Efficacy of lurasidone across five symptom dimensions of schizophrenia: Pooled analysis of short-term, placebo-controlled studies

Objective:

To evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone for schizophrenia using an established five-factor model of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).

Methods:

Patient-level data were pooled from five randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week studies of lurasidone (fixed doses, 40–160 mg/d) for patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Changes in five established PANSS factors were assessed using mixed-model repeated measures analysis.

Results:

Compared with placebo (n = 496), lurasidone (n = 1029, dose groups pooled) significantly improved the PANSS total score at Week 6 (−22.6 vs. −12.8; P < 0.001; effect size, 0.45), as well as all factor scores (P < 0.001 for each): positive symptoms (−8.4 vs. −6.0; effect size, 0.43), negative symptoms (−5.2 vs. −3.3; effect size, 0.33), disorganized thought (−4.9 vs. −2.8; effect size, 0.42), hostility/excitement (−2.7 vs. −1.6; effect size, 0.31), and depression/anxiety (−3.2 vs. −2.3; effect size, 0.31). Separation from placebo occurred at Week 1 for the positive symptoms, disorganized thought, and hostility/excitement factors and at Week 2 for the other factors.

Conclusions:

In this pooled analysis of short-term studies in patients with acute schizophrenia, lurasidone demonstrated significant improvement for each of the five PANSS factor scores, indicating effectiveness across the spectrum of schizophrenia symptoms.

The Efficacy of Lurasidone on PANSS Subscales in Adolescent Patients with Schizophrenia: Results from a 6-week, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Study

Introduction

Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic that demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of adults with schizophrenia in the dose range of 37–148 mg/day.

Objective/Aims

The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in adolescent patients with schizophrenia.

Methods

Adolescents (13–17 years old) diagnosed with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to six weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 37 mg/day, 74 mg/day or placebo. Changes from baseline to week 6 in PANSS total and subscale (positive, negative, general psychopathology, excitability) scores were evaluated using mixed-model repeated-measures analysis.

Results

A total of 326 patients (mean age, 15.4 years) were randomized and received lurasidone 37 mg/day (n = 108), 74 mg/day (n = 106), or placebo (n = 112). The PANSS total score at week 6 demonstrated a placebo-adjusted, least-squares (LS) mean improvement of –8.0 (P < 0.001; effect size [ES], 0.51) for the 37 mg/day group and –7.7 (P < 0.001; ES = 0.48) for the 74 mg/day group. Placebo-adjusted LS mean change for lurasidone 37 mg/day and 74 mg/day, respectively, was –3.2 (P < 0.001; ES = 0.62) and –3.2 (P < 0.001; ES = 0.60) on the PANSS positive subscale, –1.7 (P = 0.011; ES = 0.41) and –1.6 (P = 0.022; ES = 0.35) on the PANSS negative subscale, –2.8 (P = 0.012; ES = 0.38) and –2.8 (P = 0.011; ES = 0.37) on the PANSS general psychopathology subscale, and –1.1 (P = 0.016; ES = 0.36) and –1.8 (P < 0.001; ES = 0.53) on the PANSS excitability subscale.

Conclusions

In adolescent patients with schizophrenia, lurasidone (37 mg/day and 74 mg/day) demonstrated statistically significant efficacy and clinically meaningful improvement across a wide spectrum of symptoms associated with schizophrenia. Sponsored by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01911429.

Disclosure of interest

Dr Correll reports being a consultant and/or advisor for Alkermes, Forum Pharmaceuticals Inc., Gerson Lehrman Group, IntraCellular Therapies, Janssen/J&J, Lundbeck, Medavante, Medscape, Otsuka, Pfizer Inc, ProPhase, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., Supernus, Takeda, and Teva providing expert testimony for Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Janssen, and Otsuka serving on a Data Safety Monitoring Board for Lundbeck and Pfizer Inc and receiving grant support from Takeda. Drs Goldman, Cucchiaro, Deng and Loebel are employees of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Safety and Effectiveness of Long-Term Treatment with Lurasidone in Older Adults with Bipolar Depression: Post-Hoc Analysis of a 6-Month, Open-Label Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 6 months of treatment with lurasidone in older adults with a diagnosis of bipolar I depression.

DESIGN

Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, 6-month, open-label extension study.

SETTING

Outpatient.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged 55 to 75 years with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of bipolar I depression who had completed 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (1 study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (2 studies).

INTERVENTION

Flexible doses of lurasidone, 20 to 120 mg/day, either as monotherapy, or adjunctive with lithium or valproate.

MEASUREMENTS

Effectiveness was assessed using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; change from open-label-baseline to month-6, observed case analysis).

RESULTS

A total of 141 older adults entered the extension study (monotherapy, N = 55; 39%; adjunctive therapy, N = 86; 61%). At the end of 6 months of open-label treatment with lurasidone, as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, minimal changes were observed in the older adult sample in mean weight (-1.0 kg and -0.4 kg, respectively); and median total cholesterol (-2.0 mg/dL and +6.0 md/dL, respectively), triglycerides (+2.5 mg/dL and +6.0 mg/dL, respectively), and HbA1c (0.0% and -0.1%, respectively). Patients treated with 6 months of lurasidone showed a mean improvement on the MADRS in both the monotherapy (-6.2) and adjunctive therapy (-6.7) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of these post-hoc analyses found that up to 7.5 months of lurasidone treatment for bipolar depression in older adults was associated with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters, with low rates of switching to hypomania or mania, and was well tolerated. The antidepressant effectiveness of lurasidone in this age group was maintained over the 6-month treatment period.

Lurasidone in combination with lithium or valproate for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder

Lurasidone (DS-RAn) has demonstrated efficacy in the acute treatment of bipolar depression, both as monotherapy, and as combination therapy with lithium or valproate. To evaluate the recurrence prevention efficacy of lurasidone for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder, patients received up to 20 weeks of open-label lurasidone (20-80mg/d) combined with lithium or valproate during an initial stabilization phase. A total of 496 patients met stabilization criteria and were randomized to 28 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-80mg/d) or placebo, in combination with lithium or valproate. Based on a Cox proportional hazard model, treatment with lurasidone reduced the probability of recurrence of any mood episode by 29% (primary endpoint), however, the reduction did not achieve statistical significance. Probability of recurrence on lurasidone was significantly lower in patients with an index episode of depression (HR, 0.57; P=0.039), in patients with any index episode who were not rapid-cycling (HR, 0.69; P=0.046), and when recurrence was based on MADRS, YMRS, or CGI-BP-S severity criteria (HR, 0.53; P=0.025; sensitivity analysis). Long-term treatment with lurasidone combined with lithium or valproate was found to be safe and well-tolerated, with minimal effects on weight or metabolic parameters.

