Search

Purpose: Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic paliperidone palmitate 3-month formulation (PP3M) is indicated in the United States for the treatment of schizophrenia only after adequate treatment with paliperidone palmitate 1-month formulation (PP1M) for ≥4 months. This analysis aimed to identify patient and disease characteristics during PP1M treatment associated with greater likelihood of achieving remission after transition to PP3M. Methods: A post hoc analysis of a randomized, Phase III, double-blind, noninferiority trial of PP3M vs PP1M (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01515423) was conducted in adult patients with schizophrenia. Patients achieving clinical stability after 17 weeks of open-label PP1M were randomized to 48 weeks of double-blind treatment with PP3M or PP1M. The primary objective of this exploratory post hoc analysis was to identify demographic and/or clinical variables associated with persistent remission after treatment with PP3M. Multiple logistic regression analysis identified the following significant predictors of remission: Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Marder negative symptom factor score, Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) total score, and Personal and Social Performance (PSP) total score. Results: At double-blind baseline, a 1-point reduction in Marder negative symptom factor score was associated with a 20% increase in the odds of achieving remission after PP3M treatment; 1-point reduction in CGI-S was associated with a doubling in remission odds; and 7- and 10-point improvements in PSP scores, respectively, were associated with 42% and 65% increases in remission odds. Conclusion: Patients with early clinically meaningful improvements in disease symptoms and severity while establishing stable PP1M dosage are more likely to achieve remission after transition to PP3M. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Independent review boards can provide an objective appraisal of investigators' decisions and may be useful for determining complex primary outcomes, such as bipolar disorder relapse, in cross-national studies. This article describes the use of an independent, blinded relapse monitoring board to assess the primary outcome (relapse) in an international clinical trial of risperidone long-acting therapy adjunctive to standard-care pharmacotherapy for patients with bipolar disorder. Design: The fully autonomous relapse monitoring board was composed of a chair and two additional members-all psychiatrists and experts in the diagnostic, clinical, and therapeutic management of bipolar disorder. The relapse monitoring board met six times during the study to review patient relapse data and was charged with the responsibility of determining if the events described by investigators qualified as relapses. Additionally, the relapse monitoring board reviewed data for all randomized patients to identify any relapse events not recognized by investigators. Results: Primary efficacy results were similar and significant for investigator- and relapse monitoring board-determined relapses. Ten discrepancies were noted: two of the 42 investigator-determined relapses did not meet the intended clinical relapse threshold as determined by the relapse monitoring board; conversely, the relapse monitoring board confirmed eight relapse events not identified by investigators. The relapse monitoring board had no direct interactions with patients and had to rely on the accuracy of investigator assessments. Also, once an investigator determined a relapse and the patients discontinued the study, less information was available to the relapse monitoring board for relapse assessment. Conclusions: Use of the relapse monitoring board supported the validity of the study by incorporating a level of standardization to mitigate the risk that local practice in different cultures and medical systems at the sites would confound study results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Real-world data (RWD) for paliperidone palmitate (PP) three-monthly (PP3M) is lacking based on Japan label requirements. This study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of PP3M versus PP once-monthly (PP1M) in patients with schizophrenia administered according to Japan label requirements., Methods: Retrospective analyses were conducted using RWD from Merative™ MarketScan® Multi-State Medicaid (MDCD) claims database (June 2015-December 2022). Adult patients with schizophrenia switching from PP1M to PP3M were included. Patients transitioning to PP3M were matched with patients who continued with PP1M using propensity score matching (PSM) at 1:1 ratio. Primary hypothesis aimed to investigate non-inferiority of PP3M versus PP1M in terms of relapse-free status at 24 months from index PP injection. Outcome measures were proportions of relapse-free patients at 24 months, time to relapse, treatment persistence, and adherence., Results: Total 4252 eligible adult schizophrenia patients on PP (PP3M:582; PP1M:3670) were identified. After PSM, each PP cohort comprised 562 matched individuals. Estimated proportion of relapse-free patients was higher in PP3M (85.7%) versus PP1M (77.9%), per Japan PP label. PP3M demonstrated superiority to PP1M after testing for non-inferiority in terms of achieving relapse-free status at 24 months, with an estimated difference of 7.8% (95% CI: 1.7%-13.9%). PP3M cohort had lower risk of relapse (HR: 0.605; CI: 0.427-0.856), longer treatment persistence, and higher treatment adherence versus PP1M cohort., Conclusions: Findings suggests that patients who switched to PP3M might be able to reduce risk of relapse compared to those who continued PP1M after aligning particularly with Japan's label requirements., (© 2024 The Author(s). Neuropsychopharmacology Reports published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of The Japanese Society of Neuropsychopharmacology.)

