Comparison of olanzapine long-acting injection and oral olanzapine: a 2-year, randomized, open-label study in outpatients with schizophrenia

All-cause mortality risk in long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with schizophrenia receiving antipsychotic treatment present lower mortality rates than those who do not. However, the non-adherence rate is high, which can be partially addressed using long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics. The impact of LAI treatments on all-cause mortality compared to oral antipsychotics remains unclear. To fill that gap, a random effects meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the odds ratio (OR) of all-cause, suicidal, and non-suicidal mortality among patients taking LAI antipsychotics compared to oral antipsychotics (PROSPERO:CRD42023391352). Individual and pooled LAI antipsychotics were analyzed against pooled oral antipsychotics. Sensitivity analyses were performed for study design, setting, and industry sponsorship. Meta-regressions were conducted for gender, age, antipsychotic dose, and race. Seventeen articles, total sample 12,042 patients (N = 5795 oral, N = 6247 LAI) were included. Lower risk of all-cause mortality for patients receiving LAI antipsychotics vs receiving oral antipsychotics was found (OR = 0.79; 95%CI = 0.66-0.95). Statistical significance was maintained when only studies comparing the same LAI and oral antipsychotic were included (OR = 0.79; 95%CI = 0.66-0.95; p = <0.01), as well as for non-suicidal mortality (OR = 0.77: 95%CI = 0.63-0.94; p = 0.01), but not for suicidal mortality (OR = 0.86; 95%CI = 0.59-1.26; p = 0.44). Mortality reduction was more pronounced for LAI antipsychotics in first-episode psychosis (FEP) (OR = 0.79; 95%CI = 0.66-0.96) compared to chronic psychosis. No individual LAI reported statistically significant differences against all pooled oral antipsychotics. LAI antipsychotics are associated with a lower risk of all-cause and non-suicidal mortality in individuals with schizophrenia compared to oral antipsychotics. Better adherence to the medication and health services may explain this difference. Whenever possible, the use of LAIs should be considered from the FEP.

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.

Association between antipsychotic medication and clinically relevant weight change: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous meta-analyses have shown that almost all antipsychotics are associated with weight gain. However, mean weight gain is not informative about clinically relevant weight gain or weight loss.

AIMS

To provide further insight into the more severe body weight changes associated with antipsychotic use, we assessed the proportion of patients with clinically relevant weight gain (CRWG) and clinically relevant weight loss (CRWL), defined as ≥7% weight gain and ≥7% weight loss.

METHOD

We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycInfo for randomised controlled trials of antipsychotics that reported CRWG and CRWL in study populations aged 15 years or older. We conducted meta-analyses stratified by antipsychotic and study duration using a random-effects model. We performed meta-regression analyses to assess antipsychotic-naive status and psychiatric diagnosis as modifiers for CRWG. PROSPERO: CRD42020204734.

RESULTS

We included 202 articles (201 studies). Almost all included antipsychotics were associated with CRWG. For CRWL, available data were too limited to draw firm conclusions. For some antipsychotics, CRWG was more pronounced in individuals who were antipsychotic-naive than in individuals switching to another antipsychotic. Moreover, a longer duration of antipsychotic use was associated with more CRWG, but not CRWL. For some antipsychotics, CRWG was higher in people diagnosed with schizophrenia, but this was inconsistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching antipsychotic medication is associated with both weight gain and weight loss, but the level of CRWG is higher than CRWL in antipsychotic-switch studies. CRWG was more pronounced in antipsychotic-naive patients, highlighting their vulnerability to weight gain. The impact of diagnosis on CRWG remains inconclusive.

The Effect of Longer Dosing Intervals for Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics on Outcomes in Schizophrenia

Medication nonadherence in schizophrenia can have serious implications including relapses and hospitalization. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics require fewer administrations, while ensuring sustained medication coverage. In this review, we summarize the expected real-world benefits of longer dosing intervals in the management of schizophrenia. LAIs are associated with improved clinical outcomes of less frequent relapses and reduced functional impairment, encouraging patients to regain control of their lives. Aripiprazole lauroxil and paliperidone palmitate three-monthly (PP3M) LAIs have longer dosing intervals of 2-3 months and provide improved outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. Paliperidone palmitate six-monthly (PP6M) LAI provides the longest dosing interval, twice-yearly dosing, among existing LAIs. Decreasing the frequency of LAI administrations has the potential to reduce occurrence of serious outcomes associated with poor medication adherence. By eliminating the need for daily oral antipsychotic dosing, LAIs could increase the likelihood of patient acceptance, decrease stigma, and promote self-esteem. Longer intervals of medication coverage may be desirable for patients with higher risk of relapse including adults with recent-onset schizophrenia, those living in circumstances that may deprive them of regular access (eg, homeless), those that are in transitions between care settings or to reduce interpersonal contact during public health emergencies (eg, COVID-19 pandemic).

