Lurasidone compared to other atypical antipsychotic monotherapies for bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Efficacy and Safety of Adding Lurasidone to Ongoing Therapy With Lithium or Valproate for the Treatment of an Acute Bipolar Depressive Episode: A Post Hoc Analysis of 2 Placebo-Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety profile of lurasidone combined with either lithium or valproate, in the short-term treatment of patients with bipolar depression.

METHODS

Data were pooled from two 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of patients with bipolar depression on stable doses of lithium or valproate randomized to lurasidone (20-120 mg/d) or placebo. Efficacy measures included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impressions Bipolar Scale, and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology via self-assessment and were analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measures approach.

RESULTS

Notably larger week 6 effect sizes were observed when lurasidone was added to lithium, compared with when lurasidone was added to valproate, on 2 of the 3 depression outcome measures, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score (d = 0.45 vs 0.22) and Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology via self-assessment (d = 0.63 vs 0.29); the efficacy advantage was smaller on the Clinical Global Impressions Bipolar Scale depression score (d = 0.34 vs 0.29). Similar adverse event profiles were observed for lurasidone treatment in combination with either lithium or valproate. The most frequently reported events (≥5%) in both groups were nausea, parkinsonism, somnolence, akathisia, and insomnia. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed during treatment with lurasidone combined with either lithium or valproate.

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone added to either lithium or valproate was found to be an effective treatment for bipolar depression, with a larger antidepressant effect observed when lurasidone was combined with lithium. There were no clinically meaningful differences in the safety or tolerability of lurasidone when used adjunctively with lithium or valproate.

Efficacy and tolerability of FDA-approved atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

We employed a Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for the treatment of bipolar patients with depressive episodes. Sixteen randomized controlled trials with 7234 patients treated by one of the five AAPs (cariprazine, lumateperone, lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) were included. For the response rate (defined as an improvement of ≥50% from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS]), all AAPs were more efficacious than placebo. For the remission rate (defined as the endpoint of MADRS ≤12 or ≤ 10), cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine had higher remission rates than placebo. In terms of tolerability, olanzapine was unexpectedly associated with lower odds of all-cause discontinuation in comparison with placebo, whereas quetiapine was associated with higher odds of discontinuation due to adverse events than placebo. Compared with placebo, lumateperone, olanzapine, and quetiapine showed higher odds of somnolence. Lumateperone had a lower rate of ≥ weight gain of 7% than placebo and other treatments. Olanzapine was associated with a significant increase from baseline in total cholesterol and triglycerides than placebo. These findings inform individualized prescriptions of AAPs for treating bipolar depression in clinical practice.

Does the Ranking Matter? A Retrospective Cohort Study Investigating the Impact of the 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Bipolar Disorder Treatment Recommendations for Acute Mania on Rehospitalization Rates

OBJECTIVE

There is limited data about the impact of mood disorders treatment guidelines on clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of prescribers' adherence to the 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) treatment guidelines recommendations on the readmission rates of patients hospitalized for mania.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort of all individuals admitted due to acute mania to Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, ON, from January 2018 to July 2021 was included in this study. Patient variables and data regarding index admission and subsequent hospitalizations were extracted from medical records up to December 31, 2021. Treatment regimens were classified as first-line, second-line, noncompliant, or no treatment. We explored the associations between treatment regimens and the risk of readmissions using univariate, multivariate, and survival analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 211 hospitalizations related to 165 patients. The mean time-to-readmission was 211.8 days (standard deviation [SD]  =  247.1); the 30-day rehospitalization rate was 13.7%, and any rehospitalization rate was 40.3%. Compared to no treatment, only first-line treatments were associated with a statistically significant decreased risk of 30-day readmission (odds ratio [OR] = 0.209; 95% CI, 0.058 to 0.670). The risk of any readmission was reduced by first-line (OR = 0.387; 95% CI, 0.173 to 0.848) and noncompliant regimens (OR = 0.414; 95% CI, 0.174 to 0.982) compared to no treatment. On survival analysis, no treatment group was associated with shorter time-to-readmission (log-rank test, p  =  0.014) and increased risk of readmission (hazard ratio = 2.27; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.96) when compared to first-line medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with first-line medications was associated with lower 30-day rehospitalization rates and longer time-to-readmission. Physicians' adherence to treatments with higher-ranked evidence for efficacy, safety, and tolerability may improve bipolar disorder outcomes.

