Persistence, use of resources and costs in patients under migraine preventive treatment: the PERSEC study.

BACKGROUND: Migraine represents a serious burden for national health systems. However, preventive treatment is not optimally applied to reduce the severity and frequency of headache attacks and the related expenses. Our aim was to assess the persistence to traditional migraine prophylaxis available in Spain and its relationship with the healthcare resource use (HRU) and costs. METHODS: Retrospective observational study with retrospective cohort design of individuals with migraine treated with oral preventive medication for the first time from 01/01/2016 to 30/06/2018. One-year follow-up information was retrieved from the Big-Pac™ database. According to their one-year persistence to oral prophylaxis, two study groups were created and describe regarding HRU and healthcare direct and indirect costs using 95% confidence intervals (CI). The analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was performed as a sensitivity analysis. Patients were considered persistent if they continued on preventive treatment until the end of the study or switched medications within 60 days or less since the last prescription. Non-persistent were those who permanently discontinued or re-initiated a treatment after 60 days. RESULTS: Seven thousand eight hundred sixty-six patients started preventive treatment (mean age (SD) 48.2 (14.8) and 80.4% women), of whom 2,545 (32.4%) were persistent for 6 months and 2,390 (30.4%) for 12 months. Most used first-line preventive treatments were antidepressants (3,642; 46.3%) followed by antiepileptics (1,738; 22.1%) and beta-blockers (1,399; 17.8%). The acute treatments prescribed concomitantly with preventives were NSAIDs (4,530; 57.6%), followed by triptans (2,217; 28.2%). First-time preventive treatment prescribers were mostly primary care physicians (6,044; 76.8%) followed by neurologists (1,221; 15.5%). Non-persistent patients required a higher number of primary care visits (mean difference (95%CI): 3.0 (2.6;3.4)) and days of sick leave (2.7 (0.8;4.5)) than the persistent ones. The mean annual expenditure was €622 (415; 829) higher in patients who not persisted on migraine prophylactic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed a high discontinuation rate for migraine prophylaxis which is related to an increase in HRU and costs for non-persistent patients. These results suggest that the treatment adherence implies not only a clinical benefit but also a reduction in HRU and costs.

The MOPEAD project: Advancing patient engagement for the detection of "hidden" undiagnosed cases of Alzheimer's disease in the community.

In most, if not all health systems, dementia is underdiagnosed, and when diagnosis occurs, it is typically at a relatively late stage in the disease process despite mounting evidence showing that a timely diagnosis would result in numerous benefits for patients, families, and society. Moving toward earlier diagnoses in Alzheimer's disease (AD) requires a conscientious and collective effort to implement a global strategy addressing the multiple causes hindering patient engagement at different levels of society. This article describes the design of the Models of Patient Engagement for Alzheimer's Disease project, an ongoing EU-funded public-private multinational initiative that will compare four innovative patient engagement strategies across five European countries regarding their ability to identify individuals with prodromal AD and mild AD dementia, which are "hidden" in their communities and traditionally not found in the typical memory clinic setting. The strategies include an online AD citizen science platform, an open house initiative at the memory clinics, and patient engagement at primary care and diabetologist clinics.

Costs and quality of life in community-dwelling patients with Alzheimer's disease in Spain: results from the GERAS II observational study.

BACKGROUND: Country-specific data on resource use and costs associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD) help inform governments about the increasing need for medical and financial support as the disease increases in prevalence. METHODS: GERAS II, a prospective observational study, assessed resource use, costs, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with AD and their caregivers in Spain. Community-dwelling patients aged ≥55 years with probable AD, and their primary caregivers, were recruited by study investigators during routine clinical practice and assessed as having mild, moderate, or moderately severe/severe (MS/S) AD dementia based on patient Mini-Mental State Examination scores. Costs of AD were calculated by applying costs to resource-use data obtained in caregiver interviews using the Resource Utilization in Dementia instrument. Total societal costs included patients' health and social care costs and caregiver informal care costs. Baseline results are presented. RESULTS: Total mean monthly societal costs/patient (2013 values) were €1514 for mild (n = 116), €2082 for moderate (n = 118), and €2818 for MS/S AD dementia (n = 146) (p value <0.001 between groups). Caregiver informal care costs comprised most of the total societal costs and differed significantly between groups (€1050, €1239, €1580, respectively; p value = 0.013), whereas patient healthcare costs did not. Across AD dementia severity groups, patient HRQoL (measured by proxy) decreased significantly (p value <0.001), caregiver subjective burden significantly increased (p value <0.001) and caregiver HRQoL was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Societal costs associated with AD in Spain were largely attributable to caregiver informal care costs and increased with increasing AD dementia severity.