Efficacy and Safety of Lurasidone in Adolescents with Schizophrenia: A 6-Week, Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in acutely symptomatic adolescent patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Patients aged 13-17 years were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind, fixed-dose lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day) or placebo. Primary and key secondary efficacy measures were change from baseline to week 6 in the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score, respectively, using mixed model for repeated measurement (MMRM) analysis. The proportion of patients achieving treatment response at endpoint, based on ≥20% reduction in PANSS total score, was analyzed using a logistic regression model.

RESULTS

Least-squares (LS) mean change in PANSS total score from baseline to week 6 was -18.6 with lurasidone 40 mg/day (N = 108; p < 0.001 vs. placebo; effect size = 0.51), -18.3 with lurasidone 80 mg/day (N = 106; p < 0.001 vs. placebo; effect size = 0.48), and -10.5 with placebo (N = 112). Similarly, LS mean change in CGI-S score from baseline to week 6 was significantly greater with lurasidone 40 mg/day (-1.0; p < 0.001; effect size = 0.49) and 80 mg/day (-0.9; p = 0.0015; effect size = 0.45) compared with placebo (-0.5). A significantly higher proportion of patients met responder criteria on lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/day versus placebo (63.9% and 65.1% vs. 42.0%; p < 0.001 for both comparisons). The rate of study discontinuation was 10.3% in lurasidone-treated and 17.7% in placebo-treated patients. The most common adverse events (incidence ≥5% in either lurasidone dose group and at least twice the rate of placebo) for lurasidone 40 mg/day, 80 mg/day, and placebo, respectively, were nausea (12.7%, 14.4%, and 2.7%), somnolence (9.1%, 11.5%, and 5.4%), akathisia (9.1%, 8.7%, and 1.8%), vomiting (8.2%, 6.7%, and 1.8%), and sedation (5.5%, 1.9%, and 1.8%). Treatment with lurasidone was not associated with clinically meaningful effects on body weight, lipids, measures of glycemic control, or prolactin.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 6-week study, lurasidone at doses of 40 and 80 mg/day demonstrated statistically significant and clinically meaningful symptom improvement in adolescent patients with schizophrenia. Lurasidone was generally well tolerated with few effects on weight and metabolic parameters, consistent with findings in adult patients with schizophrenia.

Lurasidone Adjunctive to Lithium or Valproate for Prevention of Recurrence in Patients with Bipolar I Disorder

Introduction

Information is not available on the maintenance efficacy of lurasidone in bipolar disorder.

Objectives/aims

To evaluate the recurrence prevention efficacy of lurasidone plus lithium (Li) or valproate (VPA) for the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder.

Methods

Patients with bipolar I disorder received up to 20 weeks of open-label lurasidone (20–80 mg/d) plus Li or VPA. Patients who achieved consistent clinical stability were randomized to 28 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20–80 mg/d) or placebo, plus Li or VPA.

Results

A total of 496 patients met stabilization criteria and were randomized to adjunctive lurasidone vs. placebo. Fewer patients in the lurasidone group had recurrence of any mood episode compared with the placebo group, with a hazard ratio of 0.71 (P = 0.078). In pre-planned secondary analyses, recurrence rates were significantly lower for the lurasidone group treated with a modal open-label dose of 80 mg/d (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; P = 0.020); when patients presented with an index episode of depression (HR = 0.57; P = 0.039); and when outcome was time-to-all-cause discontinuation (HR = 0.72; P = 0.034), or time-to-recurrence based on symptom severity criteria (HR = 0.53; P = 0.025).

Conclusions

In patients stabilized on lurasidone plus Li or VPA, continued treatment was associated with non-significant reduction in risk of recurrence of any mood disorder (primary). Consistent with dose-response effects observed during acute treatment of bipolar depression, risk of recurrence on lurasidone was significantly reduced after open-label treatment with the 80 mg/d dose, and in the 20–80 mg/d dose in patients presenting with an index episode of depression.

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01358357.

Sponsored by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Disclosure of interest

Drs. Pikalov, Cucchiaro, Mao, and Loebel are employees of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals IncDr. Calabrese has received research support from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Cleveland Foundation, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lundbeck, NARSAD, Repligen, Stanley Medical Research Institute, Takeda, and Wyeth. Dr. Calabrese consulted to or served on advisory boards of Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cephalon, Dainippon Sumitomo, Elan, EPI-Q, Inc., Forest, France Foundation, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman LaRoche, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Lundbeck, Merck, Neurosearch, OrthoMcNeil, Otsuka, Pfizer, Repligen, Servier, Solvay, Sunovion, Supernus, Synosia, Takeda, Teva, and Wyeth. Dr. Calabrese has provided CME lectures supported by AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, France Foundation, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Sanofi-Aventis, Schering-Plough, Pfizer, Solvay, Sunovion, and Wyeth.

Long-term use of lurasidone in patients with bipolar disorder: safety and effectiveness over 2 years of treatment

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a chronic illness with a 2-year recurrence rate of approximately 50% among individuals receiving treatment in the community. The aim of this 18-month, open-label, continuation study was to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in patients who initially presented with a major depressive episode associated with bipolar disorder, and who had completed at least 6 months of initial treatment with lurasidone.

METHODS

Patients with bipolar I depression were enrolled in one of three 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (monotherapy with lurasidone, 1 study; adjunctive therapy with lurasidone; and lithium or valproate, 2 studies). Study completers were eligible for a 6-month, open-label extension study of lurasidone utilizing flexible daily doses of 20-120 mg; extension completers were then eligible for an additional 18 months of continuation treatment with flexible, once-daily doses of lurasidone in the range of 20-80 mg. Concomitant therapy with mood stabilizers was permitted throughout the open-label extension and continuation studies.

RESULTS

A total of 1199 patients entered, and 941 (78.5%) completed initial, double-blind, acute treatment, of whom 817/941 (86.8%) entered, and 559 (68.4%) completed the 6-month extension study; 122/559 patients (21.8%) entered the 18-month continuation study, of whom 19.7% of discontinued, including 6.6% due to adverse events and 1.6% due to insufficient efficacy. The mean dose of lurasidone during the 18-month continuation study was 61.8 mg/day, and the modal dose was 60 mg/day. Mean change in weight, from acute baseline to 18-month continuation endpoint was +0.8 kg (completers, n = 55); median changes in cholesterol and triglycerides were -3.0 mg/dL and +26.0 mg/dL, respectively. Based on a Kaplan-Meier analysis, the probability of relapse during 18 months of continuation treatment with lurasidone was estimated to be 18.3% in the monotherapy group and 29.1% in the adjunctive therapy group. Improvement in global illness severity was also maintained during 18 months of continuation therapy (CGI-S at continuation baseline, 2.1; 18-month completers, 1.7; LOCF-endpoint, 1.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Up to 2 years of treatment with lurasidone was safe and well tolerated in this bipolar disorder population presenting with an index episode of depression. Improvement in depressive symptoms was maintained in the majority of patients treated with lurasidone, with relatively low rates of relapse, and with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

Lurasidone Dose Escalation in Early Nonresponding Patients With Schizophrenia: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of dose increase in adult patients with schizophrenia who demonstrate inadequate initial response to standard-dose lurasidone and to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose lurasidone in adult patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted between May 2013 and June 2014, hospitalized patients with acute schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria) were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment with lurasidone 20 mg/d (n = 101), lurasidone 80 mg/d (n = 199), or placebo (n = 112). Nonresponders to lurasidone 80 mg/d (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] score decrease < 20%) at 2 weeks were re-randomized to lurasidone 80 mg/d or 160 mg/d for the remaining 4 weeks of the study. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to week 6 in PANSS total score.