Oral and long-acting antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: a network meta-analysis of 92 randomized trials including 22,645 participants

According to current evidence and guidelines, continued antipsychotic treatment is key for preventing relapse in people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, but evidence-based recommendations for the choice of the individual antipsychotic for maintenance treatment are lacking. Although oral antipsychotics are often prescribed first line for practical reasons, long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are a valuable resource to tackle adherence issues since the earliest phase of disease. Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL and CINAHL databases and online registers were searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing LAIs or oral antipsychotics head-to-head or against placebo, published until June 2021. Relative risks and standardized mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were relapse and dropout due to adverse events. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess study quality, and the CINeMA approach to assess the confidence of pooled estimates. Of 100 eligible trials, 92 (N=22,645) provided usable data for meta-analyses. Regarding relapse prevention, the vast majority of the 31 included treatments outperformed placebo. Compared to placebo, "high" confidence in the results was found for (in descending order of effect magnitude) amisulpride-oral (OS), olanzapine-OS, aripiprazole-LAI, olanzapine-LAI, aripiprazole-OS, paliperidone-OS, and ziprasidone-OS. "Moderate" confidence in the results was found for paliperidone-LAI 1-monthly, iloperidone-OS, fluphenazine-OS, brexpiprazole-OS, paliperidone-LAI 1-monthly, asenapine-OS, haloperidol-OS, quetiapine-OS, cariprazine-OS, and lurasidone-OS. Regarding tolerability, none of the antipsychotics was significantly worse than placebo, but confidence was poor, with only aripiprazole (both LAI and OS) showing "moderate" confidence levels. Based on these findings, olanzapine, aripiprazole and paliperidone are the best choices for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia-spectrum disorders, considering that both LAI and oral formulations of these antipsychotics are among the best-performing treatments and have the highest confidence of evidence for relapse prevention. This finding is of particular relevance for low- and middle-income countries and constrained-resource settings, where few medications may be selected. Results from this network meta-analysis can inform clinical guidelines and national and international drug regulation policies.

The effect of long-acting injectable antipsychotic medications compared with oral antipsychotic medications among people with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic medications may be an important modality of reducing costs, improving symptoms, and fostering quality of life outcomes for those with schizophrenia. Our objective was to systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of LAIs compared with oral antipsychotics on medication adherence, symptom remission/relapse, rehospitalization, outpatient visits, emergency department visits, healthcare costs, and social functioning. We performed a systematic search of PsycInfo, CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus databases to examine studies meeting inclusion criteria prior to August 30th, 2020. Randomized controlled trials, retrospective studies, prospective studies among people with schizophrenia with at least 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall effect sizes and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated with random-effects modeling. We found 75 articles meeting our inclusion criteria, including 341 730 individuals with schizophrenia. Systematic review results indicated that LAIs compared with orals improved medication adherence (25/29 studies), symptom remission/relapse (10/18 studies), rehospitalizations (26/49 studies), emergency department visits (9/17 studies), medical costs (11/15 studies), and social functioning (5/9 studies); however, LAIs also increased outpatient visits (7/16 studies) and pharmacy costs (10/10 studies). Meta-analytic results of studies with similar outcome measures did not find differences between LAIs and orals in respect to outcomes, except lowering emergency department visits and increasing pharmacy costs. The differences between the results of the narrative synthesis and the meta-analyses were possibly because of the low availability of studies with similar outcomes in the pooled analyses. Our overall results suggest that LAIs are at least comparable to orals in supporting important healthcare outcomes for those with schizophrenia. These findings support clinical practice in encouraging providers to prescribe LAIs when indicated.

Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia: a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis of randomised, cohort, and pre-post studies

BACKGROUND

Evidence of comparative benefits of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) versus oral antipsychotics for schizophrenia has been inconsistent across study designs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparative benefits of LAIs versus oral antipsychotics in three study designs to inform clinical decision making.

METHODS

We did a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis comparing LAIs versus oral antipsychotics for schizophrenia covering three study designs: randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and pre-post studies. Our literature search was without language restrictions, in MEDLINE and PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Embase, for studies published from database inception up to a last search on March 13, 2020. We also searched for unpublished studies and ClinicalTrials.gov. We included studies lasting at least 6 months that targeted adults with schizophrenia and related disorders (>80% of participants). Studies on penfluridol (neither an LAI or daily oral antipsychotic), case reports, and case series with fewer than 20 patients were excluded. Two investigators independently extracted study-level data and resolved disagreement by consensus, or via a third investigator. Study authors were contacted to obtain additional information as needed. For our primary outcome we meta-analysed the risk ratio (RR) for hospitalisation or relapse with LAIs versus oral antipsychotics by a random-effects model, with hospitalisation used preferentially over relapse. As secondary analyses, we reversed the preferential order to relapse over hospitalisation, and assessed hospitalisation risk and relapse risk individually. Other secondary outcomes included all meta-analysable data, classed by relevance to effectiveness, efficacy, safety, quality of life, cognitive function, and other outcomes, and analysed by study design. Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as pooled RR and continuous outcomes as standardised mean difference (SMD). The protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019142094).