Broader conceptualization of remission assessed by the remission from depression questionnaire and its association with symptomatic remission: a prospective, multicenter, observational study.

BACKGROUND: Goals of treating major depressive disorder (MDD) include achieving remission and avoiding relapse. It is possible that patients may have a broader view of remission than what is captured via clinician-rated scales. This patient perspective may, in turn, have an impact on treatment outcomes. METHODS: The association between a broader conceptualization of remission, based on the Remission from Depression Questionnaire (RDQ) score at baseline, and being in symptomatic remission after 6 months was evaluated in subjects (N = 613) with MDD in symptomatic remission at baseline (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAMD-17] ≤7). Specific aspects of depression were assessed from physician and patient perspectives as secondary endpoints. A backwards selection strategy was used to statistically model remission status and determine association of factors with potential to influence remission. RESULTS: At month 6, after adjustment for baseline HAMD-17 score, there was no association between baseline RDQ score and symptomatic remission status (HAMD-17), relapse, composite remission status, healthcare resource utilization, or quality of life. There was no association between functional impairment scores at baseline (Sheehan Disability Scale and Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale) and symptomatic remission status (HAMD-17) at month 6. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that RDQ-constructs are independent from symptomatic remission. Symptom severity at study entry appeared to be the only significant predictor of eventual relapse during the 6-month follow-up period. However, our results also suggest that the current definition of remission that is based on symptom reduction should be further elaborated and that alternative or additional definitions should be considered in determining remission.

Observational Retrospective Study in Patients Treated with Galcanezumab as Preventive Treatment for Migraine: The ORYGAM Study.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of galcanezumab has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, but evidence about its use under clinical practice conditions is still limited. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of the patients treated with galcanezumab in routine clinical practice in Spain as well as treatment patterns, persistence, and effectiveness. METHODS: A retrospective chart review study was carried out in six hospitals. Information of adults with migraine, who started treatment with galcanezumab between November 2019 and September 2021, was analyzed until end or loss of follow-up. Continuous variables were described as mean (standard deviation, SD) and median (interquartile range, IQR), and categorical variables as frequency and percentages. Persistence to treatment was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: A total of 314 patients were analyzed over median follow-up period of 17.5 months (13.8-20.7), with a mean age of 46.3 (12.6), 85% women, 80.6% chronic migraine, and reporting a mean of monthly migraine days of 16.7 (7.8). Overall, 72.9% had comorbid conditions, with anxiety and depression disorders being the most frequent. More than 60% had received ≥ 6 previous preventive drugs, the most common being antiepileptics, antidepressants, and botulinum toxin (95.2%, 89.8% and 84.1%, respectively). Overall, 60.3% of the patients with other preventive treatments maintained them after galcanezumab initiation. The median time on galcanezumab was 14.6 months (9.4-22.8); 95.7%, 82.0%, 76.2% and 59.8% of patients were persistent to treatment at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months, respectively. Of the patients who discontinued (151: 48.1%), 57.6% were due to lack of effectiveness and 31.1% were due to improvement in migraine. The average reduction of monthly migraine days at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months was 7.9 (7.2), 9.1 (7.5), 8.8 (6.6) and 9.0 (6.9) days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In real clinical practice, galcanezumab is an effective treatment and has a high persistence in patients with migraine, mostly chronic and with multiple use of previous preventive treatments.

