Dose-associated changes in safety and efficacy parameters observed in a 24-week maintenance trial of olanzapine long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia

Antipsychotic dose reduction compared to dose continuation for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic drugs are the mainstay treatment for schizophrenia, yet they are associated with diverse and potentially dose-related side effects which can reduce quality of life. For this reason, the lowest possible doses of antipsychotics are generally recommended, but higher doses are often used in clinical practice. It is still unclear if and how antipsychotic doses could be reduced safely in order to minimise the adverse-effect burden without increasing the risk of relapse.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of reducing antipsychotic dose compared to continuing the current dose for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on 10 February 2021 at the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, and WHO ICTRP. We also inspected the reference lists of included studies and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any dose reduction against continuation in people with schizophrenia or related disorders who were stabilised on their current antipsychotic treatment.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently screened relevant records for inclusion, extracted data from eligible studies, and assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2. We contacted study authors for missing data and additional information. Our primary outcomes were clinically important change in quality of life,  rehospitalisations and dropouts due to adverse effects; key secondary outcomes were clinically important change in functioning, relapse, dropouts for any reason, and at least one adverse effect. We also examined scales measuring symptoms, quality of life, and functioning as well as a comprehensive list of specific adverse effects. We pooled outcomes at the endpoint preferably closest to one year. We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs, of which 22 studies provided data with 2635 participants (average age 38.4 years old). The median study sample size was 60 participants (ranging from 18 to 466 participants) and length was 37 weeks (ranging from 12 weeks to 2 years). There were variations in the dose reduction strategies in terms of speed of reduction (i.e. gradual in about half of the studies (within 2 to 16 weeks) and abrupt in the other half), and in terms of degree of reduction (i.e. median planned reduction of 66% of the dose up to complete withdrawal in three studies). We assessed risk of bias across outcomes predominantly as some concerns or high risk.  No study reported data on the number of participants with a clinically important change in quality of life or functioning, and only eight studies reported continuous data on scales measuring quality of life or functioning. There was no difference between dose reduction and continuation on scales measuring quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.15, 6 RCTs, n = 719, I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) and scales measuring functioning (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.17, 6 RCTs, n = 966, I2 = 0%, high certainty evidence). Dose reduction in comparison to continuation may increase the risk of rehospitalisation based on data from eight studies with estimable effect sizes; however, the 95% CI does not exclude the possibility of no difference (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.81, 8 RCTs, n = 1413, I2 = 59% (moderate heterogeneity), very low certainty evidence). Similarly, dose reduction increased the risk of relapse based on data from 20 studies (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.06, 20 RCTs, n = 2481, I2 = 70% (substantial heterogeneity), low certainty evidence).   More participants in the dose reduction group in comparison to the continuation group left the study early due to adverse effects (RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.49, 6 RCTs with estimable effect sizes, n = 1079, I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) and for any reason (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.81, 12 RCTs, n = 1551, I2 = 48% (moderate heterogeneity), moderate certainty evidence). Lastly, there was no difference between the dose reduction and continuation groups in the number of participants with at least one adverse effect based on data from four studies with estimable effect sizes (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.12, 5 RCTs, n = 998 (4 RCTs, n = 980 with estimable effect sizes), I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review synthesised the latest evidence on the reduction of antipsychotic doses for stable individuals with schizophrenia. There was no difference between dose reduction and continuation groups in quality of life, functioning, and number of participants with at least one adverse effect. However, there was a higher risk for relapse and dropouts, and potentially for rehospitalisations, with dose reduction. Of note, the majority of the trials focused on relapse prevention rather potential beneficial outcomes on quality of life, functioning, and adverse effects, and in some studies there was rapid and substantial reduction of doses. Further well-designed RCTs are therefore needed to provide more definitive answers.

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.

Weight gain and antipsychotics: a drug safety review

INTRODUCTION

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are widely used in several psychiatric disease entities and exert to a different extent a risk for antipsychotic-induced weight gain (AIWG). As AIWG is associated with an increase in metabolic syndrome or cardiovascular events, knowledge of these risks is crucial for further monitoring and the initiation of counteractive measures.

AREAS COVERED

We searched PubMed and Web of Sciences for randomized-controlled trials and naturalistic observational studies published between 2010 and 2014 with sample sizes exceeding 100, including all marketed SGAs apart from zotepine, and providing data on weight increase. We also summarized relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses of head-to-head comparisons.

