Medication adherence, healthcare resource utilization, and costs among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate or once-every-three-months paliperidone palmitate

Evaluating the 6-month formulation of paliperidone palmitate: a twice-yearly injectable treatment for schizophrenia in adults

INTRODUCTION

Paliperidone Palmitate is the only antipsychotic that has been developed in three different intramuscular long-acting injectable (LAI) dosing regimen: monthly (PP1M), quarterly (PP3M), and from 2020 also twice-yearly (PP6M). The latter was approved for the maintenance treatment of adults with schizophrenia and clinically stabilized with PP1M or PP3M.

AREAS COVERED

Data from studies evaluating efficacy in the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia with PP6M are reviewed. Since no post-marketing safety studies are currently available, data from spontaneous reporting system databases, FAERS and Eudravigilance, are analyzed and the reported treatment-emergent adverse events of PP6M are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The efficacy of PP6M is comparable to that of PP3M in terms of relapses prevention in patients with schizophrenia previously stabilized on PP3M or PP1M. Also, the maintenance of clinical efficacy in the long term has been demonstrated. Data from pharmacovigilance analyses, as well as from phase 3 studies, show that PP6M is generally well tolerated, consistently with PP3M safety data. PP6M allows a longer dosing interval than any other LAI antipsychotics, potentially reducing nonadherence and disease relapses. In future, an increase in the prescription rates of PP6M is expected and real-world efficacy and tolerability studies will be conducted.

Relapse Rates With Paliperidone Palmitate in Adult Patients With Schizophrenia: Results for the 6-Month Formulation From an Open-label Extension Study Compared to Real-World Data for the 1-Month and 3-Month Formulations

BACKGROUND

The 3 paliperidone palmitate (PP) long-acting injectable antipsychotic formulations, PP 1-month (PP1M), PP 3-month (PP3M), and PP 6-month (PP6M), have shown to reduce the risk of relapse in schizophrenia. The current phase-4 study constructed external comparator arms (ECAs) using real-world data for PP3M and PP1M and compared relapse prevention rates with PP6M from an open-label extension (OLE) study in adult patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

PP6M data were derived from a single-arm, 24-month, OLE study (NCT04072575), which included patients with schizophrenia who completed a 12-month randomized, double-blind, noninferiority, phase-3 study (NCT03345342) without relapse. Patients in the PP3M and PP1M ECAs were identified from the IBM® MarketScan® Multistate Medicaid Database based on similar eligibility criteria as the PP6M cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 178 patients were included in each cohort following propensity score matching. Most patients were men (>70%; mean age: 39-41 years). Time to relapse (primary analysis based on Kaplan-Meier estimates) was significantly delayed in the PP6M cohort (P < .001, log-rank test). The relapse rate was lower in the PP6M cohort (3.9%) vs PP3M (20.2%) and PP1M (29.8%) cohorts. Risk of relapse decreased significantly (P < .001) by 82% for PP6M vs PP3M (HR = 0.18 [95% CI = 0.08 to 0.40]), 89% for PP6M vs PP1M (HR = 0.11 [0.05 to 0.25]), and 35% for PP3M vs PP1M (HR = 0.65 [0.42 to 0.99]; P = .043). Sensitivity analysis confirmed findings from the primary analysis. Although the ECAs were matched to mimic the characteristics of the PP6M cohort, heterogeneity between the groups could exist due to factors including prior study participation, unmeasured confounders, variations in data capture and quality, and completeness of clinical information.

CONCLUSIONS

In a clinical trial setting, PP6M significantly delayed time to relapse and demonstrated lower relapse rates compared with PP3M and PP1M treatments in real-world settings among adult patients with schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04072575; EudraCT number: 2018-004532-30.

Cumulative Clinical Experience of the Use of Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Monthly Long-Acting Injection in the Treatment of Schizophrenia: A Critical Appraisal

