Search

Leslie Citrome,1 Ronald Landbloom,2 Cheng-Tao Chang,3 Willie Earley4 1Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY, USA; 2Department of Neuroscience, Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA; 3Biostatistics, Allergan, Jersey City, NJ, USA; 4Clinical Development, Allergan, Jersey City, NJ, USA Background: Bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of aggression. However, effective management of hostility and/or agitation symptoms may prevent patients from becoming violent. This analysis investigated the efficacy of the antipsychotic asenapine on hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.Methods: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trials of asenapine in adults with manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder (NCT00159744, NCT00159796, and NCT00764478). Post hoc analyses assessed the changes from baseline to day 21 on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility-related item scores in asenapine- or placebo-treated patients with at least minimal or mild symptom severity and on the PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) total score in agitated patients. Changes were adjusted for improvements in overall mania symptoms to investigate direct effects on hostility.Results: Significantly greater changes in favor of asenapine versus placebo were observed in YMRS hostility-related item scores (irritability: least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval] =–0.5 [–0.87, –0.22], P=0.001; disruptive–aggressive behavior: –0.7 [–0.99, –0.37], P

Kosuke Okazaki, Kazuhiko Yamamuro, Toshifumi Kishimoto Department of Psychiatry, Nara Medical University School of Medicine, Kashihara, Japan Aims: Antipsychotics are effective for treating schizophrenia, but atypical antipsychotics can cause several adverse side effects including weight gain, hyperprolactinemia, and extrapyramidal symptoms. Moreover, weight gain increases the risk of metabolic diseases.Methods: We treated a case of olanzapine-induced weight gain in a 41-year-old man with schizophrenia by switching his medication from olanzapine to asenapine.Results: The weight gain improved after switching the medication, from 80.3 to 75.0 kg, a weight loss of 6.6%, and there was no significant worsening of psychological symptoms or other adverse effects.Conclusions: Asenapine might be effective for treating patients with schizophrenia who experience olanzapine-induced weight gain. Keywords: olanzapine, weight gain, schizophrenia, asenapine

Suresh Durgam,1 Ronald P Landbloom,2 Mary Mackle,2 Xiao Wu,1 Maju Mathews,3 Henry A Nasrallah4 1Allergan Inc, Jersey City, 2Merck, Whitehouse Station, 3Forest Research Institute (now Allergan), Jersey City, NJ, 4Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA Purpose: The primary objective of this study was to assess long-term safety with sublingual asenapine 2.5 or 5 mg twice daily (BID) in patients with schizophrenia.Patients and methods: Actively treated patients on asenapine 2.5 mg BID, asenapine 5 mg BID, or olanzapine 15 mg once daily (QD) who completed a 6-week randomized, double-blind, placebo- and olanzapine-controlled study continued lead-in treatment in this 26-week, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, olanzapine-controlled Phase IIIB extension study; placebo patients were assigned to asenapine 2.5 mg BID treatment. Safety analyses were based on the all treated set (patients who received one or more doses of extension trial medication); change from baseline analyses used the acute study baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and changes in laboratory parameters were monitored; weight change for asenapine versus olanzapine was the key secondary objective. Descriptive statistics were used; weight change was analyzed using a mixed-model repeated-measure approach.Results: Of the 120 patients in the all-treated set, 60% completed treatment (asenapine 2.5 mg BID 66.1% overall, asenapine 5 mg BID 52.4%, olanzapine 15 mg QD 56.3%). The incidence of TEAEs was higher for placebo patients from the lead-in study who switched to asenapine 2.5 mg BID for extension treatment (71.0%) versus patients continuing asenapine 2.5 mg BID (38.7%), asenapine 5 mg BID (38.1%), or olanzapine 15 mg QD (25.0%). The most common TEAE (≥5% in every group) was worsening of schizophrenia. Least squares mean change in body weight from the acute study baseline to week 26 was +0.6 kg for overall asenapine 2.5 mg BID, +0.8 kg for asenapine 5 mg BID, and +1.2 kg for olanzapine 15 mg QD. There were no clinically relevant changes in metabolic parameters; values were generally similar across treatment groups.Conclusion: Asenapine 2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID were generally well tolerated in long-term treatment. Weight gain was less for overall asenapine 2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID than for olanzapine 15 mg QD. Keywords: asenapine, schizophrenia, long-term, safety, weight, olanzapine

Objective. Fos protein expression in catecholamine-synthesizing neurons of the substantia nigra (SN) pars compacta (SNC, A8), pars reticulata (SNR, A9), and pars lateralis (SNL), the ventral tegmental area (VTA, A10), the locus coeruleus (LC, A6) and subcoeruleus (sLC), the ventrolateral pons (PON-A5), the nucleus of the solitary tract (NTS-A2), the area postrema (AP), and the ventrolateral medulla (VLM-A1) was quantitatively evaluated aft er a single administration of asenapine (ASE) (designated for schizophrenia treatment) in male Wistar rats preconditioned with a chronic unpredictable variable mild stress (CMS) for 21 days. Th e aim of the present study was to reveal whether a single ASE treatment may 1) activate Fos expression in the brain areas selected; 2) activate tyrosine hydroxylase (TH)-synthesizing cells displaying Fos presence; and 3) be modulated by CMS preconditioning.