EXPERT OPINION

Recently published data still support the hierarchical ranking of SGAs already proposed in previous reviews ranking clozapine and olanzapine as having the highest risk, followed by amisulpride, asenapine, iloperidone, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone and sertindole in the middle, and aripiprazole, lurasidone and ziprasidone with the lowest risk. Number needed to harm varied considerably in our meta-analysis. Younger patients and patients with a lower baseline body mass index are most vulnerable. The greatest amount of weight gain occurs within the first weeks of treatment. AIWG occurs in all diagnostic groups and is also common in treatment with first-generation antipsychotics; therefore, awareness of this adverse event is essential for anyone prescribing antipsychotics.

The effects of novel and newly approved antipsychotics on serum prolactin levels: a comprehensive review

Since the 1970s, clinicians have increasingly become more familiar with hyperprolactinemia (HPRL) as a common adverse effect of antipsychotic medication, which remains the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment for patients with schizophrenia. Although treatment with second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) as a group is, compared with use of the first-generation antipsychotics, associated with lower prolactin (PRL) plasma levels, the detailed effects on plasma PRL levels for each of these compounds in reports often remain incomplete or inaccurate. Moreover, at this moment, no review has been published about the effect of the newly approved antipsychotics asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone on PRL levels. The objective of this review is to describe PRL physiology; PRL measurement; diagnosis, causes, consequences and mechanisms of HPRL; incidence figures of (new-onset) HPRL with SGAs and newly approved antipsychotics in adolescent and adult patients; and revisit lingering questions regarding this hormone. A literature search, using the MEDLINE database (1966-December 2013), was conducted to identify relevant publications to report on the state of the art of HPRL and to summarize the available evidence with respect to the propensity of the SGAs and the newly approved antipsychotics to elevate PRL levels. Our review shows that although HPRL usually is defined as a sustained level of PRL above the laboratory upper limit of normal, limit values show some degree of variability in clinical reports, making the interpretation and comparison of data across studies difficult. Moreover, many reports do not provide much or any data detailing the measurement of PRL. Although the highest rates of HPRL are consistently reported in association with amisulpride, risperidone and paliperidone, while aripiprazole and quetiapine have the most favorable profile with respect to this outcome, all SGAs can induce PRL elevations, especially at the beginning of treatment, and have the potential to cause new-onset HPRL. Considering the PRL-elevating propensity of the newly approved antipsychotics, evidence seems to indicate these agents have a PRL profile comparable to that of clozapine (asenapine and iloperidone), ziprasidone and olanzapine (lurasidone). PRL elevations with antipsychotic medication generally are dose dependant. However, antipsychotics having a high potential for PRL elevation (amisulpride, risperidone and paliperidone) can have a profound impact on PRL levels even at relatively low doses, while PRL levels with antipsychotics having a minimal effect on PRL, in most cases, can remain unchanged (quetiapine) or reduce (aripiprazole) over all dosages. Although tolerance and decreases in PRL values after long-term administration of PRL-elevating antipsychotics can occur, the elevations, in most cases, remain above the upper limit of normal. PRL profiles of antipsychotics in children and adolescents seem to be the same as in adults. The hyperprolactinemic effects of antipsychotic medication are mostly correlated with their affinity for dopamine D2 receptors at the level of the anterior pituitary lactotrophs (and probably other neurotransmitter mechanisms) and their blood-brain barrier penetrating capability. Even though antipsychotics are the most common cause of pharmacologically induced HPRL, recent research has shown that HPRL can be pre-existing in a substantial portion of antipsychotic-naïve patients with first-episode psychosis or at-risk mental state.

Almost all antipsychotics result in weight gain: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Antipsychotics (AP) induce weight gain. However, reviews and meta-analyses generally are restricted to second generation antipsychotics (SGA) and do not stratify for duration of AP use. It is hypothesised that patients gain more weight if duration of AP use is longer.

Method

A meta-analysis was conducted of clinical trials of AP that reported weight change. Outcome measures were body weight change, change in BMI and clinically relevant weight change (7% weight gain or loss). Duration of AP-use was stratified as follows: ≤6 weeks, 6–16 weeks, 16–38 weeks and >38 weeks. Forest plots stratified by AP as well as by duration of use were generated and results were summarised in figures.

Results

307 articles met inclusion criteria. The majority were AP switch studies. Almost all AP showed a degree of weight gain after prolonged use, except for amisulpride, aripiprazole and ziprasidone, for which prolonged exposure resulted in negligible weight change. The level of weight gain per AP varied from discrete to severe. Contrary to expectations, switch of AP did not result in weight loss for amisulpride, aripiprazole or ziprasidone. In AP-naive patients, weight gain was much more pronounced for all AP.