Diagnosis and management of bipolar disorders

Bipolar disorders (BDs) are recurrent and sometimes chronic disorders of mood that affect around 2% of the world's population and encompass a spectrum between severe elevated and excitable mood states (mania) to the dysphoria, low energy, and despondency of depressive episodes. The illness commonly starts in young adults and is a leading cause of disability and premature mortality. The clinical manifestations of bipolar disorder can be markedly varied between and within individuals across their lifespan. Early diagnosis is challenging and misdiagnoses are frequent, potentially resulting in missed early intervention and increasing the risk of iatrogenic harm. Over 15 approved treatments exist for the various phases of bipolar disorder, but outcomes are often suboptimal owing to insufficient efficacy, side effects, or lack of availability. Lithium, the first approved treatment for bipolar disorder, continues to be the most effective drug overall, although full remission is only seen in a subset of patients. Newer atypical antipsychotics are increasingly being found to be effective in the treatment of bipolar depression; however, their long term tolerability and safety are uncertain. For many with bipolar disorder, combination therapy and adjunctive psychotherapy might be necessary to treat symptoms across different phases of illness. Several classes of medications exist for treating bipolar disorder but predicting which medication is likely to be most effective or tolerable is not yet possible. As pathophysiological insights into the causes of bipolar disorders are revealed, a new era of targeted treatments aimed at causal mechanisms, be they pharmacological or psychosocial, will hopefully be developed. For the time being, however, clinical judgment, shared decision making, and empirical follow-up remain essential elements of clinical care. This review provides an overview of the clinical features, diagnostic subtypes, and major treatment modalities available to treat people with bipolar disorder, highlighting recent advances and ongoing therapeutic challenges.

Therapeutic Potential and Limitation of Serotonin Type 7 Receptor Modulation

Although a number of mood-stabilising atypical antipsychotics and antidepressants modulate serotonin type 7 receptor (5-HT7), the detailed contributions of 5-HT7 function to clinical efficacy and pathophysiology have not been fully understood. The mood-stabilising antipsychotic agent, lurasidone, and the serotonin partial agonist reuptake inhibitor, vortioxetine, exhibit higher binding affinity to 5-HT7 than other conventional antipsychotics and antidepressants. To date, the initially expected rapid onset of antidepressant effects-in comparison with conventional antidepressants or mood-stabilising antipsychotics-due to 5-HT7 inhibition has not been observed with lurasidone and vortioxetine; however, several clinical studies suggest that 5-HT7 inhibition likely contributes to quality of life of patients with schizophrenia and mood disorders via the improvement of cognition. Furthermore, recent preclinical studies reported that 5-HT7 inhibition might mitigate antipsychotic-induced weight gain and metabolic complication by blocking other monoamine receptors. Further preclinical studies for the development of 5-HT7 modulation against neurodevelopmental disorders and neurodegenerative diseases have been ongoing. To date, various findings from various preclinical studies indicate the possibility that 5-HT7 modifications can provide two independent strategies. The first is that 5-HT7 inhibition ameliorates the dysfunction of inter-neuronal transmission in mature networks. The other is that activation of 5-HT7 can improve transmission dysfunction due to microstructure abnormality in the neurotransmission network-which could be unaffected by conventional therapeutic agents-via modulating intracellular signalling during the neurodevelopmental stage or via loss of neural networks with aging. This review attempts to describe the current and novel clinical applications of 5-HT7 modulation based on preclinical findings.

Effects of Treatment of Acute Major Depressive Episodes in Bipolar I Versus Bipolar II Disorders With Quetiapine

BACKGROUND

Several second-generation antipsychotic drugs (SGAs) have evidence of benefit for acute major depressive episodes in bipolar disorder (BD) patients. However, their comparative efficacy in types I vs II BD (BD1 vs BD2) remains uncertain.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic literature search for randomized, double-blinded, controlled treatment trials for acute major depressive episodes involving head-to-head comparisons of BD1 versus BD2 subjects, followed by meta-analyses and meta-regression modeling.

RESULTS

Seven reports met out inclusion criteria, yielding 22 comparisons of SGA versus placebo averaging 8.3 weeks in duration. All trials involved quetiapine, which was much more effective than placebo (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] = 1.76 [95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.12], P < 0.0001). Estimated % improvement averaged 53.5% [46.5-60.5] with quetiapine vs 39.8% [34.2-45.4] with placebo ( P < 0.0001); their ratio was somewhat larger with BD1 (1.56 [1.26-1.86]) versus BD2 subjects (1.22 [1.07-1.37], P = 0.04; as was SMD (BD1: 2.35 [1.83-2.86]; BD2: SMD = 1.44 [1.05-1.82]). Meta-regression found diagnosis (BD1 > BD2) to be the only factor significantly associated with the meta-analytic outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Although data are limited, depressed BD1 patients may respond somewhat better to quetiapine than BD2. Additional head-to-head diagnostic comparisons are needed with other SGAs, as well as evaluation of monotherapy versus various combinations that include SGAs in both short- and long-term use.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

Pharmacological treatments recommended for bipolar depression are inconsistent across guidelines. We compared the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression.