Therapy of schizophrenia requires long-term treatment with a relevant antipsychotic drug to achieve a therapeutic effect. The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of prolonged treatment with the atypical neuroleptic asenapine on the expression and activity of rat cytochrome P450 (CYP) in the liver. The experiment was carried out on male Wistar rats. Asenapine (0.3 mg/kg s.c.) was administered for two weeks. The levels of CYP mRNA protein and activity were determined in the liver and hormone concentrations were measured in the pituitary gland and blood serum. Asenapine significantly decreased the activity of CYP1A (caffeine 8-hydroxylation and 3-N-demethylation), CYP2B, CYP2C11 and CYP3A (testosterone hydroxylation at positions 16β; 2α and 16α; 2β and 6β, respectively). The neuroleptic did not affect the activity of CYP2A (testosterone 7α-hydroxylation), CYP2C6 (warfarin 7-hydroxylation) and CYP2E1 (chlorzoxazone 6-hydroxylation). The mRNA and protein levels of CYP1A2, CYP2B1, CYP2C11 and CYP3A1 were decreased, while those of CYP2B2 and CYP3A2 were not changed. Simultaneously, pituitary level of growth hormone-releasing hormone and serum concentrations of growth hormone and corticosterone were reduced, while that of triiodothyronine was enhanced. In conclusion, chronic treatment with asenapine down-regulates liver cytochrome P450 enzymes, which involves neuroendocrine mechanisms. Thus, chronic asenapine treatment may slow the metabolism of CYP1A, CYP2B, CYP2C11 and CYP3A substrates (steroids and drugs). Since asenapine is metabolized by CYP1A and CYP3A, the neuroleptic may inhibit its own metabolism, therefore, the plasma concentration of asenapine in patients after prolonged treatment may be higher than expected based on a single dose.

Schizophrenic patients resistant to antipsychotics are diagnosed as having treatment-refractory schizophrenia, and they are treated with clozapine. However, clozapine is sometimes combined with electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) if clozapine monotherapy fails. In this report, a severe treatment-refractory schizophrenic patient who did not respond to clozapine even with ECT, but who recovered with asenapine monotherapy, is presented. Asenapine, considered a serotonin spectrum dopamine modulator, is a new atypical antipsychotic with unique pharmacological features that is used not only for schizophrenia, but also for bipolar disorder. The unique features of asenapine may be effective for some treatment- refractory schizophrenic patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Controlling hyperactive and mixed delirium is extremely important for the continuation of cancer treatment in palliative care. In general, oral antipsychotics are the first-line drug therapy for delirium; however, oral administration is problematic in patients presenting dysphagia. In this case report, we describe an end-stage cancer patient with aphagia who developed delirium and responded to sublingual antipsychotic asenapine for treating delirium. We also discuss the effectiveness of asenapine in hyperactive delirium as well as its usefulness for treating delirium in palliative care.Method: A cancer patient with delirium was treated with several oral antipsychotics commonly used to treat delirium but did not respond to any of them. The patient subsequently developed aphagia with progression of the disease. Sublingual asenapine was therefore given to treat delirium.Result: Asenapine was effective in treating delirium without causing any obvious side effects.Significance Of Results: In the present case, asenapine was effective in treating hyperactive delirium that did not respond to commonly used antipsychotics. Because asenapine is a sublingual tablet, it can be used in patients with dysphagia and aphagia. In addition, this drug is anticipated to diminish the burden of end-stage patients from taking oral medications. Furthermore, its management is easier compared with injections, and can therefore also be easily used in homecare patients. Based on these perspectives, asenapine may become an important option for treating delirium in palliative care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment landscape for psychiatric disorders is constantly changing due to emerging data, and the 2021 Annual Psychiatric Times[TM] World CME Conference[TM] provided updates from expert faculty in the field. [...]