Paliperidone palmitate 3-monthly (PP3M), an approved maintenance treatment for patients with schizophrenia, was the first long-acting antipsychotic injectable (LAI) to require only four administrations per year. Here, we aimed to review the available evidence about its use in the management of schizophrenia to date and highlight key study findings in order to provide a balanced overview of current experience in clinical practice. For that purpose, an extensive search of available literature from PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was conducted in March 2023. Emerging data from real-world studies appear to signal that the benefits of the use of PP3M may well extent beyond the obvious convenience for patients and resource efficiency for services and may be actually associated with improved effectiveness and patient satisfaction. Large naturalistic studies from Australia, Europe and the US comparing treatment continuation between newer LAIs and/or oral antipsychotics showed that patients treated with PP3M had higher compliance rates and a longer period of continuous use. The risk of relapse, re-hospitalization and number of bed days was also lower with PP3M compared to PP1M and other LAIs as demonstrated by several cohort studies. Furthermore, patients treated with PP3M were using lower doses of benzodiazepines and concomitant oral antipsychotics compared with other LAIs. What is more, PP3M appears to positively impact patients' satisfaction and quality of life, facilitating long-term goals. In fact, recent studies recorded better quality-adjusted life years and decreased stigma, with improved social acceptability and promotion of rehabilitation for patients transitioning to PP3M. The rates of general satisfaction rates with PP3M were also higher among psychiatrists and caregivers who reported overall less concerns. In conclusion, clinical exposure and a growing body of evidence thus far, reinforce the use of PP3M in an effort to enhance patient outcomes alongside individual experience and treatment persistence.

A Cross-Sectional Study of Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs for Antipsychotics Among Medicaid Beneficiaries with Schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Patient affordability is an important nonclinical consideration for treatment access among patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated and measured out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for antipsychotics (APs) among Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Adults with a schizophrenia diagnosis, ≥ 1 AP claim, and continuous Medicaid eligibility were identified in the MarketScan® Medicaid Database (1 January 2018-31 December 2018). OOP AP pharmacy costs ($US 2019) were normalized for a 30-day supply. Results were descriptively reported by route of administration [ROA; orals (OAPs), long-acting injectables (LAIs)], generic/branded status within ROAs, and dosing schedule within LAIs. The proportion of total (pharmacy and medical) OOP costs AP-attributable was described.

RESULTS

In 2018, 48,656 Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia were identified (mean age 46.7 years, 41.1% female, 43.4% Black). Mean annual total OOP costs were $59.97, $6.65 of which was AP attributable. Overall, 39.2%, 38.3%, and 42.3% of beneficiaries with a corresponding claim had OOP costs > $0 for any AP, OAP, and LAI, respectively. Mean OOP costs per patient per 30-day claim (PPPC) were $0.64 for OAPs and $0.86 for LAIs. By LAI dosing schedule, mean OOP costs PPPC were $0.95, $0.90, $0.57, and $0.39 for twice-monthly, monthly, once-every-2-months, and once-every-3-months LAIs, respectively. Across ROAs and generic/branded status, projected OOP AP costs per-patient-per-year for beneficiaries assumed fully adherent ranged from $4.52 to $13.70, representing < 25% of total OOP costs.

CONCLUSION

OOP AP costs for Medicaid beneficiaries represented a small fraction of total OOP costs. LAIs with longer dosing schedules had numerically lower mean OOP costs, which were lowest for once-every-3-months LAIs among all APs.

Budget impact of introducing once-every-6-months paliperidone palmitate in US health care plans

BACKGROUND: In the United States, most patients with schizophrenia have Medicaid coverage. Antipsychotic treatments are the cornerstone of schizophrenia management; most patients are treated with daily oral antipsychotics but struggle with medication adherence. Evidence suggests that medication adherence is inversely correlated with dosing frequency. Once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP) has been demonstrated to improve adherence compared with oral antipsychotics; transitioning to once-every-3-months PP (PP3M) further improved adherence. In 2021, once-every-6-months PP (PP6M) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to provide even longer between-dose intervals. Public health stakeholders who aim to improve medication adherence are interested in understanding how introducing PP6M to the formulary will impact the budget. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the budget impact of introducing PP6M to the formulary from the perspectives of a hypothetical US multistate health care payer and state Medicaid programs using California, Georgia, and Ohio as examples. METHODS: The budget impact model was developed from a payer perspective, comparing the reference scenario (without PP6M in the market) with a new scenario (with PP6M). The study population included patients with schizophrenia who were eligible to receive PP6M. Market shares were assigned to the reference and new market scenarios. Efficacy was measured by the relative risk of relapse while receiving treatment. Adherence effects were included in the model and affected costs of treatment and relapse rates. A deterministic 1-way sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: Base-case results for a multistate payer with 1 million members demonstrate that adding PP6M to the market results in total incremental plan-level costs ranging from $7,747 in year 1 to $11,501 in year 5. Increased drug costs were offset by administration and relapse cost savings ($105 and $881 in year 5, respectively). The average incremental cost per treated patient per year was stable at $180.06 for each year, and the incremental cost per member per month stayed below $0.01 for each year. The results of the model from the state-level Medicaid scenarios are broadly similar to those of the multistate base-case perspective. The 1-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated the model is most sensitive to the per-package costs of PP6M and PP3M, along with the proportion of patients fully adherent with PP3M. CONCLUSIONS: The budget impact of introducing PP6M as a treatment option is minimal. With the expected cost offsets from reduced administration and relapse costs due to adherence benefits, these results suggest that PP6M can be a viable treatment option from a clinical and a budgetary perspective. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The study sponsor provided funds to Xcenda and ApotheCom for medical writing, editorial support, and submission of the manuscript. Hilary Phelps was an employee of Janssen Global Services, LLC, at the time of the development and finalization of the manuscript. Alex Keenan is an employee of Janssen Global Services, LLC, and holds stock in Johnson & Johnson, Inc. Dee Lin and Carmela Benson are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and hold stock in Johnson & Johnson, Inc. Aditya Raju was an employee of Xcenda at the time of the development and finalization of the manuscript, and Danmeng Huang is an employee of Xcenda, a health care consulting firm that was contracted by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. Chih-Yuan Cheng is an employee of Janssen NV.