METHODS

A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression was conducted based on a literature search of major electronic databases.

RESULTS

Three studies comparing quetiapine with lithium were identified and analyzed; no other antipsychotic-mood stabilizer combinations were found. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between quetiapine and lithium for the following outcomes: (1) remission from depressive episodes (risk ratio [RR]: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.51-6.40, P = 0.36), (2) changes in depressive symptom (standardized mean difference: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.52-0.08, P = 0.15), (3) changes in social function (standardized mean difference: -0.00, 95% CI: -0.19-0.18, P = 0.98), (4) suicide-related events (odds ratio [OR]: 2.35, 95% CI: 0.40-13.65, P = 0.34), (5) severe adverse events (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 0.51-5.20, P = 0.41), (6) dropouts due to adverse events (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.76-1.87, P = 0.45, 7) dropout for any reasons (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.74-1.22, P = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Although this study found no differences in the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression, a comprehensive comparison of antipsychotics and mood stabilizers was not performed. Further studies are needed to clarify which of these, not just quetiapine and lithium, is more useful for bipolar depression.

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.

Adjunctive antidepressants for the acute treatment of bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The depressive phase of bipolar disorder causes significant functional impairment and disease burden. The efficacy and safety of antidepressants in the treatment of bipolar depression has long been a subject of debate.

AIMS

To synthesize evidence of the effectiveness, risk of mood switching, and tolerability of adjunctive antidepressants in acute bipolar depression compared to using mood stabilizers or antipsychotics alone.

METHOD

Multiple databases were searched for randomized controlled trials, including open label and double-blinded, for patients ages 18 or older with acute bipolar depression, comparing efficacy and adverse events in those who used adjunctive antidepressants versus without. Risk of bias and outcomes were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. This study has PROSPERO registration CRD42016037701.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Adjunctive antidepressants showed no significant effect on improving response rate (RR=1.10, 95%CI: 0.98-1.23). Subgroup analysis showed that adjunctive antidepressants with antipsychotics had a small but significantly better response rate compared to antipsychotics alone, which was not seen with adjunctive antidepressants with mood stabilizers. However, that finding was limited by studies predominantly using olanzapine as the antipsychotic medication. Adjunctive antidepressants had no clinically significant impact (but a small statistically significant impact) on improving depressive symptoms (SMD=-0.13, 95%CI: -0.24 to -0.02). There was no association with increased mood switch (RR=0.97, 95%CI: 0.68-1.39) and there was an association with lower dropout due to inefficacy (RR=0.66, 95%CI: 0.45∼0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of adjunctive antidepressants clinically improving response rate or depressive symptoms for acute bipolar depression. They are well tolerated, without increasing the risk of short-term mood switch.

Guidelines for the management of psychosis in the context of mood disorders

Psychotic episodes occur in a substantial proportion of patients suffering from major mood disorders (both unipolar and bipolar) at some point in their lives. The nature of these episodes is less well understood than the more common, non-psychotic periods of illness and hence their management is also less sophisticated. This is a concern because the risk of suicide is particularly high in this subtype of mood disorder and comorbidity is far more common. In some cases psychotic symptoms may be signs of a comorbid illness but the relationship of psychotic mood to other forms of psychosis and in particular its interactions with schizophrenia is poorly understood. Therefore, our targeted review draws upon extant research and our combined experience to provide clinical context and a framework for the management of these disorders in real-world practice - taking into consideration both biological and psychological interventions.

Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis: Efficacy and Safety of Second-Generation Antipsychotics in Youths With Bipolar Depression

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative efficacy and safety of second-generation antipsychotics for treating major depressive episodes in youths with bipolar disorder.

METHOD

A systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of second-generation antipsychotics for bipolar depression in youths 10 to 18 years of age was conducted. Efficacy measures included Children's Depression Rating Scale, Revised (CDRS-R) and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Disorder-Severity Depression (CGI-BP-S-depression) and Overall (CGI-BP-S-overall) scores. Available safety outcomes included discontinuations (all-cause, lack of efficacy, adverse events), metabolic parameters (weight change, cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose), changes in prolactin, and somnolence. Results from the NMA were reported as mean changes from baseline or odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

RESULTS

Four RCTs comparing placebo to lurasidone, quetiapine (1 each for immediate- and extended-release), and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC) met all of the inclusion criteria. Lurasidone and OFC demonstrated similar and statistically significant improvements in CDRS-R, but quetiapine did not (lurasidone: -5.70 [-8.66, -2.76]; OFC: -5.01 [-8.63, -1.38]; quetiapine: -1.85 [-5.99, 2.27]). Lurasidone was associated with smaller changes in weight, cholesterol, and triglycerides from baseline compared to OFC and quetiapine. There were no differences in changes in glucose levels among antipsychotics. In addition, lurasidone was associated with smaller change in prolactin levels compared to OFC but not quetiapine.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from 4 studies in this NMA indicated that lurasidone and OFC, but not quetiapine, were efficacious for the treatment of bipolar depression in youths. Lurasidone was associated with less weight gain and smaller impacts on cholesterol and triglycerides compared with quetiapine and OFC.