FINDINGS

We identified 14 687 records, of which 137 studies (397 319 patients) met the inclusion criteria (32 RCTs [23·4%; 8577 patients], 65 cohort studies [47·4%; 377 447 patients], and 40 pre-post studies [29·2%; 11 295 patients]) and were analysed. The quality of studies in terms of risk of bias varied across study designs and within each study design from low to high. LAIs were associated with a lower risk of hospitalisation or relapse than oral antipsychotics in each of the three study designs (RCTs: 29 studies, 7833 patients, RR 0·88 [95% CI 0·79-0·99], p=0·033; cohort studies: 44 studies, 106 136 patients, RR 0·92 [0·88-0·98], p=0·0044; pre-post studies: 28 studies, 17 876 patients, RR 0·44 [0·39-0·51], p<0·0001). This association was maintained across the study designs when we reversed the preferential order to risk of relapse over hospitalisation, and in individual analysis of hospitalisation risk. The association was maintained only in pre-post studies for relapse risk alone. In all other outcomes related to effectiveness, efficacy, safety, quality of life, cognitive function, and other outcomes, LAIs were more beneficial than oral antipsychotics in 60 (18·3%) of 328 comparisons, not different in 252 (76·8%) comparisons, and less beneficial in 16 (4·9%) comparisons when analysed by study design. Significant heterogeneity was observed across all three study designs. Publication biases were apparent in cohort and pre-post studies, but effect sizes were similar after trim-and-fill analyses.

INTERPRETATION

Although study designs have strengths and weaknesses, including potential low quality of observational studies, we consistently identified significant benefit with LAIs versus oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalisation or relapse, in settings ranging from restricted research (RCTs) to real-word application (cohort and pre-post studies). Our findings suggest that increased clinical use of LAIs could improve outcomes in schizophrenia.

FUNDING

None.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Chinese, French, German, Italian, Japanese, Portugese and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Maintenance Treatment With Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics for People With Nonaffective Psychoses: A Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study compared relapse prevention and acceptability of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in the maintenance treatment of adults with nonaffective psychoses.

METHODS

The authors searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and online registers for randomized controlled trials published until June 2020. Relative risks and standardized mean differences were pooled using random-effects pairwise and network meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were relapse rate and all-cause discontinuation ("acceptability"). The quality of included studies was rated with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and the certainty of pooled estimates was measured with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation).

RESULTS

Of 86 eligible trials, 78 (N=11,505) were included in the meta-analysis. Regarding relapse prevention, most of the 12 LAIs included outperformed placebo. The largest point estimates and best rankings of LAIs compared with placebo were found for paliperidone (3-month formulation) and aripiprazole. Moderate to high GRADE certainty for superior relapse prevention compared with placebo was also found for (in descending ranking order) risperidone, pipothiazine, olanzapine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation). In head-to-head comparisons of LAIs, only haloperidol was inferior to aripiprazole, fluphenazine, and paliperidone. For acceptability, most LAIs outperformed placebo, with moderate to high GRADE certainty for (in descending ranking order) zuclopenthixol, aripiprazole, paliperidone (3-month formulation), olanzapine, flupenthixol, fluphenazine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation). In head-to-head comparisons, only LAI aripiprazole had superior acceptability to other LAIs (bromperidol, fluphenazine, paliperidone [1-month formulation], pipothiazine, and risperidone).

CONCLUSIONS

LAI formulations of paliperidone (3-month formulation), aripiprazole, olanzapine, and paliperidone (1-month formulation) showed the highest effect sizes and certainty of evidence for both relapse prevention and acceptability. Results from this network meta-analysis should inform frontline clinicians and guidelines.

Predictors of discontinuation and hospitalization during long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatment in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder

The aim of this study was to evaluate discontinuation and hospitalization rates in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder who were treated with long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics. We recorded clinical data about the period before the LAI treatment, when LAI treatment was initiated, and during the LAI treatment. Variables related to early (<8 weeks) and other LAI discontinuations and hospitalization were analyzed. Out of 452 patients, 14.4% of them discontinued their LAI treatment before 8 weeks, another 24.8% of the patients stopped their LAI by themselves later. Early discontinuers were younger, had shorter duration of illness, and less educated. Sixty-two (27.2%) of the patients were hospitalized under LAI treatment and 40% of the hospitalizations occurred in initial 6 months. Rate of hospitalization was 36.1% in the group who discontinued LAI after 8 weeks. In logistic regression analysis, younger age, history of combined antipsychotic treatment, number of hospitalizations before LAI, use of LAI for less than 6 months and alcohol abuse under LAI treatment were found related to hospitalization. Our findings suggested that discontinuation and hospitalization are still common among the patients who were treated with LAI antipsychotics.

Risk of withdrawal of consent for treatment with long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Despite the clinical importance of antipsychotic long-acting injections (LAIs) in the treatment of schizophrenia, their use may be limited by patients' reluctance to accept the injections. No studies to date have investigated whether patients are more likely to withdraw their consent to treatment with LAIs than to treatment with oral antipsychotics (OAPs). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the risk of withdrawal of consent between the 2 routes of administration.

