychotic efficacy of lurasidone or quetiapine XR were not significant. There were no significant associations between antipsychotic treatment and changes in CRP level at study endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this post-hoc analysis based on a placebo-controlled trial in patients with schizophrenia suggest that baseline CRP level combined with measures of metabolic risk significantly moderated the improvement in cognitive performance associated with lurasidone 160 mg/day (vs. placebo) treatment. Our findings underscore the importance of maintaining a low metabolic risk profile in patients with schizophrenia.

[The pharmacoeconomic efficacy of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia]

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic evaluation of lurasidone for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia under Russian healthcare system conditions and inclusion in EDL (Essential Drugs List) and Medication List for the Certain Categories of Citizens.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia was performed. Methods of pharmacoeconomic analysis were: cost analysis, budget impact analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

Use of lurasidone for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia requires 50.04% less costs than the use of paliperidone and 46.69% less costs than the use of sertindole allowing to provide additional therapies to 100.1 and 87.6% of patients, respectively. The cost minimization analysis results are stable when prices fluctuate in the range of ±30%. Considering the current volume of antipsychotic drug supply, replacing 100% of paliperidone with lurasidone from the first year will reduce the cost of antipsychotics for patients who received paliperidone by 39.79 or by 360.81 million rubles over 3 years. Replacing 100% of sertindole with lurasidone from the first year will reduce the cost of antipsychotics for patients who received sertindole by 37.21 or 173.87 million rubles over 3 years. The results of the budget impact analysis are resistant to changes in prices for compared drugs in a wide range.

CONCLUSION

Lurasidone is a more effective drug for treatment of schizophrenia from a pharmacoeconomic point of view in comparison with paliperidone and sertindole. With comparative efficacy with paliperidone and sertindole the use of lurasidone can significantly reduce the burden on budget of state programs of compensation for certain categories of citizens.

Lurasidone and risk for metabolic syndrome: results from short- and long-term clinical studies in patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effects of treatment with lurasidone on risk for metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Rates of metabolic syndrome during treatment with lurasidone (40-160 mg/d) were analyzed using pooled, short-term data from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (vs olanzapine and quetiapine XR); long-term data from two active-comparator-controlled studies (vs risperidone and quetiapine XR); and data from two open-label studies in which patients were switched from olanzapine or risperidone to lurasidone.

RESULTS

MetS was defined based on the National Cholesterol Education Program criteria. In short-term studies, the odds of meeting criteria for MetS at week 6 LOCF (adjusted for baseline metabolic syndrome status) was similar for the lurasidone and placebo groups (OR = 1.18; [95% CI, 0.81-1.71]; P = .39), but the odds (vs placebo) were significantly greater for olanzapine (OR = 2.81; [95% CI, 1.53-5.15]; P < .001) and quetiapine (OR = 3.49; [95% CI, 1.93-6.29]; P < .0001). No dose effect was observed for lurasidone across the dose range of 40-160 mg/d. In long-term studies, the odds of MetS after 12 months of treatment was significantly higher for risperidone compared with lurasidone (OR = 2.12; 95% CI, 1.15-3.90; P = .016) and for quetiapine XR compared with lurasidone (OR = 3.92; 95% CI, 1.15-13.40; P = .029). In open-label extension studies, the rate of MetS decreased in patients switched to lurasidone after 6 weeks of treatment with olanzapine or 12 months of treatment with risperidone.

CONCLUSION

In this analysis of lurasidone clinical trials, the odds of developing metabolic syndrome were minimal during short- and long-term treatment with lurasidone (40-160 mg/d).

Randomized, double-blind, 6-week non-inferiority study of lurasidone and risperidone for the treatment of schizophrenia

AIM

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone for the treatment of Chinese schizophrenic patients.

METHODS

Hospitalized schizophrenia patients aged 18-65 were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind, double-dummy, flexible-dose treatment with lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day) or risperidone (2, 4 or 6 mg/day). Efficacy was evaluated using a non-inferiority comparison of lurasidone relative to risperidone based on week 6 change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Safety assessments included adverse events, clinical laboratory measures, and electrocardiograms.

RESULTS

Four hundred and forty-four patients were screened to obtain an intent-to-treat sample of 384 patients, of whom 54 patients discontinued treatment prior to 6 weeks. Lurasidone met the criteria for non-inferiority versus risperidone on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean (SE) change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -31.2 (1.0) and -34.9 (1.0) in the lurasidone and risperidone group, respectively. The mean difference score was 3.7, and the upper boundary of the 95%-confidence interval (1.0-6.3) was less than the prespecified margin of 7.0. No clinically meaningful between-treatment group differences were evident on secondary efficacy measures, including PANSS positive, PANSS negative, Clinical Global Impression scale - Severity, and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia scales. The incidence of adverse events was lower for lurasidone vs risperidone for extrapyramidal symptoms (17.0% vs 38.2%), akathisia (7.2% vs 13.6%), prolactin increase (3.1% vs 14.1%), and weight increase (0.5% vs 5.2%).