'Unfortunately, in the great majority of people, both bipolar I disorder and bipolar II disorder--especially bipolar II disorder--are not detected in a timely fashion,' said Roger S. McIntyre, MD, FRCPC, [...]

Thomas Scheidemantel,1 Irina Korobkova,2 Soham Rej,3,4 Martha Sajatovic1,2 1University Hospitals Case Medical Center, 2Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA; 3Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, 4Geri PARTy Research Group, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada Abstract: Asenapine (Saphris®) is an atypical antipsychotic drug which has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults, as well as the treatment of acute manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I in both adult and pediatric populations. Asenapine is a tetracyclic drug with antidopaminergic and antiserotonergic activity with a unique sublingual route of administration. In this review, we examine and summarize the available literature on the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of asenapine in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). Data from randomized, double-blind trials comparing asenapine to placebo or olanzapine in the treatment of acute manic or mixed episodes showed asenapine to be an effective monotherapy treatment in clinical settings; asenapine outperformed placebo and showed noninferior performance to olanzapine based on improvement in the Young Mania Rating Scale scores. There are limited data available on the use of asenapine in the treatment of depressive symptoms of BD, or in the maintenance phase of BD. The available data are inconclusive, suggesting the need for more robust data from prospective trials in these clinical domains. The most commonly reported adverse effect associated with use of asenapine is somnolence. However, the somnolence associated with asenapine use did not cause significant rates of discontinuation. While asenapine was associated with weight gain when compared to placebo, it appeared to be modest when compared to other atypical antipsychotics, and its propensity to cause increases in hemoglobin A1c or serum lipid levels appeared to be similarly modest. Asenapine does not appear to cause any clinically significant QTc prolongation. The most commonly reported extra-pyramidal symptom associated with asenapine was akathisia. Overall, asenapine appears to be a relatively well-tolerated atypical antipsychotic, effective in the treatment of acute manic and mixed episodes of BD. Keywords: asenapine, bipolar, manic episode, mixed episode, depressive features, safety, tolerability

Abstract A highly selective and sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay has been described for the determination of asenapine (ASE) in presence of its inactive metabolites N -desmethyl asenapine (DMA) and asenapine- N -glucuronide (ASG). ASE, and ASE 13C-d3, used as internal standard (IS), were extracted from 300 µL human plasma by a simple and precise liquid-liquid extraction procedure using methyl tert -butyl ether. Baseline separation of ASE from its inactive metabolites was achieved on Chromolith Performance RP 8e (100 mm × 4.6 mm) column using acetonitrile-5.0 mM ammonium acetate-10% formic acid (90:10:0.1, v/v/v) within 4.5 min. Quantitation of ASE was done on a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer equipped with electrospray ionization in the positive mode. The protonated precursor to product ion transitions monitored for ASE and ASE 13C-d3 were m/z 286.1 → 166.0 and m/z 290.0 → 166.1, respectively. The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantitation (LOQ) of the method were 0.0025 ng/mL and 0.050 ng/mL respectively in a linear concentration range of 0.050–20.0 ng/mL for ASE. The intra-batch and inter-batch precision (% CV) and mean relative recovery across quality control levels were ≤ 5.8% and 87.3%, respectively. Matrix effect, evaluated as IS-normalized matrix factor, ranged from 1.03 to 1.05. The stability of ASE under different storage conditions was ascertained in presence of the metabolites. The developed method is much simpler, matrix free, rapid and economical compared to the existing methods. The method was successfully used for a bioequivalence study of asenapine in healthy Indian subjects for the first time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Phospholipid complexes have become promising delivery systems for delivery of drugs with poor bioavailability like asenapine maleate. To improve the bioavailability of asenapine maleate, phospholipid complex was chosen for the drug with Phospholipon 90 G (phosphatidylcholine). The automated molecular docking calculation for asenapine and maleate individually with phospholipid was performed by AutoGrid 4.2.6, a docking program. The van der Waals hydrogen bond, electrostatic potential energy and desolvation free energy grid maps were calculated by AutoDock parameter set- and distance-dependent dielectric functions respectively. The change in free energy was specifically seen for the complex between asenapine and phospholipid which exhibited least binding docking energy