METHODS

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were systematically searched. RCTs with open-label or rater-masked design that compared LAIs with OAPs were selected. Data on study discontinuation due to withdrawal of consent and/or loss to follow-up were extracted.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (4815 patients) that met the study eligibility criteria were included in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference between the LAI and OAP groups in the risk of cessation of treatment because of withdrawal of consent. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the risk of study discontinuation because of withdrawal of consent plus loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings were unexpected and suggest that patients may not be more hesitant to continue LAIs than OAPs after consenting to or receiving treatment. Nevertheless, patients should be provided detailed explanations about the use of LAIs and a support system that encourages them to continue treatment.

Rationale and neurobiological effects of treatment with antipsychotics in patients with chronic schizophrenia considering dopamine supersensitivity

The long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia often involves the management of relapses for most patients and the development of treatment resistance in some patients. To stabilize the clinical course and allow as many patients as possible to recover, clinicians need to recognize dopamine supersensitivity, which can be provoked by administration of high dosages of antipsychotics, and deal with it properly. However, no treatment guidelines have addressed this issue. The present review summarized the characteristics of long-acting injectable antipsychotics, dopamine partial agonists, and clozapine in relation to dopamine supersensitivity from the viewpoints of receptor profiles and pharmacokinetics. The potential merits and limitations of these medicines are discussed, as well as the risks of treating patients with established dopamine supersensitivity with these classes of drugs. Finally, the review discussed the biological influence of antipsychotic treatment on the human brain based on findings regarding the relationship between the hippocampus and antipsychotics.

Updating the Comparative Evidence on Second‐Generation Antipsychotic Use With Schizophrenia

Objective

The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review of literature comparing second‐generation antipsychotics (SGAs) with each other and with first‐generation antipsychotics (FGAs) in treating schizophrenia.

Methods

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases were searched through January 2020. Following standard methods, recent high‐quality systematic reviews of each drug comparison and subsequently published primary studies were included to update the meta‐analyses with any new data. Two reviewers independently conducted study selection, abstraction, and quality assessment.

Results

Two systematic reviews and 29 newer trials (total of 162 trials of SGAs, N=53,861; 116 trials of SGAs versus FGAs, N=119,558) were included. Most trials were of fair quality, industry‐funded, and included older SGAs and a few recently approved SGAs (asenapine, lurasidone, iloperidone, cariprazine, brexpiprazole and long‐acting injection [LAI] formulations of aripiprazole and paliperidone). Older SGAs had similar effects on function, quality of life, mortality, and adverse event incidence, although clozapine improved symptoms more than most other drugs and olanzapine and risperidone were superior to some other drugs. Olanzapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole performed similarly on outcomes of benefit compared with haloperidol. Risperidone LAI and olanzapine resulted in fewer withdrawals due to adverse events, but risk of diabetes increased with olanzapine. Haloperidol had greater incidence of adverse events than did olanzapine and risperidone, but similar effects on other outcomes.

Conclusions

Most comparative evidence favored older SGAs, with clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone superior on more outcomes than other SGAs. Older SGAs had similar benefits as haloperidol but with fewer adverse events.

Use of the second‐generation antipsychotics olanzapine, aripiprazole, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone resulted in similar function, quality of life, mortality, and overall incidence of adverse events.

Core illness symptoms improved more with olanzapine and risperidone than asenapine, quetiapine, or ziprasidone, and more with paliperidone than lurasidone or iloperidone.

Haloperidol showed similar benefits but more adverse events than did olanzapine or risperidone.

Cardio-metabolic risk in individuals prescribed long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication

People living with severe mental illness (SMI) experience significant physical health co-morbidity. Few studies have focused on physical health outcomes for those prescribed long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics. This observational cross-sectional study aimed to assess the prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and other cardio-metabolic risk factors in a large cohort prescribed LAI and managed by community mental health services. For participants with elevated cardio-metabolic risk factors, the proportion receiving appropriate management was assessed. Of the 301 eligible participants, many met the full criteria for MetS (44%) and its components. Cardio-metabolic risk factors were largely under- or un-treated. Smoking rates were very high (62%) along with reported high rates of physical inactivity and poor dietary intake. The vast majority (89%) reported seeing their general practitioner in the preceding twelve months. Individuals prescribed LAI have a very high prevalence of MetS and potentially modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Routine monitoring accompanied by evidence-based treatment of cardiometabolic abnormalities which contribute to significant morbidity, disability and premature death should be prioritised. Better collaboration between mental health services and primary care providers should be pursued to optimise the delivery of effective physical health care to individuals living with SMI.

Comparative effectiveness of second generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics based on nationwide database research in Hungary

Background

Schizophrenia is a severe condition that affects approximately 1% of the population. Certain elements of antipsychotic treatment can only be examined in large population, thus the need for population-based real-world analyses has been increasing.

Patients and methods

Hungarian National Health Fund database includes all healthcare data of the population of Hungary. All patients diagnosed with schizophrenia between 01.01.2006 and 31.12.2015 were included in the study. We analyzed all patients with newly initiated second-generation antipsychotic during the inclusion period (01.01.2012–31.12.2013). Patients were followed for 2 years. All-cause treatment discontinuation served as the primary outcome of the study. Patients with newly initiated long-acting injectable treatments were further investigated in stratified analyses based on their previous treatment.