Residual symptoms and functioning in depression, does the type of residual symptom matter? A post-hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND: The degrees to which residual symptoms in major depressive disorder (MDD) adversely affect patient functioning is not known. This post-hoc analysis explored the association between different residual symptoms and patient functioning. METHODS: Patients with MDD who responded (≥50% on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; HAMD-17) after 3 months of treatment (624/930) were included. Residual core mood-symptoms (HAMD-17 core symptom subscale ≥1), residual insomnia-symptoms (HAMD-17 sleep subscale ≥1), residual anxiety-symptoms (HAMD-17-anxiety subscale ≥1), residual somatic-symptoms (HAMD-17 Item 13 ≥1), pain (Visual Analogue Scale ≥30), and functioning were assessed after 3 months treatment. A stepwise logistic regression model with normal functioning (Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale ≥80) as the dependent variable was used. RESULTS: After 3 months, 59.5% of patients (371/624) achieved normal functioning and 66.0% (412/624) were in remission. Residual symptom prevalence was: core mood symptoms 72%; insomnia 63%; anxiety 78%; and somatic symptoms 41%. Pain reported in 18%. Factors associated with normal functioning were absence of core mood symptoms (odds ratio [OR] 8.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.6-16.7), absence of insomnia symptoms (OR 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.7), episode length (4-24 weeks vs. ≥24 weeks [OR 2.0; 95% CI, 1.1-3.6]) and better baseline functioning (OR 1.0; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1). A significant interaction between residual anxiety symptoms and pain was found (p = 0.0080). CONCLUSIONS: Different residual symptoms are associated to different degrees with patient functioning. To achieve normal functioning, specific residual symptoms domains might be targeted for treatment.

Burden and Unmet Needs in Migraine Patients: Results from the OVERCOME (Spain) Study.

INTRODUCTION: This analysis aimed to evaluate demographics, migraine-related disability, symptoms, diagnosis and healthcare consultation, work productivity, and treatment patterns according to headache frequency in adults with migraine in the OVERCOME (ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment and Care Of MigrainE) (Spain) study. METHODS: Data were obtained from an observational, cross-sectional, web-based survey conducted between October 2020-February 2021 in Spain. Eligible participants were adult members of online survey panels living in Spain who were able to read and write Spanish and fulfilled the International Classification of Headache Disorders, third edition (ICHD-3) criteria for migraine or had a self-reported physician diagnosis. RESULTS: In total, 10,229 patients comprised the Spanish sample. Only 56.2% of respondents had a confirmed healthcare professional (HCP) diagnosis of migraine, despite almost all meeting modified ICHD-3 criteria. Pain severity, migraine-related disability, and interictal burden increased with increasing number of headache days per month. Migraine impacted on respondents' work productivity, with increases in presenteeism, work productivity loss, and daily activity impairment at higher headache frequencies. Over the past year, 66.2% of all HCP visits were specifically due to migraine, most commonly with a general practitioner or pharmacist. A subgroup of 1277 patients (12.5% of the total survey population) met eligibility criteria for migraine preventive medications, of whom only 36.6% were currently taking a preventive. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the OVERCOME (Spain) survey reveal the substantial burden of migraine, which is directly linked to headache frequency. However, most patients experiencing frequent headaches and eligible for migraine preventives are currently not taking them. Findings highlight the importance of addressing unmet needs for people with migraine in Spain.

Adaptation and Validation of the Spanish Version of Decisional Conflict Scale in People with Migraine in Spain.

Purpose: We aimed to validate the Spanish version of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and analyze its psychometric properties in people with migraine. Patients and Methods: The DCS validation comprised two phases. First, a translation and cross-cultural adaptation following the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Good Practices: 1-preparation, 2-independent forward translation, 3-reconciliation, 4-back-translation, 5-harmonization, 6-clinical review, and 7-content validation in a group of migraine patients. Second, the analysis of the psychometric properties. The reliability or internal consistency of the DCS scale and subscales was assessed using Cronbach's α value. The item-subscale correlation was also evaluated. A floor and ceiling effects for DCS score was considered when at least 15% of respondents obtained DCS >90 (ceiling) or <10 (floor). The construct validity was studied through the correlation between the DCS subscales and by the correlation between the DCS and other questionnaires (Decision Self-Efficacy Scale [DSES] and 9-item Shared Decision-Making [SDM-Q-9]). Spearman's coefficients were estimated for the correlations. Results: The cross-cultural adaptation was conducted on 17 patients who completed the questionnaire in a mean of 2.4 ±1.1 minutes. Generally, more than 75% of them considered that DCS items were adequate, easy to understand, and relevant. The psychometric properties were evaluated in a sample of n=128 patients. Accordingly, the internal consistency of DCS was high, with a Cronbach's α of 0.97 for the scale and between 0.87 to 0.96 for subscales. Also, a slight floor effect was observed, with 24.2% of patients having DCS scores <10. The correlation between subscales exceeded Spearman's coefficient of 0.7. Whereas the correlation between the DCS and the other questionnaires was generally moderate (Spearman's coefficient >0.4). Conclusion: The Spanish version (Spain) of the DCS has very acceptable psychometric properties (reliability and construct validity) and good potential for assessing decisional conflicts among migraine patients.