RESULTS

In nonresponders to lurasidone 80 mg/d (n = 95), dose increase to 160 mg/d at week 2 significantly reduced PANSS total score at week 6 study endpoint compared with continuing 80 mg/d (-16.6 vs -8.9; P < .05 [effect size = 0.52]). While a comparable magnitude of improvement was observed in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score from week 2 to week 6 endpoint for lurasidone 160 mg/d versus 80 mg/d (-1.0 vs -0.6; effect size = 0.44), the difference was not statistically significant (P = .052). Patients receiving lurasidone 20 mg/d did not demonstrate significant improvement compared with placebo at week 6 in PANSS total (-17.6 vs -14.5; P = .26) or CGI-S (-0.93 vs -0.73; P = .17) scores. Few dose-related adverse effects associated with lurasidone were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult patients with schizophrenia demonstrating nonresponse to 2 weeks of treatment with lurasidone 80 mg/d, dose increase to 160 mg/d resulted in significant symptom improvement compared with continuing lurasidone 80 mg/d. Lurasidone 20 mg/d was not associated with significant improvement in psychotic symptoms in adult patients with schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01821378.

Efficacy of Lurasidone in Adults Aged 55 Years and Older With Bipolar Depression: Post Hoc Analysis of 2 Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Studies

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in patients aged 55 years and older with bipolar depression.

METHODS

A post hoc analysis was performed on the older adult subgroup (n = 142) of outpatients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar I depression in 2 placebo-controlled, 6-week, randomized, double-blind studies conducted from 2009-2012: a monotherapy study comparing fixed flexible-dose ranges of lurasidone 20-60 mg/d or 80-120 mg/d with placebo and an adjunctive therapy study comparing flexible doses of lurasidone 20-120 mg/d with placebo adjunctive to either lithium or valproate. The primary endpoint was mean change at week 6 in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score.

RESULTS

In the randomized sample, the proportion of older adults was 88/505 (17.4%) in the monotherapy study and 54/348 (15.5%) in the adjunctive therapy study. In the older adult subgroup in the monotherapy study, mean change at week 6 in the MADRS was significantly greater for lurasidone versus placebo (-14.8 vs -7.1; P = .003; effect size, 0.83; pooled doses), and in the adjunctive therapy study, mean change for lurasidone was not significantly different from placebo (-13.9 vs -11.1; P = .398; effect size, 0.26). Discontinuation rates due to adverse events for lurasidone versus placebo were similar for the monotherapy (6.8% vs 6.9%) and adjunctive therapy (3.8% vs 7.1%) studies. Lurasidone had minimal effects on metabolic laboratory values.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of these post hoc analyses, which assessed the efficacy of lurasidone in older adults with bipolar disorder, found that monotherapy was significantly effective while adjunctive therapy was not associated with significant improvement. Both monotherapy and adjunctive therapy with lurasidone were safe and well-tolerated in this older adult population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00868699, NCT00868452.

The development of lurasidone for bipolar depression

Bipolar disorder is a chronic, recurrent illness that ranks among the top 10 causes of disability in the developed world. As the illness progresses, major depressive episodes increasingly predominate. However, few treatment options are available that have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of bipolar depression, either as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in combination with mood stabilizers. Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic drug that was initially developed for the treatment of schizophrenia. Since no previous atypical antipsychotic development program had proceeded directly from work on schizophrenia to bipolar depression, the decision to focus on this indication represented an innovation in central nervous system drug development and was designed to address a clinically significant unmet need. The current review summarizes key results of a clinical development program undertaken to characterize the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in patients diagnosed with bipolar depression. Lurasidone is currently the only treatment for bipolar depression approved in the United States as both a monotherapy and an adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate. The approval of lurasidone expands available treatment options for patients with bipolar depression and provides a therapy with an overall favorable risk-benefit profile.

LURASIDONE IN THE LONG-TERM TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH BIPOLAR DISORDER: A 24-WEEK OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION STUDY

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of 6 months of open-label, uncontrolled extension treatment with lurasidone in patients with a diagnosis of bipolar depression who completed 6 weeks of acute treatment.

METHODS

Patients completing 6 weeks of double-blind placebo-controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (one study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (two studies), were treated for 6 months with flexible doses of lurasidone, 20-120 mg/day, in an open-label, uncontrolled extension study (N = 813; monotherapy, 38.9%; adjunctive therapy, 61.1%). Changes in safety parameters were calculated from double-blind, acute-phase baseline to month 6 of the extension phase, using a last observation carried forward (LOCF endpoint) analysis.

RESULTS

Five hundred fifty-nine of 817 (68.4%) patients completed the extension study. In the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, 6.9 and 9.0%, respectively, discontinued due to an adverse event. For the monotherapy and adjunctive therapy groups, respectively, changes from double-blind baseline to month 6 were +0.8 and +0.9 kg for weight (mean), 0.0 and +2.0 mg/dL for total cholesterol (median), +5.0 and +5.0 mg/dL for triglycerides (median), -1.0 and 0.0 mg/dL for glucose (median); -22.6 and -21.7 for Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; mean); whereas change from open-label baseline to month 6 were +0.85 and +0.88 kg for weight (mean), and -6.9 and -6.5 for MADRS (mean).

CONCLUSIONS

Six months of treatment with open-label lurasidone was safe and well tolerated with minimal effect on weight and metabolic parameters; continued improvement in depressive symptoms was observed.

Lurasidone for the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder With Mixed Features: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

Accumulating evidence indicates that manic symptoms below the threshold for hypomania (mixed features) are common in individuals with major depressive disorder. This form of depression is often severe and is associated with an increased risk for recurrence, suicide attempts, substance abuse, and functional disability. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in major depressive disorder with mixed features.