Results

106,624 patients had schizophrenia diagnosis during the study period. 12,232 patients met the inclusion criteria for newly initiating second-generation antipsychotic during the inclusion period. The proportion of patients still on treatment after 1 year for oral treatments varied between 17% (oral risperidone) and 31% (oral olanzapine) while the analogous data for long acting injectables were between 32% (risperidone long acting) and 64% (paliperidone long acting one monthly). The 2-year data were similarly in favor of long-actings. Median time to discontinuation in the oral group varied between 57 days (clozapine) and 121 days (olanzapine). The median time to discontinuation for long-actings was significantly longer: between 176 and 287 days; in case of paliperidone long acting, median was not reached during the observation period. Patients receiving long-acting treatment switched from another long-acting remained on the newly initiated treatment significantly longer than those switched from orals.

Conclusion

Our results indicate the superiority of second generation long-acting antipsychotics with regard to rates of treatment discontinuation and periods of persistence to the assigned medication.

Discontinuation rates during long-term, second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injection treatment: A systematic review

AIM

The aim of this review was to analyze the discontinuation rates during long-term treatment with second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injection (SGA-LAI) in adults with either schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorders.

METHODS

A systematic search (PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library) of studies published in English (1 January 2001-12 October 2018) identified 1214 abstracts, which were analyzed independently by the author and two colleagues. Studies were retrieved and reviewed if they reported primary data on the discontinuation rate before the study end during treatment lasting ≥36 weeks. Data were extracted from 51 articles meeting the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

In all head-to-head comparisons, and studies on patients with schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorders, the discontinuation rate before the study end in patients treated with SGA-LAI was, at best, similar to that recorded in patients treated with first-generation antipsychotics in either oral or LAI formulations or with oral SGA. In particular, in most of the SGA-LAI long-term studies, the rate of premature dropout was higher than 50%.

CONCLUSION

Reviewed data suggest that SGA-LAI show no clear superiority over less expensive drugs (including first-generation antipsychotic LAI and oral antipsychotic formulations) in reducing the risk of premature antipsychotic discontinuation. Thus, alternative strategies should be considered to improve medication persistence and lower discontinuation rates in patients with severe psychiatric disorders. Planning tailored, individualized, and integrated approaches (including frequent clinical evaluations, and behavioral or other flexible techniques adaptable to different settings and patients) may be an effective intervention for improving patient adherence in long-term pharmacological treatment regimens.

One-year mirror-image study of the impact of olanzapine long-acting injection on healthcare resource utilization and costs in severe schizophrenia

Olanzapine long-acting injections (OLAIs) are often prescribed to patients with severe schizophrenia who are typically excluded from randomized clinical trials. To date, no mirror-image study has examined the impact of OLAIs on healthcare resource utilizations in these patients. We conducted a retrospective, one-year mirror-image study of OLAIs on 40 patients with severe schizophrenic disorder. Illness severity was defined by failure to respond to two sequential antipsychotics. Outcomes included: (i) healthcare resource utilizations via hospitalization admissions, bed days, outpatient visits, and inpatient service costs computations (ii) clinical efficacy through changes in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and in the Clinical Global Impression-Schizophrenia Scale (CGI-SCH), and (iii) adverse effects. After one year, OLAIs were associated with significant decreases of 65.7%, 86.2% and 86.2% in hospitalization admissions, bed days, and inpatient service costs respectively. A significant mean change of -0.47 and -0.63 was determined the BPRS and the CGI-SCH scores, respectively. There were no significant differences in the number of outpatient visits and adverse effects, except for post-injection sedation/delirium syndrome whose incidence was 0.30% per injection. This mirror-image study provides the first evidence that prescribing OLAIs reduces in a cost-effective manner average bed days and hospital admissions in patients with severe schizophrenia.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Long-acting Injectable and Oral Second-generation Antipsychotics for the Treatment of Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable (LAI) and oral second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in treating schizophrenia by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library, as well as five Korean databases, were systemically searched to identify studies published from 2000 to 16 April 2015, which compared the efficacy and safety of LAI and oral SGAs. Using data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), meta-analyses were conducted. In addition, the GRADE (the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was applied to explicitly assess the quality of the evidence. A total of 30 studies including 17 RCTs and 13 observational studies were selected. The group treated with LAI SGAs was characterized by significantly lower relapse rates, longer times to relapse and fewer hospital days, but also by a higher occurrence of extrapyramidal syndrome and prolactin-related symptoms than that in the group treated with oral SGAs. Our findings demonstrate that there is moderate to high level of evidence suggesting that in the treatment of schizophrenia, LAI SGAs have higher efficacy and are associated with higher rates of extrapyramidal syndrome and prolactin-related symptoms. Additionally, the use of LAI SGAs should be combined with appropriate measures to reduce dopamine D₂ antagonism-related symptoms.