Remission in schizophrenia: results from a 1-year follow-up observational study.

OBJECTIVES: This study used the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group operational-severity criteria to, a) provide descriptive data on prevalence and stability of symptomatic remission, b) attempt a criterion (concurrent) validation of this measure of remission, and c) explore correlates of remission stability. METHODS: From an unselected sample of 1010 stable outpatients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR), a subgroup of 452 (44.8%) in symptomatic remission was followed for 1 year. Of these, 376 were re-evaluated in a research diagnostic assessment. In addition to relevant sociodemographic and clinical data, measures included symptoms, depression, functioning, social cognition, attitudes towards medication, and quality of life. Estimates of point prevalence are provided. Correlates of remission were identified by logistic regression. RESULTS: Symptomatic remission at baseline correlated with better premorbid adjustment, better social cognition, good treatment compliance, younger age, the absence of comorbid substance abuse, current or past participation in psychotherapy, and a lack of past participation in rehabilitation. After 1 year, 338 out of the 376 (89.9%) patients re-evaluated were found again in remission. In this assessment, better premorbid adjustment, good treatment compliance, and improvement of depressive symptoms and social cognition during follow-up again correlated with remission. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that symptomatic remission (as defined above) has considerable criterion validity and is a realistic goal in the treatment of schizophrenia. Attaining and sustaining remission may warrant better clinical and functional outcomes for patients.

The Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (SOHO) study: 3-year results of antipsychotic treatment discontinuation and related clinical factors in Spain.

INTRODUCTION: This article presents the long-term results in terms of antipsychotic medication maintenance and factors influencing it in a representative sample of patients with schizophrenia recruited in the SOHO study within Spain. METHODS: The SOHO was a prospective, 3-year observational study of the outcomes of schizophrenia treatment in outpatients who initiated therapy or changed to a new antipsychotic performed in 10 European countries with a focus on olanzapine. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyse the time to treatment discontinuation and the Cox proportional hazards model to investigate correlates of discontinuation. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: In total, 1688 patients were included in the analyses. Medication maintenance at 3years varied with the antipsychotic prescribed, being highest with clozapine (57.6%, 95% CI 39.2-74.5), followed by olanzapine (48.3%, 95% CI 45.1-51.5); and lowest with quetiapine (19.0%, 95% CI 13.0-26.3). Treatment discontinuation was significantly less frequent with olanzapine than with risperidone (p=0.015), depot typical (p=0.001), oral typical antipsychotics (p<0.001) or quetiapine (p<0.001); but not than with clozapine (p=0.309). Longer maintenance was also associated with higher social abilities and better cognitive status at baseline; in contrast, a shorter time to discontinuation was associated with the need for mood stabilisers during follow-up. This study emphasises the different value of antipsychotics in day-to-day clinical practice, as some of them were associated with longer medication maintenance periods than others. This study has some limitations because of possible selection and information biases derived from the non-systematic, non-randomised allocation to treatments and the existence of unobserved covariates that may influence the outcome.

Effect of olanzapine or risperidone treatment on some cognitive functions in a one-year follow-up of schizophrenia outpatients with prominent negative symptoms.

AIMS: To compare olanzapine and risperidone outcome on some neurocognitive dimensions in chronic schizophrenia patients with prominent negative symptoms. METHOD: We randomised and followed for 1 year 235 chronic schizophrenia outpatients with a SANS global score > or =10 to open-label flexible-dose treatment with olanzapine or risperidone. Clinical, functional and cognitive assessments [including the COGLAB battery reaction time, vigilance-span of apprehension (VSA) and a card-sorting task] were done periodically. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between olanzapine (n=120) and risperidone (n=115) treatments in the neurocognitive dimensions tested. Mean+/-SD doses were 12.2+/-5.8 mg/day of olanzapine and 4.9+/-2.0 mg/day of risperidone. Patients in the olanzapine group showed a significant improvement in the VSA total score, but the within-group change was modest (effect size of 0.26); the difference with the risperidone group was not significant (p=0.207). Patients in both groups showed a significant improvement in a composite measure of executive efficiency based on the card-sorting task, with within-group effect size of 0.21 (risperidone) and 0.35 (olanzapine); the between-group difference was not significant (p=0.164). At baseline, better functional status correlated with VSA. Patients scoring lower on VSA or executive efficiency at baseline improved more on these respective measures. CONCLUSION: Modest pro-cognitive effects can also be found in chronic schizophrenia outpatients with prominent negative symptoms when treated with olanzapine or risperidone.