METHODS

Patients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for major depressive disorder who presented with two or three protocol-defined manic symptoms were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with either lurasidone at 20-60 mg/day (N=109) or placebo (N=100). Changes from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score (MADRS; primary outcome measure) and Clinical Global Impressions severity subscale score (CGI-S; key secondary outcome measure) were evaluated using a mixed model for repeated-measures analysis.

RESULTS

Lurasidone significantly improved depressive symptoms and overall illness severity, assessed by least squares mean change at week 6 in the MADRS and CGI-S scores: -20.5 compared with -13.0 (effect size, 0.80) and -1.8 compared with -1.2 (effect size, 0.60), respectively. Significant improvement in manic symptoms, assessed by the Young Mania Rating Scale, was also observed, in addition to other secondary efficacy endpoints. Rates of discontinuation due to adverse events were low. The most common adverse events were nausea (6.4% and 2.0% in the lurasidone and placebo groups, respectively) and somnolence (5.5% and 1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone was effective and well tolerated in this study involving patients with major depressive disorder associated with subthreshold hypomanic symptoms (mixed features).

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study of lurasidone for the maintenance of efficacy in patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of lurasidone as maintenance treatment for schizophrenia.

METHOD

Adults experiencing an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia initially received 12-24 weeks of open-label treatment with lurasidone (40-80 mg/d, flexibly dosed). Patients who maintained clinical stability for ⩾12 weeks were randomized in double-blind fashion to placebo or lurasidone (40-80 mg/d, flexibly dosed) for an additional 28-week treatment period. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to relapse (based on Kaplan-Meier survival analysis).

RESULTS

A total of 676 patients enrolled in the open-label phase; 285 met protocol-specified stabilization criteria and were randomized to lurasidone (N=144) or placebo (N=141). During the open-label phase, mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score decreased from 90.1 to 54.4 in patients who met clinical stability criteria and were randomized. In the double-blind phase, lurasidone significantly delayed time to relapse compared with placebo (log-rank test, p=0.039), reflecting a 33.7% reduction in risk of relapse (Cox hazard ratio (95% confidence interval), 0.663 (0.447-0.983); p=0.041). Probability of relapse at the double-blind week 28 endpoint (based on Kaplan-Meier analysis) was 42.2% in the lurasidone group and 51.2% in the placebo group. Minimal changes in weight, lipid, glucose, and prolactin were observed throughout the study.

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter, placebo-controlled, randomized withdrawal study demonstrated the efficacy of lurasidone for the maintenance treatment of patients with schizophrenia.

Recovery in bipolar depression: Post-hoc analysis of a placebo-controlled lurasidone trial followed by a long-term continuation study

BACKGROUND

In this post-hoc analysis, rates of remission and recovery were evaluated in patients with bipolar depression treated with lurasidone.

METHODS

Outpatients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar I depression, were randomized to 6 weeks of once-daily, double-blind treatment with lurasidone 20-60mg, lurasidone 80-120mg or placebo, followed by a 6-month, open-label, flexible-dose, lurasidone continuation study. Recovery was defined as meeting criteria for combined symptomatic remission (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score ≤12) and functional remission (all Sheehan Disability Scale domain scores ≤3) sustained for at least 3 months in the 6-month continuation study.

RESULTS

A significantly higher proportion of lurasidone-treated patients met criteria for combined symptomatic remission and functional remission (33.3%, 91/273) compared to the placebo group (21.0%, 30/143, p<0.05, NNT=9) at the 6-week study endpoint. In the 6-month continuation study, the proportion of lurasidone-treated patients achieving sustained recovery was 60.7% (85/140) and 44.9% (31/69), for patients who continued lurasidone treatment and who switched from placebo to lurasidone, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

The definition of recovery used has not been previously validated and the analysis was post hoc. Lack of a control group in the continuation study limits data interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

Recovery in patients with bipolar depression was assessed based on rates of combined symptomatic and functional remission sustained over time. A majority of patients initially treated with lurasidone in the acute phase achieved recovery status in the continuation study. Treatment with lurasidone (vs. placebo) earlier in the course of the bipolar depressive episode increased the likelihood of subsequent recovery.

Treatment of early non-response in patients with schizophrenia: assessing the efficacy of antipsychotic dose escalation

BACKGROUND

Early non-response to antipsychotic treatment in patients with schizophrenia has been shown in multiple studies to predict poor response at short-term trial endpoint. Therefore, strategies to address the challenge of non-improvement early in the course of treatment are needed. A novel trial design was developed to assess the potential utility of antipsychotic dose escalation in patients with an inadequate initial treatment response. This design was embedded in a study intended to assess the efficacy of low dose lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia. The purpose of this report is to describe the background, rationale and design of this study that included a novel method for the assessment of the potential for dose-response in early non-responding patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS/DESIGN

In this 6-week, international, multicenter, double-blind trial, eligible adults with acute schizophrenia were randomized to receive fixed doses of lurasidone 20 mg/day, 80 mg/day (active control), or placebo in a 1:2:1 ratio. Patients initially randomized to lurasidone 80 mg/day who did not have a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score improvement ≥ 20% at Week 2 were re-randomized on a 1:1 basis to receive either lurasidone 80 mg/day or lurasidone 160 mg/day for the remainder of the trial. All other groups remained on their initially assigned treatment. The formal primary objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose lurasidone (20 mg/day) compared to placebo; secondary objectives included evaluating the efficacy of lurasidone 80 mg/day versus 160 mg/day in early non-responders, and evaluating the efficacy of lurasidone in all subjects initially randomized to 80 mg/day versus placebo.

DISCUSSION

Since a lack of early improvement predicts poor response to short-term antipsychotic treatment in patients with schizophrenia, several treatment strategies have been proposed to enhance treatment outcome in early non-responders. A novel clinical trial design involving a placebo arm and re-randomization of early non-responders to increased or maintained antipsychotic dose was developed. The study design described in this report provides a robust method to assess the value of antipsychotic dose escalation in patients with schizophrenia who demonstrate poor initial treatment response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01821378; initial registration March 22, 2013.

Lurasidone in the treatment of bipolar depression with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features: post hoc analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features are prevalent in patients with bipolar depression and are associated with more severe and complex illness, including increased risk for suicide attempts, higher switch to mania during antidepressant therapy, and a higher rate of recurrence. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with bipolar depression presenting with mixed features.

METHOD

Patients with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of major depressive episode associated with bipolar I disorder, with or without rapid cycling, and with a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score ≥ 20 and a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score ≤ 12 were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind, once-daily treatment with lurasidone 20-60 mg, lurasidone 80-120 mg, or placebo. The presence of mixed features was defined as a YMRS score ≥ 4 at study baseline. Efficacy analyses included change in MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 (the primary outcome in the original study, conducted between April 2009 and February 2012).