Background: The 3 paliperidone palmitate (PP) long-acting injectable antipsychotic formulations, PP 1-month (PP1M), PP 3-month (PP3M), and PP 6-month (PP6M), have shown to reduce the risk of relapse in schizophrenia. The current phase-4 study constructed external comparator arms (ECAs) using real-world data for PP3M and PP1M and compared relapse prevention rates with PP6M from an open-label extension (OLE) study in adult patients with schizophrenia., Methods: PP6M data were derived from a single-arm, 24-month, OLE study (NCT04072575), which included patients with schizophrenia who completed a 12-month randomized, double-blind, noninferiority, phase-3 study (NCT03345342) without relapse. Patients in the PP3M and PP1M ECAs were identified from the IBM® MarketScan® Multistate Medicaid Database based on similar eligibility criteria as the PP6M cohort., Results: A total of 178 patients were included in each cohort following propensity score matching. Most patients were men (>70%; mean age: 39-41 years). Time to relapse (primary analysis based on Kaplan-Meier estimates) was significantly delayed in the PP6M cohort (P < .001, log-rank test). The relapse rate was lower in the PP6M cohort (3.9%) vs PP3M (20.2%) and PP1M (29.8%) cohorts. Risk of relapse decreased significantly (P < .001) by 82% for PP6M vs PP3M (HR = 0.18 [95% CI = 0.08 to 0.40]), 89% for PP6M vs PP1M (HR = 0.11 [0.05 to 0.25]), and 35% for PP3M vs PP1M (HR = 0.65 [0.42 to 0.99]; P = .043). Sensitivity analysis confirmed findings from the primary analysis. Although the ECAs were matched to mimic the characteristics of the PP6M cohort, heterogeneity between the groups could exist due to factors including prior study participation, unmeasured confounders, variations in data capture and quality, and completeness of clinical information., Conclusions: In a clinical trial setting, PP6M significantly delayed time to relapse and demonstrated lower relapse rates compared with PP3M and PP1M treatments in real-world settings among adult patients with schizophrenia., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04072575; EudraCT number: 2018-004532-30., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of CINP.)

BACKGROUND: Given relapse frequency early in the course of schizophrenia, recently diagnosed patients may benefit from longacting injectable antipsychotics, which are associated with reduced risk of relapse and hospitalization compared with oral antipsychotics (OAPs). OBJECTIVE: To compare health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs in patients with recent-onset schizophrenia treated with continuous paliperidone palmitate (PP) or continuous OAP or who switched from OAP to PP. METHODS: In this analysis, we combined the 2 randomized phases of the prospective, open-label Disease Recovery Evaluation and Modification (DREaM) clinical study using the principal stratification method to generate 3 treatment strategies: continuous PP for 18 months (PP-PP), continuous OAP for 18 months (OAP-OAP), and initial OAP switched to PP after 9 months (OAP-PP). HCRU metrics included psychiatric hospitalizations, psychiatric and nonpsychiatric emergency department visits, and ambulatory visits. Costs were analyzed using generalized linear models with inverse-probability weighting based on time-varying probabilities of exposure. Robust SEs were estimated using individual-level clustered bootstrapping. Subgroup analyses were performed by region and prior antipsychotic use (< 6 vs ≥ 6 months). RESULTS: A total of 181 patients were included in the PP-PP (n = 61), OAP-OAP (n = 61), and OAP-PP (n = 59) groups. The majority of patients (73%) were enrolled at study sites in the United States, and 48% had received an antipsychotic for less than 6 months prior to study entry. Baseline characteristics were well balanced, and no significant differences in discontinuation rates were observed across treatment strategies. Compared with OAP-OAP, significantly lower cumulative HCRU and costs were apparent before 9 months in the PP-PP group and after 9 months in the OAP-PP group. The cumulative 18-month effects of PP-PP and OAP-PP vs OAP-OAP on the number of psychiatric hospitalizations were ‒0.28 (95% CI = ‒0.51 to ‒0.08) and ‒0.27 (95% CI = ‒0.50 to 0.04), respectively, and those on cumulative mean per-patient total health care costs (in 2020 USD) were -$2,867 (95% CI = ‒$5,133 to ‒$750) and ‒$2,789 (95% CI = ‒$5,155 to ‒$701), respectively. Subgroup analyses indicated a greater reduction in psychiatric hospitalizations and costs with PP-PP or OAP-PP relative to OAP-OAP in patients with less than 6 vs 6 or more months of prior antipsychotic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous early use of PP in adults with recentonset schizophrenia significantly reduced psychiatric hospitalizations and associated estimated costs compared with OAP; these effects were particularly notable for patients with a shorter duration of prior antipsychotic use. As this was a post hoc analysis of a study that was not powered for HCRU assessments, future studies calibrating these effects to larger real-world populations will be useful. DISCLOSURES: Dr Basu reports consulting fees through Salutis Consulting LLC related to this work. Ms Benson, Dr Turkoz, Ms Patel, Dr Baker, and Dr Brown are employees of Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, and stockholders of Johnson & Johnson, Inc. This research was funded by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC. The sponsor was involved in the study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; development and review of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

We evaluated the usefulness of a treatment manual to facilitate the use of long-acting injectable risperidone in community mental health centers (CMHCs) during an open-label observational study. Perceived clinical utility and clinician adherence to the manual were evaluated. Patient adherence to treatment satisfaction, Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) and the Schizophrenia Quality-of-Life Scale (SQLS) were assessed. Mean score for overall utility of the guidebook was 4.2 +/- .6 (scale ratings ranged from 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely). Most clinicians (89-100%) found the guidebook useful, and were adherent to key aspects of appropriate treatment use including concomitant oral risperidone use and injection and dosing parameters for long-acting risperidone. Most patients were adherent to treatment (86.7%), preferred long-acting risperidone over oral risperidone (72.6%) or other oral antipsychotics (78.4%) and were satisfied with long-acting risperidone (90.1%). The open-label observational design limits interpretation of these data. However, in this study manual-supported use of long-acting risperidone was associated with successful implementation of this pharmacologic treatment in the CMHC setting.