Symptomatic remission and social/vocational functioning in outpatients with schizophrenia: prevalence and associations in a cross-sectional study.

PURPOSE: Progress in therapeutic options for schizophrenia has revived long-term expectations of researchers, practitioners and patients. At present, definitions of therapeutic outcome include both maintained symptomatic remission and appropriate functioning in a conceptual framework that targets patient's recovery as the ultimate goal. We aimed to know the prevalence and clinical features of patients with schizophrenia achieving these outcomes. METHODS: A multi-centre, cross-sectional study was performed in more than 100 mental health facilities within Spain. Recently published consensus-based operational criteria for symptomatic remission and the Global Assessment of Functioning scale were used to evaluate outcomes. Other clinical aspects like depressive symptoms, social cognition, premorbid adjustment and patients' attitudes to medication were also evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 1010 patients were analysed. Of these, 452 (44.8%) were at clinical remission, but only 103 (10.2%) showed an adequate social and/or vocational functioning. Factors predicting both outcomes were better pre-morbid adjustment (odds ratio, OR=1.56) and better social cognitive function (OR=1.14). Other factors, like treatment adherence, current or past psychotherapy and patient's age were not associated to functionality but only to clinical remission. Current substance use and previous rehabilitation were associated to a lower likelihood of symptomatic remission. CONCLUSION: Although symptomatic remission in patients with schizophrenia is a realistic and reachable goal, future efforts should be directed to a sustained appropriate functioning in these patients.

Improvement in social functioning in outpatients with schizophrenia with prominent negative symptoms treated with olanzapine or risperidone in a 1 year randomized, open-label trial.

UNLABELLED: GENERAL PURPOSE: To evaluate the social functioning of schizophrenic outpatients after switching to second-generation antipsychotics. METHODOLOGY: Multi-center, randomized, open-label, parallel, flexible-dose, 1-year study of schizophrenic outpatients with prominent negative symptoms (defined as a SANS Global score > or =10), previously treated with conventional antipsychotics. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to treatment with an initial dose of at least 10 mg/day olanzapine (N = 120) or at least 3 mg/day risperidone (N = 115). Dosage could be modified during the study according to clinical criteria. Social functioning was evaluated using the total and subscales scores of the Social Functioning Scale (SFS) (validated Spanish version). Other efficacy measures included the SANS, SAPS, and CGI-S scales. Response was defined in advance as a 30% improvement in the SANS Global score. RESULTS: The mean doses during the trial were 12.2 mg/day (S.D. = 5.8) of olanzapine and 4.9 mg/day (S.D. = 2) of risperidone. There were no significant baseline differences in SFS total scores or other relevant clinical variables. At 1 year, olanzapine-treated patients presented a mean improvement in SFS total scores (7.75) that were significantly higher (p = 0.0028) than for risperidone-treated patients (-0.92). Treatment with olanzapine resulted in a greater numerical improvement than risperidone in all SFS domains and reached statistical significance in such categories as social engagement or withdrawal (p = 0.01), independence (performance) (p = 0.0098), independence (competence) (p = 0.04), recreational activities (p = 0.0391), and occupation/employment (p = 0.0024) in which the greatest difference between the olanzapine and risperidone groups was found (0.86 vs. -3.06). Significantly more patients treated with olanzapine reached or surpassed the SFS typified total scores corresponding to a functional level that is representative of a sample of stabilized Spanish outpatients with schizophrenia without prominent negative symptoms (p = 0.0009). Associated factors were treatment with olanzapine and a 30% improvement or more in SANS global score or SAPS global score. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with olanzapine was associated with overall greater improvement in social functioning (as measured by SFS) compared to risperidone-treated patients.

