Switching strategies for antipsychotic monotherapy in schizophrenia: a multi-center cohort study of aripiprazole.

RATIONALE: Changing antipsychotics of patients with chronic schizophrenia involves several risks. Switching to aripiprazole is especially difficult. We investigated switching methods and related factors for successful switching patients with chronic schizophrenia to aripiprazole. OBJECTIVES: This study was a multi-center historical cohort study and approved by the research ethics committee of Okayama University Hospital and Okayama Psychiatric Medical Center. We compared survival proportions of 178 chronic schizophrenia patients who continued aripiprazole monotherapy for 6 months after non-direct switching (add-on switching (n = 45), cross switching (n = 62)) or direct switching (n = 71). We adjusted possible confounders using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of patients with chronic schizophrenia, 56.7% (101/178) were switched to aripiprazole monotherapy, and 55.0% (98/178) showed improvement in symptoms as demonstrated by the Clinical Global Impression Severity score. Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that non-direct switching had a higher survival proportion than direct switching (log-rank test, p = 0.012). Even after adjusting for several variables using a Cox proportional hazards model, add-on switching had a significantly lower hazard at 6 months than direct switching (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.82, P = 0.01). In cases of switching to aripiprazole for psychiatric symptoms, non-direct switching had a lower hazard than direct switching (hazard ratio 0.41, 95% confidence interval 0.21-0.81, P = 0.01) but was not significant for adverse reaction. When aripiprazole was switched from olanzapine, add-on switch showed the lowest hazard ratio for continuation (hazard ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.07-1.11, P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Flexibility in strategies when switching to aripiprazole may induce a better outcome for patients with chronic schizophrenia.

Clinicopathological Analysis of 320 Cases of Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Using the Hans Classifier.

The estimation of clinical prognosis for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with a quick, cost-efficient method is necessary because of the clinical heterogeneity of this disease, which leads to death, relapsed or refractory disease in approximately 40% of patients. We analyzed 320 cases diagnosed from 2007 to 2013 treated with R-CHOP therapy at Tokai University Hospital and associated institutions. DLBCL was classified according to the cell-of-origin using the Hans algorithm [germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) vs non-GCB subtypes], and into 6 subgroups derived from combinations of CD10, BCL6 and MUM1 markers. The percentage of GCB and non-GCB (NGCB) subtypes was 35% and 65%, respectively. GCB-DLBCL was characterized by lower BCL2 immunohistochemical expression, extranodal sites ＜1, better therapeutic response, and favorable overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) (P＜0.01). The most frequent subgroup was NGCB-1 (CD10-BCL6+MUM1+, 51%) followed by GCB-1 (CD10+BCL6+or-MUM1+, 21%), NGCB-2 (CD10-BCL6-MUM1+, 13%), GCB-2 (CD10+BCL6+or-MUM1-, 10%), GCB-3 (CD10-BCL6+MUM1-, 4%) and NGCB-3 (CD10-BCL6-MUM1-, 2%). In comparison with GCB-2 and GCB-3 (both MUM1-), the GCB-1 (MUM1+) was characterized by favorable PFS (5-year PFS 84% vs 65%, OR 0.368, P＜0.05), independent of high LDH (associated with unfavorable PFS, OR 7.04, P＜0.01) in the multivariate analysis. This predictive value of MUM1 was independent of CD10. Interestingly, triple-negative NGCB-3 tended to have a more favorable prognosis than the other NGCB subgroups. In conclusion, the Hans classifier is a valid method to evaluate the prognosis of DLBCL NOS. In the GCB subtypes, GCB subtypes, MUM1-positivity is associated with a more favorable outcome (PFS).