Is aripiprazole similar to quetiapine for treatment of bipolar depression? Results from meta-analysis of Chinese data

OBJECTIVE

To study the similarities and differences in the clinical efficacy of aripiprazole and quetiapine in Chinese patients with bipolar depression through meta-analysis. Additionally, to provide evidence of aripiprazole in treatment for bipolar depression.

METHODS

We searched Chinese literature related to the study of aripiprazole and quetiapine in treatment for bipolar depression, among which results such as comments, letters, reviews, and case reports were excluded. The clinical efficacy between aripiprazole and quetiapine was synthesized and discussed.

RESULT

A total of 1,546 subjects were included in 17 studies. The random effect model was used to review the data by RevMan 5.2. The results showed that there was no significant difference in the remission rate between patients treated with aripiprazole and quetiapine evidenced by the scale used to evaluate the patients being treated for bipolar depression (221/501 vs. 193/501, Z = 1.12, P = 0.26). But the results also showed that the remission rate of aripiprazole with lithium carbonate was significantly higher than quetiapine with lithium carbonate in the treatment of bipolar depression (111/232 vs. 69/232, Z = 3.92, P < 0.0001). The results showed that the effective rate of aripiprazole was similar to quetiapine (426/572 vs. 386/572, Z = 2.70, P = 0.007). Overall, there was no difference in the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) score between patients treated with aripiprazole and quetiapine (Z = 1.68, P = 0.09). The results also show that the drop-out rate of aripiprazole was similar to quetiapine in the treatment of patients with bipolar depression (Z = 1.80, P = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

As an atypical antipsychotic, aripiprazole may be similar to quetiapine for treating bipolar depression with similar drop-out and higher remission rates when combined with lithium carbonate. However, the results of this study need to be read with caution given the poor quality of collected/analyzed literature.

Second-Generation Antipsychotics in Management of Acute Pediatric Bipolar Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy in reduction of depressive symptoms, and safety and tolerability of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) to manage pediatric bipolar depression (PBD). Methods: We conducted a systematic review for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) for PBD in MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE. Four (quetiapine: 2, lurasidone: 1, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination [OFC]: 1) out of 569 studies met the criteria for inclusion in meta-analysis. RevMan was used for statistical analysis, and the mean difference (MD) between mean children's depression rating scale-revised (CDRS-R) score was used to measure treatment difference between SGA and placebo. Results: Lurasidone displayed a significant reduction in depressive symptoms (MD -5.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] -8.67 to -2.73) in PBD, followed by OFC (MD -5.00, 95% CI -8.64 to -1.36) and quetiapine (MD -2.30, 95% CI -6.80 to 2.20; MD 1.00, 95% CI -9.88 to 11.88). The response was significantly higher for lurasidone (59.5% vs. 36.5%; p < 0.001) and OFC (78.2% vs. 59.2%, p = 0.003) compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant MD in treatment and response rates between quetiapine and placebo in all RCTs. The weighted mean CDRS-R total score difference was -4.58 (95% CI -6.59 to -2.56) and overall effect was significant (p < 0.00001). Importantly, the p value for heterogeneity was 0.46, which indicated that there was no heterogeneity between outcomes of the studies. The number needed to treat (NNT) for lurasidone was 4.3, followed by OFC (NNT = 5.3) and quetiapine (NNT = 12.5; NNT = 25). Conclusion: Our findings showed lurasidone and OFC were more efficacious than placebo for acute depressive episodes in PBD. RCTs of treatments for PBD remain scarce pressing the need for more research.

Effects of Atypical Antipsychotics, Clozapine, Quetiapine and Brexpiprazole on Astroglial Transmission Associated with Connexin43