Safety and effectiveness of olanzapine in monotherapy: a multivariate analysis of a naturalistic study.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated safety and effectiveness of olanzapine in monotherapy compared with conventional antipsychotics in treatment of acute inpatients with schizophrenia. METHOD: This was a prospective, comparative, nonrandomized, open-label, multisite, observational study of Spanish inpatients with an acute episode of schizophrenia. Data included safety assessments with an extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) questionnaire and the report of spontaneous adverse events, plus clinical assessments with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S). A multivariate methodology was used to more adequately determine which factors can influence safety and effectiveness of olanzapine in monotherapy. RESULTS: 339 patients treated with olanzapine in monotherapy (OGm) and 385 patients treated with conventional antipsychotics (CG) were included in the analysis. Treatment-emergent EPS were significantly higher in the CG (p<0.0001). Response rate was significantly higher in the OGm (p=0.005). Logistic regression analyses revealed that the only variable significantly correlated with treatment-emergent EPS and clinical response was treatment strategy, with patients in OGm having 1.5 times the probability of obtaining a clinical response and patients in CG having 5 times the risk of developing EPS. CONCLUSION: In this naturalistic study olanzapine in monotherapy was better-tolerated and at least as effective as conventional antipsychotics.

Internet in clinical research based on a pilot experience.

Computing has become an integral part of many disciplines nowadays, turning it into an evermore necessary working tool. Internet provides a fast and easy way to collect scientific data and is becoming a more and more effective and safe way to transmit data. It is also an efficient means for interaction and information sharing within a work group that provides the necessary flexibility. A pilot project was conducted replacing the traditional hardcopy version of the case report form for an electronic one (e-CRF) and with access to Internet within the Naturalistic Randomized Clinical Trial of the Effectiveness of Olanzapine and Risperidone in the Treatment of Schizophrenia. Carrying out this pilot project has given us the opportunity to determine the advantages electronic data collection (EDC) by Internet has to offer both researchers and sponsors. The results have optimized time management, since it is easier to work in real time; data quality is improved, since intermediates are eliminated, and it facilitates communication amongst the different parties involved in the project. The use of this technology requires updated Internet connections and adequate personal computers, since the possibilities offered by the computer system and high-speed connection are critical in conducting the project. Obviously, this may involve a higher initial investment, but the results have revealed to us that these start-up costs are later offset by lowering personnel costs or by decreasing the number of monitoring visits. On the basis of our experience and that of the participating investigators, certain recommendations for future clinical trials using e-CRF can be made. We will go into these recommendations in greater depth throughout this paper. In short, EDC can dramatically improve the clinical trial process, opening the door to new technologies in the world of clinical research, not only for sponsors, but also for clinicians.

Safety, effectiveness, and patterns of use of olanzapine in acute schizophrenia: a multivariate analysis of a large naturalistic study in the hospital setting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the safety and effectiveness of the atypical antipsychotic olanzapine for the treatment of inpatients with acute schizophrenia. Furthermore, we evaluated patterns of use of olanzapine and their relationship to safety and effectiveness. PATIENTS AND METHOD: This was a prospective, comparative, nonrandomized, open-label, observational study of 848 patients with schizophrenia (International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition) hospitalized due to an acute psychotic episode. Data were collected during patients' entire hospital stay. Safety of antipsychotic therapy was assessed with an extrapyramidal symptoms questionnaire (based on the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser scale) and the report of spontaneous adverse events. Clinical status was assessed with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S). A multivariate statistical approach was employed. RESULTS: Patients treated with olanzapine in monotherapy had the lowest risk of developing extrapyramidal symptoms (11.2%), whereas patients treated with conventional antipsychotics had a higher risk (39.0%; p < 0.001). Patients treated with olanzapine in monotherapy (even patients with prominent positive symptoms) displayed a higher rate of response compared with conventional antipsychotics-treated patients (p = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine is a safe and effective treatment for patients with acute schizophrenia in the hospital setting, even for patients with prominent positive or agitation symptoms.