Conclusion

Given prolonged exposure, virtually all AP are associated with weight gain. The rational of switching AP to achieve weight reduction may be overrated. In AP-naive patients, weight gain is more pronounced.

Switching to olanzapine long-acting injection from either oral olanzapine or any other antipsychotic: comparative post hoc analyses

BACKGROUND

A considerable proportion of patients suffering from schizophrenia show suboptimal responses to oral antipsychotics due to inadequate adherence. Hence, they are likely to benefit from switching to a long-acting injectable formulation. These post hoc analyses assessed the clinical effects of switching to olanzapine long-acting injection (OLAI) from either oral olanzapine (OLZ) or other antipsychotics (non-OLZ).

METHODS

Post hoc analyses were done based on two randomized studies (one short-term, one long-term) conducted in patients suffering from schizophrenia and treated with OLAI. The short-term study was an 8-week placebo-controlled, double-blind trial in acute patients, and the long-term study was a 2-year, oral olanzapine-controlled, open-label, follow-up of stabilized outpatients.

RESULTS

These analyses used data from 62 OLAI-treated patients (12 switched from OLZ, 50 from non-OLZ) from the short-term study and 190 OLAI-treated patients (56 switched from OLZ, 134 from non-OLZ) from the long-term study. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses of time to all-cause discontinuation of OLAI treatment did not differ significantly between OLZ and non-OLZ patients in the short-term study (P=0.209) or long-term study (P=0.448). Similarly, the proportions of OLZ and non-OLZ patients that discontinued OLAI were not statistically different in the short-term (16.7% versus 36.0%, respectively; P=0.198) or long-term (57.1% versus 47.8% respectively; P=0.238) studies. In the short-term study, no significant differences were detected between the patient groups in mean change in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (-13.4 OLZ versus -20.8 non-OLZ; P=0.166). In the long-term study, mean change in PANSS total score (3.9 OLZ versus -3.6 non-OLZ; P=0.008) was significantly different between the non-OLZ and OLZ groups. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in OLZ and non-OLZ groups per study.

CONCLUSION

These post hoc analyses suggest that no significant differences in clinical effectiveness were seen after switching from non-OLZ or OLZ to OLAI. However, these findings should be interpreted with care, due to small sample sizes and differences in patients' clinical profiles.

Drug safety evaluation of olanzapine pamoate

INTRODUCTION

Olanzapine pamoate is one of three second-generation antipsychotics available as depot medication. While non-adherence is a major problem in the treatment of schizophrenia, olanzapine pamoate can improve adherence, though its use is limited by its safety profile.

AREAS COVERED

The review covers data on efficacy with a focus on tolerability and safety of olanzapine pamoate using the known databases including PubMed, Psychinfo and Embase using keywords. Relevant websites were also reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Olanzapine is an efficacious antipsychotic that can be used in its oral and depot formula (olanzapine pamoate) for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. It has demonstrated superiority over conventional and some other atypical antipsychotics, with both formulas having comparable low rates of motor side effects. The side effects on body weight and glucose homeostasis are also similar in both formulas and limit its use. The only clear difference regarding side effects is 'the risk that 0.07% of injections in preclinical trials have led to a post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome event which requires a risk management plan'. Especially in outpatients this could cause inconveniences that should be overcome by offering, for example, psychological therapies or psychoeducation to effectively use the time when patients have to remain in the healthcare facilities.

Long-acting injectable formulations of new-generation antipsychotics: a review from a clinical perspective

Antipsychotics are the mainstay of the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia. In this context, the evidence also supports the effectiveness of long-acting injections (LAIs) or depots of antipsychotics regarding their relapse-preventing properties. When a LAI formulation of risperidone was launched as the first second-generation depot, there was a renaissance of interest in these formulations. In the meantime, olanzapine, paliperidone, and aripiprazole have been approved by regulatory authorities as LAIs in various countries. All studies using the new-generation depots have shown a clear advantage over placebo regarding relapse prevention and symptom reduction. Safety profiles of the long-acting compounds are comparable to their oral formulations with the exception of olanzapine pamoate injections, which can sometimes lead to a post-injection delirium. Despite the fact that many treatment guidelines recommend LAI antipsychotics as an important treatment option for the long-term management of schizophrenia, they are still most frequently used in chronically ill patients with considerable compliance problems. It is imperative to overcome this indication bias in order to be able to utilize all available treatment options in the long-term management of schizophrenia. There is little evidence on comparisons between LAIs and their oral mother compounds, and even less concerning effectiveness comparisons between different depots. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the recent clinical evidence on new-generation depot antipsychotics.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of schizophrenia, part 2: update 2012 on the long-term treatment of schizophrenia and management of antipsychotic-induced side effects