Recently, accumulating preclinical findings suggest the possibility that functional abnormalities of tripartite synaptic transmission play important roles in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia and affective disorder. Therefore, to explore the novel mechanisms of mood-stabilizing effects associated with tripartite synaptic transmission, the present study determined the effects of mood-stabilizing antipsychotics, clozapine (CLZ), quetiapine (QTP) and brexpiprazole (BPZ), on the astroglial l-glutamate release and expression of connexin43 (Cx43) in the astroglial plasma membrane using cortical primary cultured astrocytes. Neither acute (for 120 min) nor subchronic (for 7 days) administrations of CLZ, QTP and BPZ affected basal astroglial l-glutamate release, whereas both acute and subchronic administration of CLZ, QTP and BPZ concentration-dependently enhanced astroglial l-glutamate release through activated hemichannels. Subchronic administration of therapeutic-relevant concentration of valproate (VPA), a histone deacetylase inhibiting mood-stabilizing antiepileptic drug, enhanced the stimulatory effects of therapeutic-relevant concentration of CLZ, QTP and BPZ on astroglial l-glutamate release through activated hemichannel. Subchronic administration of therapeutic-relevant concentration of CLZ, QTP and BPZ did not affect Cx43 protein expression in the plasma membrane during resting stage. After subchronic administration of VPA, acute and subchronic administration of therapeutic-relevant concentrations of CLZ increased Cx43 protein expression in the plasma membrane. Both acute administrations of therapeutic-relevant concentrations of QTP and BPZ did not affect, but subchronic administrations enhanced Cx43 protein expression in the astroglial plasma membrane. Furthermore, protein kinase B (Akt) inhibitor suppressed the stimulatory effects of CLZ and QTP, but did not affect Cx43 protein expression in the astroglial plasma membrane. These results suggest that three mood-stabilizing atypical antipsychotics, CLZ, QTP and BPZ enhance tripartite synaptic glutamatergic transmission due to enhancement of astroglial Cx43 containing hemichannel activities; however, the Cx43 activating mechanisms of these three mood-stabilizing antipsychotics were not identical. The enhanced astroglial glutamatergic transmission induced by CLZ, QTP and BPZ is, at least partially, involved in the actions of these three mood-stabilizing antipsychotics.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Hospitalization risk among adults with bipolar I disorder treated with lurasidone versus other oral atypical antipsychotics: a retrospective analysis of Medicaid claims data

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk of hospitalization for adult Medicaid beneficiaries with bipolar I disorder treated with lurasidone vs. other oral atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) as monotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of the IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid Claims database identified adults with bipolar I disorder who initiated an AAP (index date) between 1 January 2014 and 30 June 2019. Patients were continuously enrolled 12 months pre- and 24 months post-index date. Each month during the post-index period was categorized as monotherapy with lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine or risperidone, no/minimal treatment, or other. Marginal structural models were performed to estimate hospitalization risk and length of stay (LOS) (all-cause and bipolar I disorder-related) compared to lurasidone.

RESULTS

The analysis included 8262 adults. Compared to lurasidone, the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of all-cause hospitalization were significantly higher for olanzapine (aOR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.09-2.10) and quetiapine (aOR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.18-1.89). The risk was significantly higher for bipolar I disorder-related hospitalization for quetiapine (aOR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.10-2.04) and risperidone (aOR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.04-2.56) compared to lurasidone. The bipolar I disorder-related LOS per 100 patient-months was more than twice as long for quetiapine (8.42 days) compared to lurasidone (3.97 days, p < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone-treated adult Medicaid patients with bipolar I disorder had significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization than those treated with olanzapine and quetiapine and lower risk of bipolar I disorder-related hospitalization than quetiapine and risperidone. Bipolar I disorder-related hospital LOS was significantly shorter for patients treated with lurasidone compared to quetiapine.

Hospitalization Risk for Adults with Bipolar I Disorder Treated with Oral Atypical Antipsychotics as Adjunctive Therapy with Mood Stabilizers: A Retrospective Analysis of Medicaid Claims Data

Background: Atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) with mood stabilizers are recommended as a first-line treatment for patients with bipolar disorder. No studies have compared the inpatient health care resource utilization for patients with bipolar disorder treated with lurasidone as adjunctive therapy with mood stabilizers compared with other oral AAPs. Objective: To compare the risk of hospitalization for adult Medicaid beneficiaries with bipolar I disorder when treated with lurasidone compared with other oral AAPs as adjunctive therapy with mood stabilizers. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used the MarketScan Research Databases Multi-State Medicaid Database (IBM, Armonk, NY) claims data to assess patients with bipolar I disorder between January 1, 2014, and June 30, 2019. Adult patients who initiated oral AAP treatment with mood stabilizers (index date) and who were continuously enrolled 12 months before (pre-index) and 24 months after (post-index) the index date were included. Treatment categories assigned by patient-month included lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone with mood stabilizers; no/minimal treatment; AAP monotherapy; and other. Marginal structural models were performed to estimate the all-cause and psychiatric hospitalization rates and hospital length of stay associated with each adjunctive AAP therapy by controlling for both time-invariant and time-varying confounders. Results: Adults with bipolar I disorder (N = 11,426; mean age = 39.4 years; female=73%) treated with an adjunctive oral AAP with mood stabilizers during the index month were categorized into lurasidone (12%), aripiprazole (17%), olanzapine (7%), quetiapine (32%), risperidone (11%), ziprasidone (7%), or other (15%) treatment groups. The adjusted odds of all-cause and psychiatric hospitalization were significantly higher for olanzapine (all causes: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.59; 95% CI, 1.13-2.25; psychiatric: aOR = 1.61, 95% CI, 1.12-2.32), quetiapine (all-causes: aOR = 1.27, 95% CI, 1.01-1.58; psychiatric: aOR = 1.28, 95% CI, 1.02-1.59), and ziprasidone (all-causes: aOR = 1.68, 95% CI, 1.05-2.66; psychiatric: aOR = 1.55, 95% CI, 1.02-2.35) compared with lurasidone with mood stabilizers. The adjusted odds of all-cause and psychiatric hospitalizations were numerically lower for lurasidone compared with aripiprazole. The all-cause hospital length of stay per 100 patient-months was significantly higher for olanzapine (20.3 days) and quetiapine (16.0 days) compared with lurasidone (12.2 days, both P values < 0.05). Conclusions: In a Medicaid population, adults with bipolar I disorder treated with lurasidone as adjunctive therapy with mood stabilizers had significantly lower all-cause and psychiatric hospitalization rates compared with olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone. Fewer hospitalizations may reduce the economic burden associated with bipolar disorder. (Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2021; 82:XXX-XXX).