Safety, effectiveness, and quality of life of olanzapine in first-episode schizophrenia: a naturalistic study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness, safety, and quality of life (Qol) offered by olanzapine in first-episode schizophrenia. METHOD: One hundred and eighty-two patients with first-episode schizophrenia (ICD-10) drawn from a larger, naturalistic, study were evaluated after 6 months of treatment with olanzapine, risperidone, or conventional antipsychotics (CA). Clinical status was assessed using the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) and Global Assessment of Function (GAF). AWAD and EuroQol scales were used to evaluate patients' attitude towards medication and Qol, respectively. RESULTS: Subjects treated with olanzapine, risperidone, and CA showed similar improvements on CGI-S and GAF. Treatment-emergent, extrapyramidal symptoms were significantly lower in olanzapine-treated patients (17.8%) than in the risperidone (46.4%) and CA (62.2%) groups. Compared to CA, olanzapine and risperidone showed significantly greater improvement on the visual analog scale of EuroQol. Olanzapine-treated patients also showed significantly improved AWAD scores. CONCLUSIONS: In first-episode schizophrenia, atypical antipsychotics were effective, and improved Qol. Olanzapine had a lower incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms and better subjective acceptance of medication.

Safety and effectiveness of olanzapine versus conventional antipsychotics in the acute treatment of first-episode schizophrenic inpatients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and effectiveness of olanzapine compared to typical antipsychotics in the treatment of first-episode schizophrenics in acute psychiatric inpatient wards. METHODS: Data were collected from a prospective, comparative, nonrandomized, open, observational study of 904 inpatients with schizophrenia. One hundred and fifty-eight patients fulfilled the criteria for first-episode schizophrenia, defined as (1) the International Classification of Diseases: Mental and Behavioral Disorders, 10th ed. (ICD-10) diagnosis of schizophrenia, (2) antipsychotic nai;ve, and (3) a course of illness of less than 5 years. Eighty-nine (56.3%) of these patients were assigned to the olanzapine treatment group (OLZ) and 69 (43.7%) to the control group that received treatment with conventional antipsychotics (CON). Safety was evaluated in terms of the spontaneous adverse events reported and a specific questionnaire for extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). Clinical status was measured by means of the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S). Clinical response was defined as the baseline-endpoint decrease in BPRS>40% plus an endpoint BPRS<18 or an endpoint CGI

Olanzapine for the treatment of chronic refractory schizophrenia: a 12-month follow-up naturalistic study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to provide long-term data on the effectiveness and safety of olanzapine in a group of patients with severe refractory schizophrenia. GENERAL METHODS: Twenty patients who had previously received treatment with typical antipsychotic agents and who met the DSM-IV criteria of schizophrenia and refractoriness to treatment were evaluated in a 1-year prospective study after switching to olanzapine. The Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale (PANSS) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) were used to measure effectiveness. The extrapyramidal symptoms were also recorded. Serial laboratory tests, electrocardiograms and body weight measurements were also performed. Longitudinal statistical analyses were performed on the global changes in the scores of the scales by means of a repeated measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: Significant reductions in the global scores from baseline in the PANSS, as well as in the BPRS, were observed. Furthermore, these reductions were also significant when considered only from Week 12. Olanzapine was, in general, well tolerated; a weight gain was observed between baseline and Month 4.5, but, interestingly, it decreased again from this time point to Month 12. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine was shown to be a suitable treatment for refractory schizophrenia in this series of seriously ill patients. Although most of the effects were observed before Week 12, improvement persisted after 1 year. Weight gain stopped or even regressed when the treatment was prolonged. Large controlled clinical trials to define the role of atypical antipsychotics for the management of treatment-refractory schizophrenia are necessary.

Safety and tolerability of olanzapine compared with other antipsychotics in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia: a naturalistic study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of olanzapine in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: A total of 135 outpatients with schizophrenia > or =60 years of age were treated with olanzapine (n = 105) or another antipsychotic (n = 30) and followed up for 6 months. Safety measures included the recording of spontaneous adverse events and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS). Clinical status and effectiveness of the medications were measured using the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness and the Global Assessment of Function (GAF) scales. Quality of life was assessed by means of the Spanish version of the EuroQol. The Awad scale was applied to evaluate patients' subjective attitude towards medication. RESULTS: The incidence of overall adverse events and EPS was non-significantly lower in patients treated with olanzapine than in patients treated with other antipsychotics. The use of anticholinergic drugs was significantly lower (P = 0.04) in patients treated with olanzapine. Both groups of patients experienced similar improvements in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and GAF scores. Non-significantly greater improvement in the acceptance of medication occurred at endpoint in olanzapine-treated patients than in control patients as measured by the Awad scale. The improvement in the EuroQol quality of life scale achieved at the end of study did not differ between both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this naturalistic study showed that olanzapine was as safe and effective as other antipsychotic drugs in the treatment of elderly patients with schizophrenia.