of –3.86 kcal/mol among the summary of 25 poses. Finally, molecular docking studies confirmed that the asenapine is able to make a complex with phosphatidylcholine, plausibly on account of its structural similarity with phospholipid in its physiochemical properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone are relatively new atypical antipsychotics. There is limited information on toxicity on pediatric exposures to these drugs. The objective of this study was to compare toxicity associated with asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone exposures in young children. Methods: A retrospective study of U.S. National Poison Data System from 2010 to 2015 of single substance exposures to asenapine, iloperidone or lurasidone in children <6 years of age that were followed to known outcome was performed. Results: There were 95 asenapine, 64 iloperidone and 124 lurasidone cases that met inclusion criteria. Reason was exploratory for 96% of cases. Drowsiness/lethargy occurred most frequently with iloperidone (45%) and least often with lurasidone (8%). Two iloperidone cases had respiratory depression. For asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone, respectively, management sites were on-site non-health care facility (non-HCF) (32%, 16%, 26%), treated/discharged from emergency department (ED) (46%, 47%, 63%), admitted to noncritical care (9%, 14%, 10%) and admitted to critical care (10%, 22%, 2%). Clinical effect duration was 8 h or less for the majority of non-HCF cases (80%) and for children treated/discharged from the ED (72%). For asenapine, iloperidone and lurasidone, coded outcomes were no effect (50%, 41%, 81%), minor effect (43%, 39%, 17%), moderate (6%, 19%, 2%) and major (0, 2%, 0). Discussion and conclusions: These findings suggest that in children under 6 years of age, lurasidone exposures were least serious and iloperidone exposures were most serious based on clinical effects, management sites and coded outcomes. Observation of symptomatic children in the ED for 8 h should be sufficient to make triage decisions based on persistence or resolution of clinical effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Asenapine is a recent drug approved in the European Union for the treatment of bipolar disorder. An original approach has been developed for asenapine analysis in patients treated with the drug, including miniaturized microsampling procedures, separation and quantitation of drug enantiomers. An original enantioselective method based on high‐performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection was developed and applied to the determination of asenapine enantiomer levels in innovative haematic samples: four micromatrices have been tested, two based on dried matrix spots (dried blood spots and dried plasma spots) and two based on volumetric absorptive microsampling (from blood and plasma). Chiral separation was achieved on a cellulose‐tris(3,5 dimethylphenylcarbamate) column, with a mobile phase containing bicarbonate buffer and acetonitrile. The method was validated with satisfactory results of linearity and precision on all matrices that showed also a significant performance in terms of stability, feasibility and reliability, when compared to fluid plasma sampling, handling and processing. Among micromatrices, both volumetric absorptive microsampling types were superior to dried matrix spots in terms of data reproducibility and correspondence with plasma levels. The bioanalytical approach proposed herein provides for the first time a chiral high‐performance liquid chromatographic method for the determination of asenapine enantiomers, coupled to a very effective microsampling strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Blood brain barrier (BBB) is a complex, tight barrier between endothelial cells of cerebral blood vessels. It acts as a physical barrier and provides access to only those moieties which are necessary for proper brain functioning. However, this selective prudence also acts as a hindrance in therapeutic targeting of brain necessitating pharmaceutical intervention. Intranasal drug delivery is one such approach which we have exploited here for targeted brain delivery of asenapine by glycol chitosan coated nanostructured lipid carrier (GC-ANLC). The best formulation was characterized for particle size (184.2 ± 5.59 nm), zeta potential (18.83 ± 1.18 mV), entrapment efficiency (83.52 ± 2.59%) and surface morphology (spherical and smooth). In-vitro drug-release study showed that Higuchi model (r 2 = 0.9938, AIC = 52.94) dictated asenapine release from GC-ANLC. Cell compatibility study suggested biocompatibility of GC-ANLC with A549 cell line as well as nasal epithelial cell membrane. After intranasal delivery, Charles-Foster rats demonstrated approximately 2.3 and 4 fold higher systemic and brain bioavailability of GC-ANLC compared to asenapine solution (ASM). Embryo fetal toxicity study was further conducted to investigate the teratogenic effect of GC-ANLC. In conclusion, prepared GC-ANLC could be used as a promising drug carrier for delivery of asenapine via intranasal route with