Lurasidone for Adolescents With Complex Mental Disorders: A Case Series

OBJECTIVES

Lurasidone is a new second generation (atypical) antipsychotic agent with unique receptor affinity and side-effect profiles, but limited literature is available on its use in adolescent populations. Contrasting with research treatment trials which typically recruit patients by stringent selection criteria, this case series examined the effects and tolerability of using lurasidone in adolescents within real-life clinical settings in treating complex cases who had not responded to other therapy options.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective case-note audit of 6 adolescents aged 14 to 17 years old attending community child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS) who were prescribed lurasidone.

RESULTS

Lurasidone had been prescribed for a range of "hard-to-manage" conditions with complex comorbidities, in adolescents in relation to specific use of lurasidone on the basis of clinical and pharmacological indications after exhausting more conventional treatment options. Case-note review suggested response to lurasidone was clinically positive in 3 cases, equivocal/marginal in 2 cases, and ineffective in 1 case. There were no cases of poor tolerance or adverse effects. Notably, positive responses for depressive and irritable mood symptoms were specifically recorded by prescribing clinicians, indicative of benefits on symptom improvement. No lurasidone attributed weight gain, galactorrhoea, metabolic abnormalities, sexual dysfunction or intolerance were reported. Pro-cognitive effects were not detected; but our findings were constrained by the non-systematic and incomplete information ascertainment, typical in retrospective case-note review.

CONCLUSION

This case series provides preliminary data supporting lurasidone's potential use in adolescents of complex clinical needs (but without a clinical diagnosis of bipolar disorder) within real-life clinical settings. Lurasidone appears to show a weight-sparing effect, in addition to improving mood symptoms in some cases. Lurasidone deserves further study for its use in the adolescent population (outside the remit of FDA) given its potential more favorable risk-benefit profile in young people. The favorable tolerability appear to be borne out by the pharmacodynamic predictions in our complex patients who would be excluded in formal clinical trial studies.

Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of Adjunctive Pharmacotherapies for Acute Bipolar Depression: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of augmentation strategies for bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 8 electronic databases for double-blind, randomized controlled trials of adjunctive pharmacotherapies for acute bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and applied the Cochrane risk of bias tool for study quality appraisal. Two reviewers independently abstracted data. We resolved all discrepancies by consensus.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were response and completion of treatment. We estimated summary rate ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) relative to placebo controls using frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 69 trials meeting eligibility criteria (8,007 participants, 42.8 years, 58.0% female). Adjunctive racemic intravenous ketamine, coenzyme Q10, pramipexole, fluoxetine, and lamotrigine were more effective than placebo. Summary RRs for response ranged between 1.51 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11 to 2.06) for fluoxetine and 12.49 (95% CI, 3.06 to 50.93) for racemic intravenous ketamine. For completion of treatment, risperidone appeared less tolerable than placebo (RR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.94), while fluoxetine seemed more tolerable than placebo (RR = 1.13; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.24). None of the investigated agents were associated with increased treatment-emergent mood switches.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The evidence for augmentation strategies in bipolar depression is limited to a handful of agents. Fluoxetine appeared to have the most consistent evidence base for both efficacy and tolerability. There remains a need for additional research exploring novel treatment strategies for bipolar depression, particularly head-to-head studies.

A missed case of lurasidone induced laryngospasm: A case study and overview of extrapyramidal symptom identification and treatment

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with bipolar disorder are treated exclusively in primary care settings, and the use of atypical antipsychotics as primary treatment for bipolar depression is increasing. Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) are common side effects of antipsychotic medications, and clinicians should actively monitor for these symptoms when prescribing antipsychotic medications. Accurate diagnosis of EPS is especially important as the symptoms can be highly distressing, and in some cases, life threatening. Our aim is to familiarize primary care providers and other clinicians prescribing antipsychotic medications with EPS and to aid in its rapid diagnosis and treatment.

