Subjective well-being in schizophrenia: a randomised controlled open-label 12-month non-inferiority study comparing quetiapine XR with risperidone (RECOVER)

A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Antipsychotic Drugs on the Quality of Life of Patients with Schizophrenia

Pharmacological antipsychotic drug interventions represent the cornerstone of the management of patients with schizophrenia and other psychotic spectrum disorders. The choice of the "best" treatment should be made on the basis of several clinical domains. However, despite available treatments, the quality of life reported by patients with schizophrenia taking antipsychotics is still very poor, and this outcome is rarely taken into account in trials assessing the efficacy and effectiveness of antipsychotic treatments. Therefore, we performed a systematic review in order to assess the impact of antipsychotic treatment on patients' quality of life. In particular, we aimed to identify any differences in the improvement in quality of life according to the (a) type of formulation of antipsychotic drugs (i.e., oral vs. depot vs. long-acting injectable); (b) type of the drug (first vs. second vs. third generation); and (c) patients' clinical characteristics. One hundred and eleven papers were included in the review. The main findings were as follows: (1) quality of life is usually considered a secondary outcome in trials on the efficacy and effectiveness of drugs; (2) second-generation antipsychotics have a more positive effect on quality of life; and (3) long-acting injectable antipsychotics are associated with a more stable improvement in quality of life and with a good safety and tolerability profile. Our systematic review confirms that quality of life represents a central element for selecting the appropriate treatment for people with schizophrenia. In particular, the availability of new treatments with a better tolerability profile, a proven effectiveness on patients' cognitive and social functioning, and with a more stable blood concentration might represent the appropriate strategy for improving the quality of life of people with schizophrenia.

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.

Long-term efficacy and safety of once-monthly Risperidone ISM® in the treatment of schizophrenia: Results from a 12-month open-label extension study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of Risperidone ISM® in patients with schizophrenia, a multicenter, open-label extension of the PRISMA-3 study was conducted.

METHODS

Eligible placebo (unstable) and Risperidone ISM® (stabilized) rollover patients from a previous 12-week double-blind phase and de novo stable patients received once-monthly intramuscular injections of Risperidone ISM® 75 or 100 mg for 12 months. The long term-efficacy assessment included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Safety evaluation included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), injection site reactions (ISR), laboratory tests and several safety scales.

RESULTS

Altogether, 215 patients entered the study (55 unstable, 119 stabilized and 41 stable patients). Most patients (74.9%) completed, and discontinuation rates were broadly similar across the study subgroups, mainly due to withdrawal of consent (12.1%). PANSS total and subscales scores decreased from baseline to endpoint in all groups, with the largest decrease for unstable patients. Improvement from baseline to 12 months was also shown for CGI-S and CGI-I scores for both unstable and stabilized patients; the CGI-S and CGI-I scores remained almost unchanged for the stable group. At least one treatment-related TEAE was reported in 39.1% of patients; the most common were headache (12.1%), hyperprolactinemia (9.8%) and asthenia (5.1%). ISR were reported in 8 (0.3%) patients; injection site pain score was low across the 2355 doses assessed.

CONCLUSION

Risperidone ISM® is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated long-term treatment of schizophrenia in adults, regardless of the initial disease severity or whether patients were previously treated with Risperidone ISM® during an acute exacerbation or switched from stable doses of oral risperidone.

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.

Long-term effectiveness of oral second-generation antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia and related disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis of direct head-to-head comparisons

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are recommended for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia. However, comparative long-term effectiveness among SGAs is unclear. Here we provide a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials lasting ≥⃒6 months comparing SGAs head-to-head in schizophrenia and related disorders. The primary outcome was all-cause discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included efficacy and tolerability, i.e., psychopathology, inefficacy-related and intolerability-related discontinuation, relapse, hospitalization, remission, functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. Pooled risk ratio and standardized mean difference were calculated using random-effects models. Across 59 studies (N=45,787), lasting 47.4±32.1 weeks (range 24-186), no consistent superiority of any SGA emerged across efficacy and tolerability outcomes. Regarding all-cause discontinuation, clozapine, olanzapine and risperidone were significantly (p<0.05) superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine was inferior to several other SGAs. As to psychopathology, clozapine and olanzapine were superior to several other SGAs, while quetiapine and ziprasidone were inferior to several other SGAs. Data for other efficacy outcomes were sparse. Regarding intolerability-related discontinuation, risperidone was superior and clozapine was inferior to several other SGAs. Concerning weight gain, olanzapine was worse than all other compared non-clozapine SGAs, and risperidone was significantly worse than several other SGAs. As to prolactin increase, risperidone and amisulpride were significantly worse than several other SGAs. Regarding parkinsonism, olanzapine was superior to risperidone, without significant differences pertaining to akathisia. Concerning sedation and somnolence, clozapine and quetiapine were significantly worse than some other SGAs. In summary, different long-term SGA efficacy and tolerability patterns emerged. The long-term risk-benefit profiles of specific SGAs need to be tailored to individual patients to optimize maintenance treatment outcomes.