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).

Effect of 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate on hospitalisation in a naturalistic schizophrenia cohort - A five-year mirror image study

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Currently the longest-acting antipsychotic formulation widespread clinical use is paliperidone 3-monthly injection (PP3M). While its efficacy has been shown in rigorous trials, there are few data relating to its effect on hospitalisation in normal clinical practice.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

This was a mirror-image study (3 years before; 2 years after) of hospitalisations before and after beginning paliperidone 1-monthly (PP1M) and switching to 3-monthly within 18 months. All consecutive patients prescribed paliperidone long-acting injections with its licence (F20 schizophrenia diagnosis; 18-65 years) were included. The setting was an urban, specialist mental health organisation In London, UK.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

In total 378 patients were initiated on PP3M during the study period. After applying inclusion criteria, 76 patients were retained and followed-up for 2 years. Mean duration of PP1M use before starting 3-monthly injections was 6 months (range 3-18 months). Of the 76 patients initiated, 13 patients discontinued PP3M within 2 years of starting PP1M or were lost to follow-up. Mean hospitalisations per patient per year fell from 0.55 (SD 0.46) before paliperidone to 0.05 (SD 0.19) after initiation (p < 0.001). Only 5 of 76 PP1M/PP3M participants were hospitalised during the 2-year follow up. The mean number of bed days per year before paliperidone initiation was 32.2 (SD 44.3) and after paliperidone initiation it was 23.0 (SD 53.2) (p = 0.004). Almost all of the bed days after initiation were associated with the index admission during which PP1M was started.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

In patients stabilised on PP1M and switched to PP3M in normal clinical practice, rehospitalisation is very uncommon and much reduced compared with previous treatments.

Comparing Relapse Rates in Real-World Patients with Schizophrenia Who Were Adequately versus Not Adequately Treated with Paliperidone Palmitate Once-Monthly Injections Before Transitioning to Once-Every-3-Months Injections

PURPOSE

This retrospective cohort study evaluated real-world data on relapses in adult patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate once-every-3-months (PP3M) following treatment with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data derived from the IBM^® MarketScan^® Multi-State Medicaid Database were analyzed. Adults aged ≥18 years with ≥1 schizophrenia diagnosis claim and ≥12 months of continuous medical and prescription enrollment before and/or at index date of PP3M were eligible for inclusion. Patients were matched on propensity score to 2 PP3M cohorts: (1) adequately treated (AT), defined as patients treated with PP1M for ≥4 months, with the last 2 doses the same and a PP3M initiation dose meeting the corresponding PP1M-to-PP3M dose conversion, or (2) not adequately treated (NAT), defined as patients who received ≤2 or no PP1M doses. Relapse rates and time to relapse distributions based on the first occurrence of a qualifying event during the 2-year follow-up period were compared between PP3M cohorts using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log rank test statistics. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards models. Two sensitivity analyses using different matched populations were performed to assess the robustness of the primary findings.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded a sample of 1314 patients (657 per group). Most patients were male (68.9%) and aged 25-64 years (90.1%). The relapse rate was significantly lower in the AT (18.4%) versus NAT cohort (26.8%), P = 0.0002. Risk of relapse decreased by 35% for AT versus NAT (HR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.51-0.81]). Relapse reductions favored the AT cohort in both sensitivity analyses (HR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.54-0.83] and HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.56-0.97]).

CONCLUSION

In this analysis of Medicaid claims data, patients adequately treated with PP1M before transitioning to PP3M demonstrated significantly lower relapse rates and delayed time to relapse.