Safety concerns associated with second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injection treatment. A systematic update

Background It has been recently suggested that second-generation antipsychotic long-acting injection (SGA-LAIs) are underutilized in clinical practice, despite that their costs significantly impact on national health system budgets. Hence, an updated analysis of safety data shown by SGA-LAIs may contribute to clarify their role in clinical practice. Materials and methods English-language, peer-reviewed articles reporting updated, primary findings on the SGA-LAI safety were identified (updated through an electronic search of five databases - PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, DARE and the Cochrane Library). Results The articles reviewed suggest that the most frequent treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) associated with aripiprazole long-acting injection (ARI-LAI) are psychotic symptoms, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) and weight gain. Data on olanzapine long-acting injection (OLA-LAI)-associated TEAEs highlight the risk of psychosis, metabolic disturbances and hyperprolactinemia. Four-hundred and forty cases of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) have also been recorded. Although not reported in reviewed studies, the risk of impulse-control problem and drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) ARI- and OLA-associated, respectively, must not be underestimated. With regards paliperidone palmitate 1-month formulation (PP1), the high incidence of clinically relevant weight gain and hyperprolactinemia are both findings of concern. Reviewed data also confirm that the leading cause of death in risperidone long-acting injection (RIS-LAI) clinical trials is suicide. The new 3-month paliperidone palmitate formulation, risperidone sustained release 1-month formulation (RIS-SR1), aripiprazole lauroxil (ARI-LXL) are still lacking exhaustive safety data. Conclusion The risk of specific TEAEs associated with all SGA-LAIs confirms SGA-LAIs do not offer advantages in safety compared with FGA-LAIs or oral antipsychotics and, especially, in early-phase schizophrenia patients. Implementing non pharmacological intervention and strategies can be effective for people with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder who adhere poorly to medication regimens.

Does formulation matter? A systematic review and meta-analysis of oral versus long-acting antipsychotic studies

Recently, many authors highlighted the potential advantages of a broader prescription of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) based on various assumptions, including favorable pharmacokinetic features. In this systematic review, data from randomized controlled trials comparing LAIs versus the oral formulation of the same antipsychotic were meta-analyzed in order to ascertain whether the route of administration may be associated with a different efficacy and tolerability profile. Of 21 included studies, 18 contributed to the meta-analysis, providing data for risperidone, olanzapine, aripiprazole, zuclopenthixol, fluphenazine and haloperidol. For all drugs, the number of dropouts for any reason (primary outcome) did not differ between the two formulations, except for a small effect in favor of LAI aripiprazole (2 comparisons; 986 patients; relative risk (RR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 0.95). Similarly, no differences emerged in terms of dropouts for adverse events, extrapyramidal symptoms, prolactin increase (except for a small advantage for LAI risperidone), weight gain, non-response rate, relapse rate, and dropouts for inefficacy (except for a small advantage for oral olanzapine). Data on aripiprazole proved to be of high quality according to the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), therefore we are confident that the effect estimate is close to the true effect. Data on risperidone were of moderate quality, while data on olanzapine, fluphenazine, zuclopenthixol and haloperidol were of low quality. In conclusion, there is no robust evidence to support doctors in choosing LAI instead of oral formulations in order to obtain better tolerability and efficacy.

Evaluation of adherence in patients prescribed long-acting injectable antipsychotics: A comparison of biweekly versus monthly administered neuroleptics

Background:

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) have been developed to decrease medication nonadherence. LAIAs are usually given biweekly or monthly, with the exception of new 3-month and 6-week formulations. There has been no known evaluation regarding whether the frequency of LAIA formulation affects adherence. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether there is a difference in adherence between LAIAs administered biweekly or monthly.

Methods:

Eligible participants were identified from the Louis Stokes Cleveland VA electronic medical record as having an active prescription for a LAIA between September 1, 2009, and September 1, 2014. Participants were then evaluated using inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine study entrance. Medication possession ratios (MPRs) were calculated for each participant to determine adherence for comparison of objectives. Descriptive statistics and t tests were used to identify significant differences between groups.

Results:

There were 128 participants enrolled based on eligibility criteria. There were no differences in MPRs for biweekly versus monthly administered LAIAs (0.98 versus 0.97, respectively; P = .691). No differences in adherence were observed between first- and second-generation LAIAs (0.98 versus 0.98, respectively; P = .975), or for risperidone LAI versus paliperidone palmitate (0.97 versus 0.99, respectively; P = .269). Hospitalizations were observed to decrease by 61% after LAIA initiation (P = .021).

Discussion:

Based on the findings of this retrospective cohort review, there was no difference in adherence in patients prescribed biweekly versus monthly injected LAIAs. Patient preference and response, safety, tolerability, cost, and availability of follow-up appointments should be other factors to take into consideration for agent selection.

Olanzapine pamoate for the treatment of schizophrenia--a safety evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Non-adherence to long-term treatment is a major issue for patients with schizophrenia and is associated with an increased risk of relapse. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics can offer a useful option to improve adherence. Due to the type of sustained-release mechanism, olanzapine pamoate (OLAI) can differ in safety as compared with oral olanzapine. Recent safety data concerning olanzapine pamoate required an update of previous systematic reviews.