METHOD

We describe a case of lurasidone induced dystonia with prominent laryngospasm and oculogyric crisis which was missed for many years in the primary care setting, largely due to misdiagnosis of symptoms as being related to anxiety and panic attacks.

RESULTS

In addition to summarizing this illustrative case, we present the most common forms of EPS and summarize the primary therapies for each type of EPS.

CONCLUSIONS

With increased management of bipolar disorder in the primary care setting and increased use of atypical antipsychotics as the primary therapy for bipolar disorder, it is essential that all practitioners are prepared to actively monitor for EPS, followed by its rapid diagnosis and treatment.

Effects of Subchronic Administrations of Vortioxetine, Lurasidone, and Escitalopram on Thalamocortical Glutamatergic Transmission Associated with Serotonin 5-HT7 Receptor

The functional suppression of serotonin (5-HT) type 7 receptor (5-HT7R) is forming a basis for scientific discussion in psychopharmacology due to its rapid-acting antidepressant-like action. A novel mood-stabilizing atypical antipsychotic agent, lurasidone, exhibits a unique receptor-binding profile, including a high affinity for 5-HT7R antagonism. A member of a novel class of antidepressants, vortioxetine, which is a serotonin partial agonist reuptake inhibitor (SPARI), also exhibits a higher affinity for serotonin transporter, serotonin receptors type 1A (5-HT1AR) and type 3 (5-HT3R), and 5-HT7R. However, the effects of chronic administration of lurasidone, vortioxetine, and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), escitalopram, on 5-HT7R function remained to be clarified. Thus, to explore the mechanisms underlying the clinical effects of vortioxetine, escitalopram, and lurasidone, the present study determined the effects of these agents on thalamocortical glutamatergic transmission, which contributes to emotional/mood perception, using multiprobe microdialysis and 5-HT7R expression using capillary immunoblotting. Acute local administration of a 5-HT7R agonist and antagonist into the mediodorsal thalamic nucleus (MDTN) enhanced and reduced thalamocortical glutamatergic transmission, induced by N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)/glutamate receptor inhibition in the reticular thalamic nucleus (RTN). Acute local administration of a relevant therapeutic concentration of vortioxetine and lurasidone into the MDTN suppressed the thalamocortical glutamatergic transmission via 5-HT7R inhibition, whereas that of escitalopram activated 5-HT7R. Subchronic administration of effective doses of vortioxetine and lurasidone (for 7 days) reduced the thalamocortical glutamatergic transmission, but escitalopram did not affect it, whereas subchronic administration of these three agents attenuated the stimulatory effects of the 5-HT7R agonist on thalamocortical glutamatergic transmission. Subchronic administration of effective doses of vortioxetine, lurasidone, and escitalopram downregulated the 5-HT7R expression of the plasma membrane in the MDTN; the 5-HT7R downregulation induced by vortioxetine and lurasidone was observed at 3 days, but that induced by escitalopram required a longer duration of 7 days. These results indicate that chronic administration of vortioxetine, escitalopram, and lurasidone generate downregulation of 5-HT7R in the thalamus; however, the direct inhibition of 5-HT7R associated with vortioxetine and lurasidone generates more rapid downregulation than the indirect elevation of the extracellular serotonin level via serotonin transporter inhibition by escitalopram.

Current Limitations and Candidate Potential of 5-HT7 Receptor Antagonism in Psychiatric Pharmacotherapy

Several mood-stabilizing atypical antipsychotics and antidepressants weakly block serotonin (5-HT) receptor type-7 (5-HT7R); however, the contributions of 5-HT7R antagonism to clinical efficacy and pathophysiology are yet to be clarified. A novel mood-stabilizing antipsychotic agent, lurasidone exhibits predominant binding affinity to 5-HT7R when compared with other monoamine receptors. To date, we have failed to discover the superior clinical efficacy of lurasidone on schizophrenia, mood, or anxiety disorders when compared with conventional mood-stabilizing atypical antipsychotics; however, numerous preclinical findings have indicated the possible potential of 5-HT7R antagonism against several neuropsychiatric disorders, as well as the generation of novel therapeutic options that could not be expected with conventional atypical antipsychotics. Traditional experimental techniques, electrophysiology, and microdialysis have demonstrated that the effects of 5-HT receptor type-1A (5-HT1AR) and 5-HT7R on neurotransmission are in contrast, but the effect of 5-HT1AR is more predominant than that of 5-HT7R, resulting in an insufficient understanding of the 5-HT7R function in the field of psychopharmacology. Accumulating knowledge regarding the pharmacodynamic profiles of 5-HT7R suggests that 5-HT7R is one of the key players in the establishment and remodeling of neural development and cytoarchitecture during the early developmental stage to the mature brain, and dysfunction or modulation of 5-HT7R is linked to the pathogenesis/pathophysiology of neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. In this review, to explore candidate novel applications for the treatment of several neuropsychiatric disorders, including mood disorders, schizophrenia, and other cognitive disturbance disorders, we discuss perspectives of psychopharmacology regarding the effects of 5-HT7R antagonism on transmission and intracellular signaling systems, based on preclinical findings.