better pharmacokinetic and safety profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Treatment of bipolar disorders has evolved over the years from conventional mood stabilizers to second-generation antipsychotics. Among the atypical antipsychotics, few have been approved by Food and Drug Administration as treatment of bipolar disorders. Aim: To study the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine and asenapine in the acute treatment of bipolar disorder-manic episode in a 3-week randomized prospective study. Materials and Methods: A 3-week randomized, prospective, comparative, flexible doses of olanzapine (5-30 mg/day) and asenapine (10-20 mg/day) for acute treatment of bipolar disorder-current manic episode with or without psychotic symptoms in hospitalized patients. Results: The end-point reduction in mean score of Young Mania rating scale in the olanzapine group was 15.82 in comparison to 6.88 in the asenapine group. Mean score on clinical global impression for bipolar disorder and positive and negative syndrome scale was significantly less in the olanzapine group at the end of the study. 81.81% patients in olanzapine group and 17.60% patients in asenapine group had clinical response. There was significant average weight gain in the olanzapine group - 1.9 kg in comparison to 0.87 kg in asenapine group. Conclusion: The clinical response with olanzapine is significantly higher than the asenapine in the treatment of bipolar disorder-manic episode with or without psychotic symptoms. However, there is significant weight gain in olanzapine-treated patients.

Aim Asenapine is a new atypical antipsychotic prescribed for the treatment of psychosis/bipolar disorders that presents higher affinity for serotonergic than dopaminergic receptors. The objective of this study was to investigate its antidepressant-like and antimanic-like properties on relevant animal models of depression and mania and to assess the acute and chronic effect of Asenapine on dorsal raphe nucleus ( DRN) 5- HT cell firing activity. Methods We assessed the effects of Asenapine using in vivo electrophysiological and behavioral assays in rats. Results Behavioral experiments showed that Asenapine had no significant effect on immobility time in the forced swim test ( FST) in control rats. In the ACTH-treated rats, a model of antidepressant-resistance, Asenapine failed to alter immobility time in the FST. In contrast in the sleep deprivation ( SD) model of mania, acute administration of Asenapine significantly decreased the hyperlocomotion of SD rats. In the DRN, acute administration of Asenapine reduced the suppressant effect of the selective 5- HT7 receptor agonist LP-44 and of the prototypical 5- HT1A receptor agonist 8- OH- DPAT on 5- HT neuronal firing activity. In addition, chronic treatment with Asenapine enhanced DRN 5- HT neuronal firing and this effect was associated with an alteration of the 5- HT7 receptor responsiveness. Conclusion These results confirm that Asenapine displays robust antimanic property and effective in vivo antagonistic activity at 5- HT1A/7 receptors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To Compare the safety of asenapine and iloperidone as per information available in public domain. Method: In addition to their USFDA approved prescribing information, literature on these two drugs from Pubmed indexed journals in English language were searched for appropriate information. We found 8 relevant articles on asenapine and iloperidone, results of which are discussed in this review. Data on the adverse effects commonly reported for atypical antipsychotics were collected from these articles and compared. Descriptive statistics was used to present the results. Results: Iloperidone is more frequently found to be associated with QTc prolongation (dose dependent), orthostatic hypotension & related dizziness (despite slow up-titration), weight gain and antimuscarinic side effects. On other side, asenapine is more frequently associated with extrapyramidal side effects and akathisia as well as the only one associated with headache, oral hypoesthesia and adverse event related discontinuations. Conclusion: Although, asenapine appears to be less frequently associated with adverse events commonly associated with atypical antipsychotics, complex sublingual dosing and higher discontinuation related to adverse events offsets this safety advantage. More importantly, both these agents require close counselling of patients for adequate compliance and/or combination with other antipsychotic to achieve optimum antipsychotic efficacy in Indian context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: A systematic review was conducted to examine the efficacy, tolerability, and acceptability of asenapine compared with other antipsychotics in the treatment of psychotic disorders.Methods: Four databases, 8 trial registries, and conference presentations were searched for randomized clinical trials of asenapine versus any comparator for the treatment of any psychotic illness. Primary outcome measures were changes in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and the