CONCLUSION

Lurasidone was found to be non-inferior to risperidone on the primary endpoint with minimal effects on weight, metabolic parameters, or prolactin levels.

Efficacy of lurasidone across five symptom dimensions of schizophrenia: Pooled analysis of short-term, placebo-controlled studies

Objective:

To evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone for schizophrenia using an established five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).

Methods:

Patient-level data were pooled from five randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week studies of lurasidone (fixed doses, 40–160 mg/d) for patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Changes in five established PANSS factors were assessed using mixed-model repeated measures analysis.

Results:

Compared with placebo (n = 496), lurasidone (n = 1029, dose groups pooled) significantly improved the PANSS total score at Week 6 (−22.6 vs. −12.8; P < 0.001; effect size, 0.45), as well as all factor scores (P < 0.001 for each): positive symptoms (−8.4 vs. −6.0; effect size, 0.43), negative symptoms (−5.2 vs. −3.3; effect size, 0.33), disorganized thought (−4.9 vs. −2.8; effect size, 0.42), hostility/excitement (−2.7 vs. −1.6; effect size, 0.31), and depression/anxiety (−3.2 vs. −2.3; effect size, 0.31). Separation from placebo occurred at Week 1 for the positive symptoms, disorganized thought, and hostility/excitement factors and at Week 2 for the other factors.

Conclusions:

In this pooled analysis of short-term studies in patients with acute schizophrenia, lurasidone demonstrated significant improvement for each of the five PANSS factor scores, indicating effectiveness across the spectrum of schizophrenia symptoms.

Exploring Biologic Predictors Response Disparities to Atypical Antipsychotics among Blacks: A Quasi-Systematic Review

Purpose

Management of schizophrenia among Blacks in the United States is affected by persistent disparities. This review explored response to atypical antipsychotics among Blacks compared with other groups to assess systematic variation that may contribute to disparities.

Methods

We conducted a quasi-systematic review of studies reporting response to atypical antipsychotics among Blacks compared with other groups, including effects of genetic variation.

Results

Of 48 identified research articles, 29 assessed differences in outcomes without inclusion of genetic variation and 20 explored effects of genetic variation; of note: one article included both types of data. Analysis of the 29 papers with clinical outcomes only suggests that while data on efficacy and risk of movement disorders were heterogeneous, findings indicate increased risk of metabolic effects and neutropenia among Blacks. Of the 20 articles exploring effects of genetic variation, allelic or genotypic variations involving several genes were associated with altered efficacy or safety among Blacks but not Whites, including risk of decreased response involving variation in DRD4 and DRD1, and improved efficacy associated with variants in DRD2, COMT, and RGS4. Others showed significant improvement in treatment response only among Whites, including variation in DTNBP1, DRD4, and GNB3.

Conclusions

The current analysis can help tailor management among Blacks using an atypical antipsychotic. Heterogeneity in genetic variation effects and response allele frequency suggests that pharmacogenetics approaches for atypical antipsychotics will need to explicitly incorporate race and ethnicity.

Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Antipsychotic Drugs for Acute Schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

The dose-response relationships of antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia are not well defined, but such information would be important for decision making by clinicians. The authors sought to fill this gap by conducting dose-response meta-analyses.

METHODS

A search of multiple electronic databases (through November 2018) was conducted for all placebo-controlled dose-finding studies for 20 second-generation antipsychotic drugs and haloperidol (oral and long-acting injectable, LAI) in people with acute schizophrenia symptoms. Dose-response curves were constructed with random-effects dose-response meta-analyses and a spline model. The outcome measure was total score reduction from baseline on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale or the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. The authors identified 95% effective doses, explored whether higher or lower doses than the currently licensed ones might be more appropriate, and derived dose equivalencies from the 95% effective doses.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The 95% effective doses and the doses equivalent to 1 mg of oral risperidone, respectively, were as follows: amisulpride for patients with positive symptoms, 537 mg/day and 85.8 mg; aripiprazole, 11.5 mg/day and 1.8 mg; aripiprazole LAI (lauroxil), 463 mg every 4 weeks and 264 mg; asenapine, 15.0 mg/day and 2.4 mg; brexpiprazole, 3.36 mg/day and 0.54 mg; haloperidol, 6.3 mg/day and 1.01 mg; iloperidone, 20.13 mg/day and 3.2 mg; lurasidone, 147 mg/day and 23.5 mg; olanzapine, 15.2 mg/day and 2.4 mg; olanzapine LAI, 277 mg every 2 weeks and 3.2 mg; paliperidone, 13.4 mg/day and 2.1 mg; paliperidone LAI, 120 mg every 4 weeks and 1.53 mg; quetiapine, 482 mg/day and 77 mg; risperidone, 6.3 mg/day and 1 mg; risperidone LAI, 36.6 mg every 2 weeks and 0.42 mg; sertindole, 22.5 mg/day and 3.6 mg; and ziprasidone, 186 mg/day and 30 mg. For amisulpride and olanzapine, specific data for patients with predominant negative symptoms were available. The authors have made available on their web site a spreadsheet with this method and other updated methods that can be used to estimate dose equivalencies in practice.