AREAS COVERED

Safety data were found in US and EU clinical trial registries, and a literature search was undertaken using the databases PubMed and EMBASE to find all relevant published studies. Where appropriate, the number needed to harm and 95% confidence interval for categorical safety outcomes were calculated.

EXPERT OPINION

The safety profile of OLAI was similar to the well-known safety profile of oral olanzapine, except for the risk of occurrence of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS). Olanzapine pamoate can be a choice for schizophrenic patients with a history of response to and acceptable tolerance of oral olanzapine, who have easy access to mental healthcare settings with emergency services for the treatment of PDSS. Long-term, prospective studies assessing the efficacy and safety of OLAI and head-to-head comparisons with other LAI and oral antipsychotics are needed.

Treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia and complex mental health needs - A national clinical guideline

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The Danish Health and Medicines Authority assembled a group of experts to develop a national clinical guideline for patients with schizophrenia and complex mental health needs. Within this context, ten explicit review questions were formulated, covering several identified key issues.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches were performed stepwise for each review question to identify relevant guidelines, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials. The quality of the body of evidence for each review question was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Clinical recommendations were developed on the basis of the evidence, assessment of the risk-benefit ratio, and perceived patient preferences.

RESULTS

Based on the identified evidence, a guideline development group (GDG) recommended that the following interventions should be offered routinely: antipsychotic maintenance therapy, family intervention and assertive community treatment. The following interventions should be considered: long-acting injectable antipsychotics, neurocognitive training, social cognitive training, cognitive behavioural therapy for persistent positive and/or negative symptoms, and the combination of cognitive behavioural therapy and motivational interviewing for cannabis and/or central stimulant abuse. SSRI or SNRI add-on treatment for persistent negative symptoms should be used only cautiously. Where no evidence was available, the GDG agreed on a good practice recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of this guideline in daily clinical practice can facilitate good treatment outcomes within the population of patients with schizophrenia and complex mental health needs. The guideline does not cover all available interventions and should be used in conjunction with other relevant guidelines.

"Long-acting" olanzapine in maintenance therapy of schizophrenia: A study with plasma levels

INTRODUCTION

This prospective study was performed to evaluate clinical efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine long-acting injection (OLZ-LAI) and the relation between OLZ plasma level (PL) and the clinical outcome in maintenance therapy of schizophrenia.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-five chronic schizophrenic outpatients with age ranging from 18 to 65 years were included in this 9-month study. Patients were given a dosage of either 210 or 300 or 405 mg of OLZ-LAI every 28 days. Patients were evaluated at baseline and every four weeks by Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS); at the same time, PL of OLZ was determined. The metabolic profile (aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, total cholesterol, and glucose levels) was analyzed every two months.

RESULTS

BPRS and total PANSS showed a statistically significant improvement from T2 with a clinical stabilization of psychopathological picture. PL ranged from 4.0 to 78.9 ng/ml (mean 20.59 ng/ml ± 14.66 standard deviation). The coefficient of variation of PLs was related to clinical stabilization. No post-injection delirium sedation syndrome occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data reveal the efficacy of OLZ-LAI in maintenance treatment of schizophrenia at lower dosages also in comparison with that of oral therapy. OLZ-LAI seems to be useful for guaranteeing constant PL of the drug. A lesser variation of PL was the most predictable factor associated with maintenance of clinical benefit.

Practical clinical trials in psychopharmacology: a systematic review

Practical clinical trials (PCTs) are randomized experiments under typical practice conditions with the aim of testing the "real-life" benefits and risks of therapeutic interventions. Influential PCTs have been conducted in cardiology, oncology, and internal medicine. Psychotropic medications are widely and increasingly used in medical practice. This review examines recent progress in conducting PCTs in psychopharmacology. The January 2000 to October 2014 MEDLINE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for peer-reviewed publications of PCTs with at least 100 subjects per treatment arm. Most PCTs in psychiatry evaluated mental health services or psychosocial interventions rather than specific pharmacotherapies. Of 157 PCTs in psychiatry, 30 (19%) were in psychopharmacology, with a median of 2 publications per year and no increase during the period of observation. Sample size ranged from 200 to 18,154; only 11 studies randomized 500 patients or more. Psychopharmacology PCTs were equally likely to be funded by industry as by public agencies. There were 10 PCTs of antidepressants, for a total of 4206 patients (in comparison with at least 46 PCTs of antihypertensive medications, for a total of 208,014 patients). Some psychopharmacology PCTs used suicidal behavior, treatment discontinuation, or mortality as primary outcome and produced effectiveness and safety data that have influenced both practice guidelines and regulatory decisions. Practical clinical trials can constitute an important source of information for clinicians, patients, regulators, and policy makers but have been relatively underused in psychopharmacology. Electronic medical records and integrated practice research networks offer promising platforms for a more efficient conduct of PCTs.

Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome in patients treated with olanzapine pamoate: mechanism, incidence, and management

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are a mainstay in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. However, continuity in intake of the prescribed medication has been one of the greatest challenges in these patients. One option to improve medication adherence is to prescribe depot or long-acting injectable formulations (LAIs) of antipsychotics. Following risperidone, several other SGAs have been introduced as LAIs. Olanzapine pamoate, paliperidone palmitate, and aripiprazole are the new-generation LAIs, which are available for 2- to 4-week intervals of application in many countries. The literature shows a clear advantage of these drugs over placebo regarding symptom reduction and relapse prevention. LAIs show a similar safety profile to oral formulations of the relevant drug, with the exception of olanzapine pamoate, which can lead to rare cases of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS). PDSS is characterized by heavy sedation (possibly including coma) and/or delirium after injection. During PDSS events, patients show higher plasma concentrations of olanzapine, leading to the assumption that unintended partial intravascular injection or blood vessel injury during the injection is causative of PDSS. Therefore, a risk-management plan proposing an observation period of 3 h was introduced. In August 2013, a new proposal by the European Medicines Agency terminated the requirement to accompany these patients to their next destination, although this requirement remains in place according to US FDA recommendations.

Within-drug benefit-risk evaluation of olanzapine long-acting injection at one and two years of treatment

We sought to evaluate the within-drug benefit-risk of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI) using both quantitative and qualitative methods. Subjects included 1192 adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who participated in clinical trials with the opportunity for at least two years of continuous treatment with olanzapine LAI (45-405 mg every two to four weeks). Using the Benefit Risk Action Team (BRAT) framework, we evaluated frequency versus duration of benefits and risks commonly observed with atypical antipsychotics. We then used the Transparent Uniform Risk/Benefit Overview (TURBO) method, which weighs the drug's two most medically serious and/or frequent adverse events versus its primary benefit (effectiveness) and an ancillary benefit. The most frequent events among all patients were remaining free of relapse (91.4% for an average of 306 days at one year, 88.4% for 546 days at two years) and symptomatic remission (81.7% for an average of 239 days at one year, 84.1% for 438 days at two years). One- and two-year incidence of ≥7% weight gain was 33.3% and 41.7%. Incidences for sexual dysfunction, hyperprolactinemia, and post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) were <2%. TURBO ratings unanimously selected PDSS and weight gain as key risks and resulted in an average score in the acceptable benefit-risk balance range.

Long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a 6-year, multinational, single-arm, open-label study

The objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). A 6-year, single-arm, open-label extension study of olanzapine LAI was conducted at 127 sites in 25 countries. Patients were 18-76 years of age, were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N=931), and had been previously enrolled in one of three clinical trials of olanzapine LAI. Patients received flexibly dosed (45-405 mg) olanzapine LAI every 2-4 weeks. The mean duration of exposure was ∼3 years. A total of 393 (42.2%) patients completed the study. The mean weight change was +2.1 kg (P<0.001), with 40.6% of patients experiencing 7% or higher weight gain. Treatment-emergent categorical changes occurred in fasting glucose, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed no systemic accumulation of olanzapine after long-term treatment. There were 36 occurrences of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome, all resolving within 72 h. The mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total and subscale scores did not change significantly over the course of the study, indicating clinical stability. Olanzapine LAI appeared effective as a long-term maintenance treatment, with a safety profile generally consistent with the known profile of oral olanzapine, except for injection-related events (including post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome).

Long-acting injectable vs oral antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

While long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are hoped to reduce high relapse rates in schizophrenia, recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) challenged the benefits of LAIs over oral antipsychotics (OAPs).

METHODS

Systematic review/meta-analysis of RCTs that lasted ≥ 6 months comparing LAIs and OAPs. Primary outcome was study-defined relapse at the longest time point; secondary outcomes included relapse at 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months, all-cause discontinuation, discontinuation due to adverse events, drug inefficacy (ie, relapse + discontinuation due to inefficacy), hospitalization, and nonadherence.

RESULTS

Across 21 RCTs (n = 5176), LAIs were similar to OAPs for relapse prevention at the longest time point (studies = 21, n = 4950, relative risk [RR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-1.08, P = .35). The finding was confirmed restricting the analysis to outpatient studies lasting ≥ 1 year (studies = 12, RR = 0.93, 95% CI:0.71-1.07, P = .31). However, studies using first-generation antipsychotic (FGA)-LAIs (studies = 10, RR = 0.82, 95% CI:0.69-0.97, P = .02) and those published ≤ 1991 (consisting exclusively of all 8 fluphenazine-LAI studies; RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65-0.96, P = 0.02) were superior to OAPs regarding the primary outcome. Pooled LAIs also did not separate from OAPs regarding any secondary outcomes. Again, studies using FGA-LAIs and those published ≤ 1991 were associated with LAI superiority over OAPs, eg, hospitalization and drug inefficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

In RCTs, which are less representative of real-world patients than naturalistic studies, pooled LAIs did not reduce relapse compared with OAPs in schizophrenia patients. The exceptions were FGA-LAIs, mostly consisting of fluphenazine-LAI studies, which were all conducted through 1991. Because this finding is vulnerable to a cohort bias, studies comparing FGA-LAI vs second-generation antipsychotics-LAI and LAI vs OAP RCTs in real-world patients are needed.