incidence of withdrawal due to adverse effects.Results: Eight randomized clinical trials, encompassing 3765 patients, that compared asenapine with placebo ( n = 5) and olanzapine ( n = 3) were included. No differences were found between asenapine and olanzapine in terms of changes to PANSS total or PANSS negative subscale scores. Patients taking asenapine were more likely to experience worsening schizophrenia and/or psychosis than were those taking olanzapine. No differences were found between asenapine and olanzapine in rates of discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions or lack of efficacy, but those taking asenapine had higher rates of withdrawal for any reason than those taking olanzapine. Asenapine caused less clinically significant weight gain or increases in triglycerides than olanzapine and was more likely to cause extrapyramidal symptoms than olanzapine. In comparison to placebo, either no difference or superiority was demonstrated in favour of asenapine on all efficacy measures.Conclusion: The current evidence is limited, as asenapine has been compared only with placebo or olanzapine. In the randomized clinical trials analysed, asenapine was similar or superior to placebo and similar or inferior to olanzapine on most efficacy outcomes. While asenapine demonstrated fewer adverse metabolic outcomes than olanzapine, rates of extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse effects were higher. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Effect of repeated asenapine (ASE) treatment on FosB/ΔFosB expression was studied in the hypothalamic paraventricular nucleus (PVN) of male rats exposed to chronic mild stress (CMS) for 21 days. Our intention was to find out whether repeated ASE treatment for 14 days may: 1) induce FosB/ΔFosB expression in the PVN; 2) activate selected PVN neuronal phenotypes, synthesizing oxytocin (OXY), vasopressin (AVP), corticoliberin (CRH) or tyrosine hydroxylase (TH); and 3) interfere with the impact of CMS. Control, ASE, CMS, and CMS + ASE treated groups were used. CMS included restraint, social isolation, crowding, swimming, and cold. From the 7th day of CMS, rats received ASE (0.3 mg/kg) or saline (300 μl/rat) subcutaneously, twice a day for 14 days. They were sacrificed on the day 22nd (16–18 h after last treatments). FosB/ΔFosB was visualized with avidin biotin peroxidase complex and OXY, AVP, CRH or TH antibodies by fluorescent dyes. Saline and ASE did not promote FosB/ΔFosB expression in the PVN. CMS and CMS + ASE elicited FosB/ΔFosB-expression in the PVN, whereas, ASE did not augment or attenuate FosB/ΔFosB induction elicited by CMS. FosB/ΔFosB-CRH occurred after CMS and CMS + ASE treatments in the PVN middle sector, while FosB/ΔFosB-AVP and FosB/ΔFosB-OXY after CMS and CMS + ASE treatments in the PVN posterior sector. FosB/ΔFosB-TH colocalization was rare. Larger FosB/ΔFosB profiles, running above the PVN, did not show any colocalizations. The study provides an anatomical/functional knowledge about an unaccented nature of prolonged ASE treatment at the level of PVN and excludes its positive or negative interplay with CMS effect. Data indicate that long-lasting ASE treatment might not act as a stressor acting at the PVN level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Asenapine (ASN) is approved in the United States as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy (to lithium or valproate) in adults with bipolar mania, and as monotherapy in pediatric patients with bipolar mania. This is the first long-term study evaluating safety and tolerability of ASN fixed doses in this population.Methods: After completing a 3-week, randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled acute trial, patients could enroll in this 26-week, fixed-dose (5 or 10mg twice daily), double-blind extension study. Select predefined treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and metabolic parameters were reported.Results: Overall, 164 patients were treated; 88 completed the study. The incidence of ≥1 TEAE was greater for PBO/ASN 5mg (68.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (54.7%) and ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (51.0%) with sedation, headache, somnolence, akathisia, and dizziness occurring as the most prevalent TEAEs. Predefined TEAEs were more common for PBO/ASN 5mg (33.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (15.1%) and ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (15.7%). Weight gain (≥7% increase from baseline to endpoint) was more frequent for ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (16.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (13.7%) and PBO/ASN 5mg (8.9%). No clinically significant metabolic changes were observed. The incidence of serious AEs was low and primarily related to underlying bipolar I disorder.Limitations: This study lacked a comparator group and was not powered for direct comparisons of ASN regimens. Results may not be applicable to the general bipolar population.Conclusions: ASN was generally safe and well tolerated in adults with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]