CONCLUSIONS

In chronic schizophrenia patients with acute exacerbations, doses higher than the identified 95% effective doses may on average not provide more efficacy. For some drugs, higher than currently licensed doses might be tested in further trials, because their dose-response curves did not plateau.

Safety and effectiveness of lurasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia in Asian patients: Results of a 26-week open-label extension study

INTRODUCTION

This study was designed to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia among Asian patients.

METHODS

Patients (N = 281) with schizophrenia who had completed a randomized, double-blind (DB), 6-week comparison of lurasidone (40 and 80 mg/day) and placebo were enrolled in a 26-week extension study in which all patients received open-label (OL), flexible doses of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day). Effectiveness was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven percent of patients completed the OL extension study; 16.7% discontinued early due to lack of effectiveness; and 10.3% due to adverse events. The most common adverse events were insomnia (11.3%), akathisia (11.0%), and nasopharyngitis (10.6%). Adverse events related to weight gain, metabolic parameters, prolactin, and ECG measures were uncommon. Mean change in the PANSS total score from the DB baseline to OL endpoint was -28.4, with mean improvement of -7.5 observed from baseline to OL endpoint, and with a PANSS responder rate of 73.7%.

DISCUSSION

The results of the current 26-week extension study found lurasidone to be a generally safe, well-tolerated, and effective long-term treatment for schizophrenia in Asian patients.

[Effect of Lurasidone on symptoms of schizophrenia in five-factor dimensional model: pooled analysis of two short-term, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients from Russia and Ukraine]

AIM

Evaluation of a new five-factor dimensional model of schizophrenia in recent revisions of classifications of mental disorders (DSM-5 and ICD-11) dictates the need to use this approach in conducting a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of new antipsychotic agents, including ethnically homogeneous populations of patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of pooled data from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week clinical studies (RCTs) of lurasidone (fixed doses, 40, 80, 120 or 160 mg/d) in patients experiencing an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Changes in PANSS total score, CGI-S score and five established PANSS factors were assessed using mixed-model repeated measures analysis.

RESULTS

Lurasidone (n=162, dose groups pooled) compared with placebo (n=68), significantly improved the PANSS total score at Week 6 (-23.0 vs. -10.5; p<0.001; effect size 0.82) as well as all PANSS factor scores: positive symptoms (-8.5 vs. -4.2; p<0.001; effect size 0.88), negative symptoms (-4.4 vs. -2.8; p=0.011, effect size 0.44), disorganized thoughts (-4.4 vs. -2.1; p<0.001; effect size 0.70), hostility/excitement (-2.7 vs. -0.7; p<0.001; effect size 0.66), and depression/anxiety (-3.5 vs. -2.2; p=0.002; effect size 0.53).

CONCLUSION

Lurasidone demonstrated significant improvement for both PANSS total score and each of the five PANSS factor scores, indicating effectiveness across the broad spectrum of schizophrenia symptoms. Effect size for both PANSS total score and each of the five PANSS factor scores for the local population was higher than for the wider population, which included patients from various countries.

The effect of high vs. low dose lurasidone on eye movement biomarkers of prefrontal abilities in treatment-resistant schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Eye movement (EM) measures can serve as biomarkers to evaluate pharmacological effects on brain systems involved in cognition. In recent onset schizophrenia, antipsychotic treatment can improve attentional control on the antisaccade task and exacerbate working memory impairment on the memory guided saccade task; effects in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) are less clear. This study evaluated the effects of high versus low dose lurasidone on EM performance in TRS.

METHODS

TRS patients completed EM testing: 1) at baseline, on existing medication regimen (n = 42), 2) after 6 weeks of low dose (80 mg) lurasidone (n = 38), 3) after 12 weeks following randomization to low (80 mg) or high dose (240 mg) lurasidone (n = 27), and 4) after 24 weeks of treatment (n = 23). EM testing included prosaccade, antisaccade, and memory guided saccade tasks.

RESULTS

Six weeks of lurasidone resulted in increased prosaccade saccade latency and reduced antisaccade errors, with no change in memory guided saccade accuracy. After randomization, prosaccade and antisaccade latencies increased in only the high dose group, with no change in antisaccade errors in both groups. Memory guided saccade error increased in the high dose group and remained stable in the low dose group.

CONCLUSION

Among TRS, stabilization on low dose lurasidone was associated with improved executive control of attention reflected by reduced antisaccade errors. High dose lurasidone resulted in prolonged speed of reflexive and executive shifts of attention and reduced spatial working memory relative to low dose. These findings indicate that EM measures are helpful biomarkers of dose-dependent antipsychotic treatment effects on executive cognitive abilities in TRS.