RESULTS

At baseline, mixed features were present in 56% of patients (lurasidone, n = 182/323; placebo, n = 90/162). Treatment with lurasidone (vs placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in MADRS scores in the mixed features group (-15.7 vs -10.9; P = .001; week 6; mixed model for repeated measures [MMRM]; effect size, 0.48) and in the group without mixed features (-15.2 vs -10.8; P = .002; week 6; MMRM; effect size, 0.48). Rates of protocol-defined treatment-emergent hypomania or mania were similar for patients with mixed features (lurasidone, 2.2%; placebo, 3.2%) and without mixed features (lurasidone, 3.4%; placebo, 0.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone was found in this post hoc analysis to be efficacious in the treatment of patients with bipolar depression who present with mixed features (assessed cross-sectionally at study baseline). No increased risk of treatment-emergent mania was observed in either group.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00868699.

Lurasidone monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

METHOD

Patients were randomly assigned to receive double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-60 mg/day [N=166] or 80-120 mg/day [N=169]) or placebo (N=170) for 6 weeks. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively.

RESULTS

Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores at week 6 for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) compared with placebo (-10.7). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-1.8; effect size=0.61) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-1.7; effect size=0.50) compared with placebo (-1.1). Both lurasidone groups also experienced significant improvements compared with placebo in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were similar in the 20-60 mg/day (6.6%), 80-120 mg/day (5.9%), and placebo (6.5%) groups. The most frequent adverse events associated with lurasidone were nausea, headache, akathisia, and somnolence. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed with lurasidone.

CONCLUSION

Monotherapy with lurasidone in the dosage range of 20-120 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression. Lurasidone was well tolerated, with few changes in weight or metabolic parameters.

Clinical assessment of lurasidone benefit and risk in the treatment of bipolar I depression using number needed to treat, number needed to harm, and likelihood to be helped or harmed

BACKGROUND

Prior to recent FDA approval of lurasidone for treatment of bipolar depression there were only two approved treatments for this condition (quetiapine and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination), and these were as likely to provide therapeutic benefit as adverse effects. We assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of lurasidone for major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder, using number needed to treat (NNT, for benefits), number needed to harm (NNH, for harms), and likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH, ratio of NNH to NNT, for trade-offs between benefits vs. harms).

METHODS

Data was collected from two 6-week multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexibly-dosed acute bipolar I depression studies, one using lurasidone monotherapy at 20-60mg/d or 80-120mg/d, and the other using lurasidone 20-120mg/d adjunctive to lithium or valproate. The NNT or NNH was calculated for lurasidone vs. placebo for the following dichotomous outcomes: response (≥50% reduction from baseline on Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score); remission (final MADRS total score ≤12); discontinuation due to an adverse event (AE); weight gain ≥7% from baseline; incidence of spontaneously reported AEs; and incidence of total cholesterol ≥240mg/dl, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥160mg/dl, fasting triglycerides ≥200mg/dl and glucose ≥126mg/dl post-baseline.

RESULTS

NNT vs. placebo for response was 5 for lurasidone monotherapy (both dose ranges) and 7 for adjunctive therapy. NNT vs. placebo for remission for lurasidone monotherapy was 6 for 20-60mg/d and 7 for 80-120mg/d and 7 for adjunctive lurasidone. NNH vs. placebo for discontinuation due to an AE for lurasidone monotherapy was 642 for 20-60mg/d and -181 for 80-120mg/d, and for adjunctive lurasidone was -54 (negative NNH denotes an advantage for lurasidone). Lurasidone was not associated with any clinically meaningful mean weight or metabolic changes compared to placebo; NNH vs. placebo for weight gain ≥7% was 29 for 20-60mg/d and 5550 for 80-120mg/d and 42 for adjunctive lurasidone. The three most frequently occurring AEs with the largest difference in incidence for lurasidone vs. placebo were nausea, akathisia, and somnolence, with NNH values for lurasidone vs. placebo ranging from 11 (nausea with lurasidone monotherapy 80-120mg/d) to 130 (somnolence with lurasidone monotherapy 20-60mg/d). LHH was substantially and consistently >1 (indicating benefit being more likely than harm) when contrasting response or remission vs. AEs or weight gain.

LIMITATIONS

Additional studies, including longer-term and open-label, "real world" data is needed to confirm the results reported here.

CONCLUSIONS

NNT, NNH, and LHH help quantify relative benefits (efficacy) and harms (side effects), thus placing lurasidone findings in research studies into clinical perspective. Lurasidone, compared to other treatments approved for bipolar depression, yielded comparable benefits (all had single-digit NNT vs. placebo for response or remission), and less risk of harm (double-digit or greater NNHs with lurasidone compared to single-digit NNHs for sedation with quetiapine and for ≥7% weight gain with olanzapine-fluoxetine combination), and thus a substantially more favorable LHH (> or >>1) with lurasidone monotherapy and adjunctive therapy, compared to quetiapine and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (LHH<or ~1).

Lurasidone as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate for the treatment of bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE Few studies have been reported that support the efficacy of adjunctive therapy for patients with bipolar I depression who have had an insufficient response to monotherapy with mood-stabilizing agents. The authors investigated the efficacy of lurasidone, a novel antipsychotic agent, as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate for the treatment of bipolar I depression. METHOD Patients were randomly assigned to receive 6 weeks of double-blind adjunctive treatment with lurasidone (N=183) or placebo (N=165), added to therapeutic levels of either lithium or valproate. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively. RESULTS Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total score at week 6 compared with the placebo group (-17.1 versus -13.5; effect size=0.34). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores compared with placebo (-1.96 versus -1.51; effect size=0.36) as well as significantly greater improvement in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were 6.0% and 7.9% in the lurasidone and placebo groups, respectively. Adverse events most frequently reported for lurasidone were nausea, somnolence, tremor, akathisia, and insomnia. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed during treatment with lurasidone. CONCLUSIONS In patients with bipolar I depression, treatment with lurasidone adjunctive to lithium or valproate significantly improved depressive symptoms and was generally well tolerated.

Effect of lurasidone on neurocognitive performance in patients with schizophrenia: a short-term placebo- and active-controlled study followed by a 6-month double-blind extension

This double-blind study evaluated change in cognitive performance and functional capacity in lurasidone and quetiapine XR-treated schizophrenia patients over a 6-week, placebo-controlled study, followed by a 6-month, double-blind extension. Cognitive performance and functional capacity were assessed with the CogState computerized cognitive battery and the UPSA-B. Analyses were conducted for all subjects, as well as the subsample whose test scores met prespecified validity criteria. No statistically significant differences were found for change in the composite neurocognitive score for lurasidone (80 mg/day and 160 mg/day) groups, quetiapine XR and placebo in the full sample at week 6. For the evaluable sample (N = 267), lurasidone 160 mg was superior to both placebo and quetiapine on the neurocognitive composite, while lurasidone 80 mg, quetiapine XR, and placebo did not differ. UPSA-B scores were superior to placebo at 6 weeks for all treatments. In the double-blind extension study, analysis of the full sample showed significantly better cognitive performance in the lurasidone (40-160 mg) group compared to the quetiapine XR (200-800 mg) group at both 3 and 6 months. Cognitive and UPSA-B total scores were significantly correlated at baseline and for change over time. This is the first study to date where the investigational treatment was superior to placebo on both cognitive assessments and a functional coprimary measure at 6 weeks, as well as demonstrated superiority to an active comparator on cognitive assessments at 6 weeks and at 6 months of extension study treatment. These findings require replication, but are not due to practice effects, because of the placebo and active controls.

