Search

Aim: Previous studies conducted primarily in the USA and Europe have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone 20-120 mg/day for the treatment of bipolar I depression. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone monotherapy for the treatment of bipolar I depression among patients from diverse ethnic backgrounds, including those from Japan., Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to double-blind treatment for 6 weeks with lurasidone, 20-60 mg/day (n = 184) or 80-120 mg/day (n = 169), or placebo (n = 172). The primary end-point was change from baseline to Week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)., Results: Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores from baseline to Week 6 for the 20-60-mg/day group (-13.6; adjusted P = 0.007; effect size = 0.33), but not for the 80-120-mg/day group (-12.6; adjusted P = 0.057; effect size = 0.22) compared with placebo (-10.6). Treatment with lurasidone 20-60 mg/day also improved MADRS response rates, functional impairment, and anxiety symptoms. The most common adverse events associated with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Lurasidone treatments were associated with minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control., Conclusion: Monotherapy with once daily doses of lurasidone 20-60 mg, but not 80-120 mg, significantly reduced depressive symptoms and improved functioning in patients with bipolar I depression. Results overall were consistent with previous studies, suggesting that lurasidone 20-60 mg/day is effective and safe in diverse ethnic populations, including Japanese., (© 2020 The Authors Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Society of Psychiatry and Neurology.)

Introduction: This study was designed to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia among Asian patients., Methods: Patients (N = 281) with schizophrenia who had completed a randomized, double-blind (DB), 6-week comparison of lurasidone (40 and 80 mg/day) and placebo were enrolled in a 26-week extension study in which all patients received open-label (OL), flexible doses of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day). Effectiveness was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale., Results: Fifty-seven percent of patients completed the OL extension study; 16.7% discontinued early due to lack of effectiveness; and 10.3% due to adverse events. The most common adverse events were insomnia (11.3%), akathisia (11.0%), and nasopharyngitis (10.6%). Adverse events related to weight gain, metabolic parameters, prolactin, and ECG measures were uncommon. Mean change in the PANSS total score from the DB baseline to OL endpoint was -28.4, with mean improvement of -7.5 observed from baseline to OL endpoint, and with a PANSS responder rate of 73.7%., Discussion: The results of the current 26-week extension study found lurasidone to be a generally safe, well-tolerated, and effective long-term treatment for schizophrenia in Asian patients., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Introduction: To evaluate efficacy and safety of lurasidone for the treatment of Asian patients with schizophrenia., Methods: Patients with schizophrenia from Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with 40 or 80 mg/d of lurasidone or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to week 6 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population., Results: On the basis of the analysis for the mITT population, the estimated difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -4.8 (P = 0.050) and -4.2 (P = 0.080). For the full intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -5.8 (P = 0.017) and -4.2 (P = 0.043). The most frequent adverse events in the lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d and placebo groups, respectively, were akathisia (7.3%, 10.4%, 3.3%), somnolence (6.0%, 2.6%, 0.7%), and vomiting (6.0%, 5.8%, 2.0%). The proportion of patients experiencing clinically significant weight gain (≥7%) was 5.3% for lurasidone 40 mg/d, 1.3% for 80 mg/d, and 1.4% for placebo. End point changes in metabolic parameters and prolactin were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo., Conclusions: In the ITT (but not the mITT) population, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement in the PANSS total score in patients with schizophrenia. Lurasidone was generally well tolerated with minimal impact on weight and metabolic parameters., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

Objective: This study was designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of aripiprazole once-monthly (AOM) by verifying non-inferiority of AOM to oral aripiprazole in Asian patients with schizophrenia., Method: The study consisted of a screening phase and three phases: an oral conversion phase (≤12weeks), an oral stabilization phase (≤12weeks) and a 52-week double-blind phase. Patients meeting stabilization criteria for 4weeks during the oral stabilization phase were randomly assigned (1:1) to AOM (400mg) or oral aripiprazole (6-24mg/day). The primary endpoint was Kaplan-Meier estimated rate of non-exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/non-relapse at Week 26., Results: A total of 724 patients were screened, and 502 patients entered the oral stabilization phase. Of 455 patients randomized in the double-blind phase, 228 received AOM and 227 received oral aripiprazole. The non-exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/non-relapse rates at Week 26 were 95.0% (AOM) and 94.7% (oral aripiprazole) and the difference was 0.3% (95% CI: -3.9,4.5), thus non-inferiority of AOM compared to oral aripiprazole with respect to non-exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/non-relapse rate was shown with a margin of -3.9% which is well above the pre-defined non-inferiority limit (-15%). The proportions of patients meeting exacerbation of psychotic symptoms/relapse criteria and stabilization of psychotic symptoms/maintenance criteria were 6.6% and 92.5% in both groups. Discontinuation rates due to all reasons were 25.9% (AOM) and 33.5% (oral aripiprazole). AOM was well tolerated as well as oral aripiprazole., Conclusions: Non-inferiority of AOM to oral aripiprazole was established. AOM is efficacious in maintenance treatment of stabilized schizophrenia, with comparable efficacy and tolerability to oral aripiprazole., Clinical Trials Registration: JapicCTI-101175., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)