Abstract These updated guidelines are based on a first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of schizophrenia published in 2006. For this 2012 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful. They are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating people suffering from schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines, a systematic review of the MEDLINE/PUBMED database and the Cochrane Library, in addition to data extraction from national treatment guidelines, has been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and then categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and five levels of recommendation (1-5) ( Bandelow et al. 2008a ,b, World J Biol Psychiatry 9:242, see Table 1 ). This second part of the updated guidelines covers long-term treatment as well as the management of relevant side effects. These guidelines are primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antipsychotic medication and other pharmacological treatment options) of adults suffering from schizophrenia.

An analysis of potentially prolactin-related adverse events and abnormal prolactin values in randomized clinical trials with paliperidone palmitate

BACKGROUND

Paliperidone palmitate has been associated with serum prolactin elevations in some patients. However, few individuals with elevated prolactin levels (hyperprolactinemia) have symptomatic potentially prolactin-related adverse events (PPR-AEs).

OBJECTIVE

To quantify rates of hyperprolactinemia in subjects treated with the newly marketed paliperidone palmitate long-acting injection (PP-LAI) in randomized clinical trials, summarize rates of PPR-AEs in those trials by sex and dose, and determine how many PPR-AEs required treatment.

METHODS

Numbers and rates of investigator-reported hyperprolactinemia and PPR-AEs were obtained from the sponsor's clinical trial database and have been included in regulatory filings. Results were tabulated for males, females, and overall, and by dose administered, using descriptive statistics. Those requiring treatment were described as well.

RESULTS

There were 3173 subjects (61.4% males) exposed to PP-LAI in 10 clinical trials; 2831 (89.2%) patients had recorded prolactin levels, including 1759 males (90.3% of exposed males) and 1072 females (87.5% of exposed females). Overall, at any time, prolactin levels were elevated for 38.8% of the subjects (39.5% for males and 37.7% for females; p = 0.354 between sexes). However, there was no significant correlation between monthly dose and proportion of subjects with elevated prolactin levels (p = 0.109). There were 115 PPR-AEs in 107 patients (3.4%); 51 (44.3% of PPR-AEs) cases represented asymptomatic hyperprolactinemia. The remaining 64 symptomatic PPR-AEs affected 2.0% of the total number of subjects. Fifteen events in 13 participants (0.41% of patients or 4.7 events/1000 patients) required treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians should periodically assess patients on paliperidone palmitate for any PPR-AEs and carefully assess the benefits and risks when managing these effects.

Comparison of metabolic changes in patients with schizophrenia during randomized treatment with intramuscular olanzapine long-acting injection versus oral olanzapine

Metabolic changes were examined in patients with schizophrenia during treatment with either oral olanzapine or olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). Data were collected from patients who had been stabilized on oral olanzapine (10, 15, or 20 mg/day) for ≥4 weeks and then randomized to either continued olanzapine oral treatment (n = 322) or LAI (n = 599; 150 mg/2 weeks, 405 mg/4 weeks, or 300 mg/2 weeks) for up to 24 weeks. Mean and categorical changes in metabolic parameters were analyzed. Mean changes in weight, glucose, and most lipids were generally not significantly different between treatment groups. Weight changes over time followed similar patterns and were not significantly different at endpoint between the two treatment-formulation groups. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased significantly less among olanzapine LAI-treated patients. Percentages of patients with potentially clinically significant changes in blood glucose and lipid concentrations were similar for the two treatments. Percentages of patients experiencing adverse events related to weight, diabetes, or dyslipidemia were also not significantly different between treatments. Metabolic changes in patients with schizophrenia appeared generally similar during treatment with oral olanzapine or olanzapine LAI.

Patient and Health Care Provider Perspectives on Long Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in Schizophrenia and the Introduction of Olanzapine Long-Acting Injection

Olanzapine long acting injection has joined risperidone and paliperidone as the second generation long acting antipsychotic injection options for treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Long acting injections are important alternatives to oral medications for patients who have difficulty adhering to daily or multiple daily medication administrations, yet may be underutilized or not well understood. Patient perceptions, adherence, and preferences are important issues for health care providers to address when discussing treatment options with their patients. Reviewed here are overall patient and health care provider attitudes and perceptions regarding long acting injections and the details of olanzapine long acting injectable, the newest agent, and how it will fit in the marketplace. In addition, efficacy, safety, dosing and use data regarding this newest long acting agent are reviewed and compared to other available long acting agents.