Effectiveness of lurasidone vs. quetiapine XR for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: a 12-month, double-blind, noninferiority study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relapse prevention efficacy of lurasidone compared with quetiapine XR (QXR) in adults patients with schizophrenia.

METHOD

This double-blind study evaluated the relapse prevention efficacy of 12 months of flexible-dose treatment with lurasidone (40-160 mg/day) compared with QXR (200-800 mg/day), in outpatients with an acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia who had recently completed a 6-week placebo-controlled trial of treatment with either lurasidone or QXR. The primary endpoint, time-to-relapse, was analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model in this noninferiority trial.

RESULTS

The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the probability of relapse over 12 months was 23.7% for subjects receiving lurasidone vs. 33.6% for QXR. The hazard ratio [95% CI] for probability of relapse was 0.728 [0.410, 1.295] (log-rank p=0.280). Since the upper limit of the hazard ratio (1.295) was smaller than the prespecified noninferiority margin (1.93), noninferiority of lurasidone compared with QXR was demonstrated in this study. The probability of hospitalization at 12 months was lower for the lurasidone group compared with the QXR group (9.8% vs. 23.1%; log-rank p=0.049). A significantly higher proportion of lurasidone subjects achieved remission at study endpoint compared with the QXR group (61.9% vs. 46.3%; p=0.043). Discontinuation rates due to AEs were similar for lurasidone and QXR (7% vs. 5%). Treatment with lurasidone was not associated with clinically significant changes in weight or metabolic parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

Twelve months of treatment with lurasidone met noninferiority criteria, and was associated with higher rates of remission, and reduced risk of hospitalization compared with QXR. No clinically significant effects on weight or metabolic parameters were observed during maintenance treatment with lurasidone.

Lurasidone for the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia: a 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled study

Despite the availability of established antipsychotic agents for the treatment of schizophrenia, continued unmet needs exist for effective medications with lower adverse-effect burden. The present study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatment with the atypical antipsychotic lurasidone for patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Patients were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 40 mg/day, 80 mg/day, or 120 mg/day, or placebo. Changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores were evaluated using mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis. Vital signs, laboratory parameters, extrapyramidal symptoms, and electrocardiogram were assessed. Treatment with lurasidone 80 mg/day resulted in significantly greater improvement in PANSS total score compared with placebo (-23.4 versus -17.0; p < 0.05) at study endpoint (MMRM); lurasidone 40 mg/day and 120 mg/day achieved clinically meaningful overall PANSS score reductions from baseline (-19.2 and -20.5), but not significant separation from placebo. Differences between all lurasidone groups and placebo for changes in laboratory parameters and electrocardiographic measures were minimal. Weight gain ≥ 7% occurred in 8.2% of patients receiving lurasidone and 3.2% receiving placebo. Modest increases in prolactin (median increase, 0.7 ng/mL) and extrapyramidal symptoms were observed following treatment with lurasidone compared with placebo. Akathisia was the most commonly reported adverse event with lurasidone (17.6%, versus 3.1% with placebo). In this study, in which a large placebo response was observed, lurasidone 80 mg/day, but not 40 mg/day or 120 mg/day, was statistically superior to placebo in treating acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia. All lurasidone doses were generally well tolerated.

Effectiveness of lurasidone for patients with schizophrenia following 6 weeks of acute treatment with lurasidone, olanzapine, or placebo: a 6-month, open-label, extension study

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of lurasidone, a new atypical antipsychotic agent, in the longer-term treatment of schizophrenia (DSM-IV). Persistence of symptom improvement was assessed as a secondary outcome.

METHOD

Patients who completed a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy of fixed doses of once-daily lurasidone (40 or 120 mg) or olanzapine 15 mg (to confirm assay sensitivity) were eligible to receive flexibly dosed lurasidone 40 to 120 mg/d in this 6-month, open-label extension study (conducted from March 2008 to December 2009). Assessments of safety and tolerability were conducted at open-label baseline, at day 10, and monthly thereafter.

RESULTS

Of 254 enrolled patients, 113 (44.5%) completed 6 months of open-label treatment. During the open-label study (month 6 observed cases), small decreases were observed in mean weight (-0.1 kg) and median lipid levels (total cholesterol, -6.5 mg/dL; low-density lipoprotein, 0.0 mg/dL; high-density lipoprotein, 0.0 mg/dL; triglycerides, -8.5 mg/dL). Patients previously treated with olanzapine (n = 69) experienced decrease in weight and improvement in lipid levels, whereas patients previously treated with lurasidone (n = 115) or placebo (n = 62) experienced minimal changes. No clinically meaningful changes were observed in median prolactin levels. The 2 most commonly reported adverse events were akathisia (13.0%) and insomnia (11.0%). Persistent antipsychotic efficacy of lurasidone was shown for patients who had previously received lurasidone, olanzapine, or placebo; further reductions from open-label baseline to final visit were observed in mean PANSS total score (-8.7) for all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Open-label treatment with flexibly dosed lurasidone (40-120 mg/d) was generally safe, well tolerated, and effective over a 6-month period in patients who had completed a preceding 6-week, double-blind study.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone 80 mg/day and 160 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of once-daily lurasidone (80 mg/day and 160 mg/day) in the treatment of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia.

METHODS

Participants, who were recently admitted inpatients with schizophrenia with an acute exacerbation of psychotic symptoms, were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of fixed-dose, double-blind treatment with lurasidone 80 mg (n=125), lurasidone 160 mg (n=121), quetiapine XR 600 mg (QXR-600 mg; n=119; active control included to test for assay sensitivity), or placebo (n=121), all dosed once daily in the evening. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of the change from Baseline to Week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (the primary efficacy measure) and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score (the key secondary efficacy measure).