Effect of lurasidone versus olanzapine on cardiometabolic parameters in unmedicated patients with schizophrenia: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Patients with schizophrenia are at higher risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than healthy individuals. This study was conducted to compare the effect of lurasidone and olanzapine on cardiometabolic parameters in unmedicated patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

The present study was a randomized open-label, parallel design, active-controlled clinical trial. After recruitment and randomization of 101 patients, a baseline assessment was done by PANSS, SOFAS, lipid profile, fasting blood glucose, HbA_1c, serum insulin and serum hs-CRP. HOMA-IR, atherogenic index, coronary risk index and cardiovascular risk indices were calculated as derived parameters. Patients received either lurasidone 80 mg or olanzapine 10 mg as monotherapy and followed up after 6 weeks.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in fasting blood glucose (p < 0.001), HbA_1c (p < 0.001) and serum insulin (p < 0.001) after 6 weeks of therapy in both the treatment groups but the difference between the groups was not significant (FBS, p = 0.209; HbA1c, p = 0.209; serum insulin, p = 0.720). Olanzapine showed worsening of lipid profile (p < 0.001) while the same improved with lurasidone (p < 0.001) and the difference between the groups was found to be significant (p < 0.001). Serum HDL level decreased in both the treatment groups (olanzapine, p < 0.001; lurasidone, p < 0.001) but the difference between the groups was not significant (p = 0.333). There was an increase in hs-CRP levels in both the treatment groups (olanzapine, p < 0.001; lurasidone, p < 0.001) with no significant difference between them (p = 0.467). Atherogenic index, coronary risk index and cardiovascular risk index increased significantly in the olanzapine group as compared with the lurasidone group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Lurasidone showed a favourable effect on lipid profile and cardiovascular risk indices over olanzapine. However, long-term studies are needed to establish and generalize the findings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03304457.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).

Psychopharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics for Bipolar Depression

Bipolar disorder is a chronic illness that affects 2%-4% of U.S. adults during their lifetime. The course of bipolar disorder is commonly characterized by prolonged periods of depression interspersed with manic-hypomanic episodes. Management of depression among patients with bipolar disorder is challenging because of the limited number of medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the high proportion of patients who do not respond to these medications, and the metabolic and other side effects associated with long-term use of these medications. In addition to reviewing the clinical options available to patients with bipolar depression and their treatment providers, this article presents an evidence-based management approach and discusses the off-label uses of currently available treatments and experimental therapeutics under development.

Lurasidone in Children and Adolescents: Systematic Review and Case Report

OBJECTIVE

To perform a systematic review of studies of lurasidone in children and/or adolescents and to present a case report aimed to add further insights into its use in clinical practice with youth.

METHODS

We searched the following databases for empirical studies, of any design, focusing on the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, or safety of lurasidone in children and/or adolescents: Pubmed (Medline), OVID (PsycInfo, EMBASE+EMBASE classic, OVID Medline), Web of Knowledge, and ClinicalTrials.gov (last search January 23, 2018).

RESULTS

From a pool of 301 potentially relevant references, we retained 12 pertinent studies (reported in 28 references), including 1 pharmacokinetics study, 1 double blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) for bipolar depression (BD) with 1 related interim analysis study of its extension phase and 1 related external posterior predictive check study, 1 double blind RCT for schizophrenia with 3 related interim analyses of its extension phase, 1 RCT and 1 case report for autism spectrum disorder, and 2 open-label studies focusing on a variety of disorders. Overall, these studies show that lurasidone is significantly more efficacious than placebo, with moderate effect sizes, and is well tolerated for BD and schizophrenia in youth. Published studies in youth have in general used doses up to 80 mg/day. Our case report suggests that high doses of lurasidone (148 mg/day) were well tolerated and might have contributed to substantial functional improvement in a 14-year old girl with psychosis and a previous history of anorexia nervosa, who had not responded to previous antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, aripiprazole).

CONCLUSIONS

There is increasing evidence that lurasidone may be moderately effective and well tolerated for the treatment of BD and psychosis in youth and may have procognitive effects. Our case report suggests that future RCTs should assess the efficacy and tolerability of high doses (>80 mg/day) of lurasidone in youth.