Bioequivalence of two quetiapine extended release tablets in Chinese healthy volunteers under fasting and fed conditions and effects of food on pharmacokinetic profiles

Objective

The objectives of this study were to evaluate the bioequivalence of Quesero extended release (Quesero XR) tablets and Seroquel extended release (Seroquel XR) tablets under fasting and fed conditions and to determine the effect of food on the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of Quesero XR or Seroquel XR in Chinese healthy volunteers.

Methods

A single-site, randomized, open-label, two-period crossover design with a 10-day washout period was conducted in 20 subjects under the fed and fasting studies. A single oral dose of 200 mg Quesero XR or Seroquel XR was given to the subjects after an overnight fast of 10 hours. Blood samples were taken at scheduled time spots from 0 hour pre dose to 36 hours post dose. Plasma concentrations of quetiapine were measured by a validated ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) method. The PK parameters were calculated by non-compartment analysis using Phoenix WinNonlin software.

Results

On both conditions, no significant differences were found among the main PK parameters of the two preparations by analysis of variance (P>0.05); the Wilcoxon test of maximum peak plasma concentration (T_max) showed no significant differences (P>0.05); the 90% confidence limit (CL) of lnC_max, lnAUC_0→36, and lnAUC_0→∞ fell within the acceptable range of 80%–125%. As compared with the fasting state, the T_max was advanced and the mean maximum plasma concentration (C_max), AUC_0→36, and AUC_0→∞ were also increased in the fed state; the geometric mean ratio and 90% CI of the main PK parameters fell outside the range of the CIs; analysis of variance showed significant differences in the other PK parameters except for apparent total clearance after oral administration (clearance rate; P<0.05).

Conclusion

The two formulations of Quesero XR and Seroquel XR are bioequivalent under both fasting and fed conditions, and food may affect the PK profiles by increasing the rate and extent of absorption of Quesero XR or Seroquel XR in Chinese healthy volunteers.

Dopamine D2-receptor affinity of antipsychotics in relation to subjective well-being in patients with a psychotic disorder

Dopamine D2-receptor blockade by antipsychotic medication reduces psychotic symptoms, but may reduce subjective well-being. The current study aims to further explore the relation between dopamine D2-receptor affinity and subjective well-being within a large sample of patients with psychotic disorders. Patients participated in a longitudinal naturalistic cohort study: the Genetic Risk and Outcome of Psychosis (GROUP) study. Three groups of antipsychotic medication were created on the basis of their affinity for the D2-receptor: (i) loose or partial agonistic binding, (ii) moderate binding, and (iii) tight binding. Subjective well-being was assessed using the Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptics scale (SWN) at baseline and the 3-year follow-up. In addition, we compared changes in SWN scores when switching to a more 'loose or partial agonistic' binding agent or to a 'tighter' binding agent between baseline and the 3-year follow-up. The final group included 388 patients at baseline and 290 at the 3-year follow-up. No significant differences in the SWN scores were found between the three affinity groups at baseline and the 3-year follow-up. In addition, analyses yielded no significant changes in SWN scores after switching to a more 'loose or partial agonistic' or more 'tight' binding antipsychotic agent. We did not find further support for the hypothesis that subjective well-being is associated with antipsychotics affinity for dopamine D2-receptors. This might imply that the effect of antipsychotic D2-receptors binding on subjective well-being is not large enough to be detected in this cross-sectional study. Other factors besides dopamine antagonism are probably more relevant for subjective well-being.