RESULTS

Treatment with both doses of lurasidone or with QXR-600 mg was associated with significantly greater improvement at Week 6 on PANSS total score, PANSS positive and negative subscale scores, and CGI-S score compared with placebo. The endpoint responder rate (≥ 20% improvement in PANSS total score) was higher in subjects treated with lurasidone 80 mg (65%; p<0.001), lurasidone 160 mg (79%; p<0.001), and QXR-600 mg (79%; p<0.001) compared with placebo (41%). The proportion of patients experiencing ≥ 7% weight gain was 4% for each lurasidone group, 15% for the QXR-600 mg group, and 3% for the placebo group. Endpoint changes in levels of cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo, while the QXR-600 mg group showed a significant median increase compared with the placebo group in levels of cholesterol (p<0.001), LDL cholesterol (p<0.01), and triglycerides (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone 80 mg and 160 mg doses administered once-daily in the evening, were safe and effective treatments for subjects with acute schizophrenia, with increased response rates observed at the higher dose. Dose-related adverse effects were limited, and both doses were generally well-tolerated.

Effectiveness of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder switched from other antipsychotics: a randomized, 6-week, open-label study

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effectiveness of switching patients to lurasidone using 3 different dosing strategies.

METHOD

Adults with DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in a nonacute phase of illness were randomized to 1 of 3 lurasidone dosing regimens for the initial 2 weeks of the study: (1) 40 mg/d for 2 weeks; (2) 40 mg/d for 1 week, increased to 80 mg/d on day 8 for week 2 (up-titration group); and (3) 80 mg/d for 2 weeks. Lurasidone was then flexibly dosed (40-120 mg/d) for the subsequent 4 weeks of the study. The preswitch antipsychotic agent was tapered by day 7 to 50% of the original dose and discontinued by the end of week 2. Subjects were stratified on the basis of whether the primary preswitch antipsychotic medication was classified as "sedating" (olanzapine or quetiapine) or "nonsedating" (all other antipsychotics). The primary outcome measure was time to treatment failure, defined as any occurrence of insufficient clinical response, exacerbation of underlying disease, or discontinuation due to an adverse event. The study was conducted from June 2010 to May 2011.

RESULTS

Of 240 subjects treated in this study, 86 (35.8%) were treated with an antecedent sedating antipsychotic, and 154 (64.2%) were treated with an antecedent nonsedating antipsychotic. Nineteen (7.9%) of the 240 patients experienced treatment failure. No clinically relevant differences were observed when the 3 randomized switch groups were compared. Treatment failure rates were 10/86 (11.6%) versus 9/154 (5.8%) among subjects who had been receiving a preswitch sedating versus nonsedating antipsychotic medication, respectively. Consistent with prior studies of lurasidone, there was no signal for clinically relevant adverse changes in body weight, glucose, insulin, lipids, or prolactin; mean improvements in weight and lipids were observed. Movement disorder rating scales did not demonstrate meaningful changes. The incidence of akathisia as an adverse event was 12.5%; only 1 subject (0.4%) discontinued due to akathisia.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching patients to lurasidone can be successfully accomplished by starting at 40 mg/d for 2 weeks, or 80 mg/d for 2 weeks, or 40 mg/d for 1 week followed by 80 mg/d the second week.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01143077.

Double-blind comparison of the safety and efficacy of lurasidone and ziprasidone in clinically stable outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

BACKGROUND

Lurasidone is a new atypical antipsychotic agent with high affinity for D(2), 5-HT(2A) and 5-HT(7) receptors. The current study evaluated the safety and efficacy of lurasidone and ziprasidone in stable outpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

METHODS

Adult outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder that was chronic (≥6 months duration) and stable were randomized to 21 days of double-blind treatment with a fixed dose of lurasidone 120 mg once daily (N=150) or ziprasidone 80 mg BID (N=151). Changes from baseline in efficacy measures were evaluated using mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM) analyses.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients who discontinued from the study was similar for lurasidone and ziprasidone (32.5% vs. 30.7%); the proportion who discontinued due to adverse events was similar (10.4% vs. 11.1%). Treatment with lurasidone and ziprasidone was associated with a small endpoint reduction in median weight (-0.65 kg vs. -0.35 kg) and median total cholesterol (-6.4 vs. -4.4 mg/dL); no endpoint change was observed in median triglycerides (0.0 vs. 0.0 mg/dL). There were no clinically significant changes in other laboratory or ECG parameters. Improvement was observed on an MMRM analysis of the PANSS total score for lurasidone and ziprasidone at Week 1 (-4.1 vs. -1.6; P=0.020), Week 2, (-6.1 vs. -3.6; P=0.074), and Week 3 (-6.3 vs. -4.5; P=0.229).

CONCLUSION

In this double-blind, fixed-dose comparison of lurasidone 120 mg and ziprasidone 160 mg, treatment with lurasidone was well-tolerated and safe, and was not associated with clinically significant changes from baseline in weight, metabolic parameters, or QTc interval. Study limitations include the relatively short trial duration and lack of placebo control.

Lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and olanzapine-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

The study was designed to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of acute schizophrenia.

METHOD

Participants, who were recently admitted inpatients with schizophrenia with an acute exacerbation of psychotic symptoms, were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with 40 mg of lurasidone, 120 mg of lurasidone, 15 mg of olanzapine (included to test for assay sensitivity), or placebo, dosed once daily. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (as the primary efficacy measure) and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score (as the key secondary efficacy measure).

RESULTS

Treatment with both doses of lurasidone or with olanzapine was associated with significantly greater improvement at week 6 on PANSS total score, PANSS positive and negative subscale scores, and CGI-S score compared with placebo. There was no statistically significant difference in mean PANSS total or CGI-S change scores for the lurasidone groups compared with the olanzapine group. With responders defined as those with an improvement of at least 20% on the PANSS, endpoint responder rates were significant compared with placebo for olanzapine only. The incidence of akathisia was higher with 120 mg of lurasidone (22.9%) than with 40 mg of lurasidone (11.8%), olanzapine (7.4%), or placebo (0.9%). The proportion of patients experiencing ≥ 7% weight gain was 5.9% for the lurasidone groups combined, 34.4% for the olanzapine group, and 7.0% for the placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

Lurasidone was an effective treatment for patients with acute schizophrenia. Safety assessments indicated a higher frequency of adverse events associated with 120 mg/day of lurasidone compared with 40 mg/day.

Characteristics of the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery in a 29-site antipsychotic schizophrenia clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Project produced a battery of tests, the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB), designed to assess cognitive treatment effects in clinical trials of patients with schizophrenia. In validation studies, the MCCB demonstrated excellent reliability, minimal practice effects and significant correlations with measures of functional capacity. This study addresses whether the MCCB demonstrates these favorable characteristics when administered in the context of the type of large multi-site industry trial for which it was designed.

METHODS

In a clinical trial comparing risperidone and lurasidone, 323 clinically-stable outpatients with schizophrenia at 29 sites were assessed with MCCB at screening and a median of 15days later at baseline. A measure of functional capacity, the UCSD Performance-based Skills Assessment-Brief (UPSA-B) was administered at baseline.

RESULTS

All 323 (100%) patients had sufficient data for computing a composite score according to the MCCB criteria. The test-retest reliability of the MCCB composite score was excellent (ICC=0.88). The severity of cognitive impairment was T=24.7 (SD=12.1) at screening and T=26.7 (SD=12.4) at baseline. The MCCB composite score demonstrated a large correlation with the UPSA-B composite score (r=.60, df=304, p<.001). The practice effect on the composite score was small (z=0.18).

DISCUSSION

In the context of a 29-site antipsychotic trial in stable outpatients with schizophrenia, the MCCB is sensitive to cognitive deficits in all domains, demonstrates excellent test-retest reliability and small practice effects, and is strongly correlated with a leading measure of functional capacity.

Lurasidone in the treatment of acute schizophrenia: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Lurasidone is a novel psychotropic agent with high affinity for D(2) and 5-HT(2A) receptors, as well as for receptors implicated in the enhancement of cognition and mood and the reduction of negative symptoms (5-HT(7), 5-HT(1A), and alpha(2c)). The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of lurasidone in patients hospitalized for an acute exacerbation of DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia.

METHOD

Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with a fixed dose of lurasidone 80 mg (N = 90, 75.6% male, mean age = 39.7 years, mean baseline score on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale derived from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [BPRSd] = 55.1) or placebo (N = 90, 77.8% male, mean age = 41.9 years, mean BPRSd score = 56.1). The primary efficacy measure was the BPRSd. The study was conducted from May to December 2004.

RESULTS

At day 42, last-observation-carried-forward endpoint, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement compared to placebo on the BPRSd (least squares mean +/- SE = -8.9 +/- 1.3 vs. -4.2 +/- 1.4; p = .012), as well as on all secondary efficacy measures, including the PANSS total score (-14.1 +/- 2.1 vs. -5.5 +/- 2.2; p = .004) and the PANSS positive (-4.3 +/- 0.7 vs. -1.7 +/- 0.7; p = .006), negative (-2.9 +/- 0.5 vs. -1.3 +/- 0.5; p = .025), and general psychopathology (-7.0 +/- 1.1 vs. -2.7 +/- 1.2; p = .0061) subscales. Significant improvement was seen as early as day 3, based on BPRSd, PANSS, and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness assessments. Treatment with lurasidone was generally well tolerated and was not associated with adverse changes in metabolic or electrocardiogram parameters. There were no clinically significant differences between lurasidone and placebo in objective measures of extrapyramidal symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that the novel psychotropic agent lurasidone is a safe and effective treatment for patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

(ClinicalTrials.gov) Identifier: NCT00088634.

The development of the retinogeniculate pathways in normal and albino ferrets

The retinogeniculate pathways of normal and albino ferrets have been studied with horseradish peroxidase and tritiated proline used as axonal markers. The uncrossed retinogeniculate projection of adult albino ferrets is abnormally small and occupies only a fraction of the geniculate area normally occupied by uncrossed afferents. The crossed pathway is correspondingly expanded, occupying almost the entire nucleus. The geniculate laminae in the albino ferret are abnormal, showing abnormal fusions between layers receiving crossed input and abnormal discontinuities next to the small cell islands receiving uncrossed afferents. In early development, retinofugal fibres can be labelled within the optic tracts on the 28th intrauterine day and a few crossed fibres can be traced into the lateral geniculate nucleus. At this stage, the uncrossed component is extremely small in normal and albino animals and cannot be traced beyond the tract. By day 32 retinal fibres are invading the lateral geniculate nucleus bilaterally, the invasion by the crossed component being significantly more advanced than that by the uncrossed component. The uncrossed pathway of the albinos is already abnormal in terms of its size, in terms of the position it occupies in the optic tract, and in terms of its limited invasion of the lateral geniculate nucleus. The abnormally reduced size of the uncrossed component appears earlier than the abnormal segregation of the retinogeniculate terminals, suggesting that the primary action of the albino gene upon central visual pathways is prechiasmatic. At postnatal stages (41 days after conception and older) the normal, gradual withdrawal of the uncrossed fibres from the monocular segment, and the separation of crossed from uncrossed retinogeniculate terminal arbors is significantly delayed in the albinos. The uncrossed retinogeniculate terminals are abnormally sparse initially and become distributed in an abnormal, interrupted pattern as development proceeds. The abnormal pattern of geniculate lamination appears to be secondary to the abnormal distribution of retinogeniculate afferents.

The dorsal lateral geniculate nucleus of the normal ferret and its postnatal development

The anterograde transport of 3H proline and of horseradish peroxidase has been used to study the retinogeniculate pathway in normal adult ferrets and in young ferrets during postnatal development. the lateral geniculate nucleus in adults shows a characteristic "carnivore" pattern, with layers A, A1, C, C1, C2, and C3, and a medial interlaminar nucleus recognizable either cytoarchitectonically or on the basis ofth retinogeniculate innervation. In addition, there is a well-defined, rather large perigeniculate nucleus. At birth the lateral geniculate nucleus is unlaminated and essentially all parts are reached by afferents from both eyes. The crossed component is by far the larger. It extends from the optic tract medially well into the perigeniculate field, in contrast to the uncrossed component which barely reaches the perigeniculate field. During the first 3 postnatal days the uncrossed fibers restrict their arbors to a small posterior and medial region, the precursor of the biocular segment of the nucleus. The crossed fibers gradually retreat from the region within which the uncrossed fibers have concentrated. Between the fourth and eighth postnatal days the field occupied by the ipsilateral component expands again to form a major focus that will define lamina A1 and a minor focus that will define C1. At this stage the crossed and the uncrossed fibers overlap at the borders of lamina A1 and the whole region of lamina C1 is also occupied by arbors of the crossed component. The perigeniculate field becomes clearly distinguishable from the lateral geniculate nucleus and the medial interlaminar nucleus is becoming clearly recognizable between days 3 and 8. Between days 8 and 15 the cytoarchitectonic borders between layers A and A1 become clearly defined, but the retinogeniculate axons from each eye still extend across this border. These axons retreat into their appropriate lamina after the 15th postnatal day an the nucleus reaches its essentially adult structure by about the fourth postnatal week. Segregation of retinofugal axons in the C layers occurs after segregation in the A layers, but many of the cells within the C layers show signs of cytological maturity earlier than those of the A layers. The nucleus undergoes a series of migrations and changes of shape as the ipsilateral and contralateral components become segregated. Whereas in teh newborn the nucleus is roughly comma-shaped and on the lateral aspect of the dorsal thalamus, in the adult it is "L"-shaped and mainly on the posterior aspect of the dorsal thalamus.